Strange Experience on Tuesday

[Inisfallen]

Yesterday was the Feast of the Assumption, so naturally I planned on attending Mass.

Usually I go to Mass in my home parish in Brooklyn (New York). Lately I’ve been driving into Manhattan and picking up my elderly and somewhat immobile father, since his parish church closed some time ago, and the nearest church is farther away than he is able to walk, and then driving back to my parish with my father. No problem, there’s not a lot of traffic on Sunday mornings, and parking is pretty easy.

However, I didn’t want to drive into Manhattan in the middle of a business day, since the traffic would be horrible and there would be no place to park when I went to pick up my father. So I decided that I’d take the subway to his place, and then we’d take a cab from there to the nearest church.

Which we did, all according to plan.

We got to the church a bit early, which was fine, and then the Mass began. I’d never been to Mass at this church before, so I don’t know if what happened then was normal procedure in this parish.

The priest addressed the congregation before starting the Mass, and told us that he’d be saying Mass ad orientem, facing away from the congregation, and that this was the way Mass was supposed to be celebrated. He then made some slightly disparaging remarks about what he called the Novus Ordo Mass, and began.

Mass was in English – I would have thought that, given his feelings about the current liturgy, he would have gone for Latin – and didn’t deviate at all from the usual Mass, except that during the Liturgy of the Eucharist, he faced away from the congregation, just as he said he would.

His sermon was a bit strange, though. He dwelt mostly on what exactly we are supposed to believe about Mary, and about the Assumption, without speaking at all about what Mary and the Assumption should mean for us. Okay, I guess, it’s his sermon, he can do it the way he wants. But then he went off on some weird digression about exorcisms and how important and necessary they are.

Then the Mass continued as planned. But at the end of the Mass, he delivered an unsettling exhortation about obedience and how we, as Catholics, were facing terrible hatred and oppression in the world today.

All in all, a bit unsettling.

But my question is – is this done commonly? To celebrate the vernacular Mass, according to the usual rite, but facing away from the congregation?

 

[PaulfromIowa]

But my question is – is this done commonly? To celebrate the vernacular Mass, according to the usual rite, but facing away from the congregation?

The Ordinary Form Mass, in whatever language, may be celebrated either versus populum, facing the people, or ad orientem, “facing east,” the same direction as the people.

 

[otjm]

I’d never been to Mass at this church before, so I don’t know if what happened then was normal procedure in this parish.

The priest addressed the congregation before starting the Mass, and told us that he’d be saying Mass ad orientem, facing away from the congregation, and that this was the way Mass was supposed to be celebrated. He then made some slightly disparaging remarks about what he called the Novus Ordo Mass, and began.

Given that the priest made an announcement before, logic would indicate that it was not normal for that parish. What one ordinarily does, is not ordinarily explained each time.

But my question is – is this done commonly? To celebrate the vernacular Mass, according to the usual rite, but facing away from the congregation?

As PaulfromIowa noted, the liturgical rules allow either.

But commonly is another matter. Without someone taking a survey of the approximately 17,300+ parishes in the US, any answer is anecdotal. I have not seen it since priests started saying Mass ad populum decades ago, and that includes some parishes in North Dakota, Washington, and California, and numerous parishes in Oregon.

Normally in matters such as this, the bishop or archbishop, who is the chief liturgist in their diocese/archdiocese will speak to his priests as to liturgy where there are options, and indicate those he wants done a certain way, and those which he allows the options to be determined by the pastor.

And that is not to imply that the pastor did not have his superior’s blessing.

 

[7_Sorrows]

Wasn’t there an Archbishop or someone in the Vatican who said the priests really should be facing the altar during the Liturgy of the Eucharist? I thought I had read that somewhere earlier this year because it almost seemed like it was a change that was really supposed to take place - ad orientem.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

It’s my understanding that ad orientem OF Masses are not common. Cardinal Sarah of the Congregation for Divine Worship was pushing for more ad orientem OF Masses last year and some people thought he was challenging the Pope. I’m sure we will see more of this sort of thing going forward as it seems to fit in with the traditionalist movement.

 

[7_Sorrows]

It’s my understanding that ad orientem OF Masses are not common. Cardinal Sarah of the Congregation for Divine Worship was pushing for more ad orientem OF Masses last year and some people thought he was challenging the Pope. I’m sure we will see more of this sort of thing going forward as it seems to fit in with the traditionalist movement.

I believe it was Cardinal Sarah who said this. Thank you.

 

[Tis_Bearself]

Wasn’t there an Archbishop or someone in the Vatican who said the priests really should be facing the altar during the Liturgy of the Eucharist? I thought I had read that somewhere earlier this year because it almost seemed like it was a change that was really supposed to take place - ad orientem.

Probably Cardinal Sarah, as I mentioned. There was a bit of a flap about his statements last year.

 

[Monica4316]

I don’t see anything strange in what you have described… Others commented on ad orientem… Regarding the other points, I don’t see why a priest can’t simply state the Church teaching in a homily? As for Catholicism being persecuted, I think it is… I don’t know it doesn’t seem strange to me!

 

[otjm]

Wasn’t there an Archbishop or someone in the Vatican who said the priests really should be facing the altar during the Liturgy of the Eucharist? I thought I had read that somewhere earlier this year because it almost seemed like it was a change that was really supposed to take place - ad orientem.

You are correct; that was Cardinal Sarah, and that public comment pretty much got waled back.

I believe it was since that kerfuffle arose that the Cardinal wrote a book (or perhaps he was already writing it); in any event, that appears to still be his personal opinion.

 

[giuseppe96]

I went through a similar experience today, except that the Mass was in Spanish so I couldn’t understand his homily. Luckily they had a bilingual missal.

 

[giuseppe96]

I’d love to be able to find an ad orientem parish close to my house. The closest Latin parish is over half an hour away with heavy traffic, so I don’t go there very often. Maybe the OF ad orientem is growing in popularity?

 

[1ke]

But my question is – is this done commonly? To celebrate the vernacular Mass, according to the usual rite, but facing away from the congregation?

Yes.

The rubrics allow for both, and the priest may decide.

He may have explained this before mass due to the fact it was a weekday and anticipated visitors who were there for the holy day based on where they work and not the regular Sunday parishioners who would have already known that priest celebrates ad orientem.

 

[1ke]

Given that the priest made an announcement before, logic would indicate that it was not normal for that parish. What one ordinarily does, is not ordinarily explained each time.

I suspect it is normal but the priest anticipated many visitors who would not know the usual routine due to his location in Manhattan and the fact it was a work day.

 

[CRM_Brother]

But my question is – is this done commonly? To celebrate the vernacular Mass, according to the usual rite, but facing away from the congregation?

In my experience, ad orientem in conjunction with the novus ordo is not common. The only times I have seen it done was when the mass was celebrated in a chapel where there was only a pre-Vatican II high altar and it was not possible to face the people.

As to the remark that the mass is supposed to be celebrated ad orientem, this is false. The orientation of the mass is entirely dependent upon the decision of the priest. As to the argument that it is how it is supposed to be celebrated based upon tradition, that to is somewhat false. There is tradition supporting both directions. the Second Vatican Council did not create a new orientation for the priest during the mass, but actually brought back a more ancient orientation for the priest. The domus ecclesia (house churches) of the early Church celebrated mass wherever they could and the people crowded around the altars from all sides. This can be seen in the construction of the ancient basilica of St. Stephen on the Celian Hill in Rome. The church is completely round with the altar in the center. During this early period they were also celebrating mass with the priest directly facing the people as evidenced by the altars found in the catacombs of St. Calixtus and St. Sebastian. An even more ancient free-standing altar believed to be from the second century is preserved in the Basilica of Sts. Cosmas and Damien.

 

[tawny]

The Ordinary Form Mass, in whatever language, may be celebrated either versus populum, facing the people, or ad orientem, “facing east,” the same direction as the people.

Correct.

 

[1ke]

In my experience, ad orientem in conjunction with the novus ordo is not common.

Perhaps not common across the board. But I think very common in some localities.

It is very common where I live, actually.

 

[Don_Ruggero]

Yesterday was the Feast of the Assumption, so naturally I planned on attending Mass.

Usually I go to Mass in my home parish in Brooklyn (New York). Lately I’ve been driving into Manhattan and picking up my elderly and somewhat immobile father, since his parish church closed some time ago, and the nearest church is farther away than he is able to walk, and then driving back to my parish with my father. No problem, there’s not a lot of traffic on Sunday mornings, and parking is pretty easy.

However, I didn’t want to drive into Manhattan in the middle of a business day, since the traffic would be horrible and there would be no place to park when I went to pick up my father. So I decided that I’d take the subway to his place, and then we’d take a cab from there to the nearest church.

Which we did, all according to plan.

We got to the church a bit early, which was fine, and then the Mass began. I’d never been to Mass at this church before, so I don’t know if what happened then was normal procedure in this parish.

The priest addressed the congregation before starting the Mass, and told us that he’d be saying Mass ad orientem, facing away from the congregation, and that this was the way Mass was supposed to be celebrated. He then made some slightly disparaging remarks about what he called the Novus Ordo Mass, and began.

Mass was in English – I would have thought that, given his feelings about the current liturgy, he would have gone for Latin – and didn’t deviate at all from the usual Mass, except that during the Liturgy of the Eucharist, he faced away from the congregation, just as he said he would.

His sermon was a bit strange, though. He dwelt mostly on what exactly we are supposed to believe about Mary, and about the Assumption, without speaking at all about what Mary and the Assumption should mean for us. Okay, I guess, it’s his sermon, he can do it the way he wants. But then he went off on some weird digression about exorcisms and how important and necessary they are.

Then the Mass continued as planned. But at the end of the Mass, he delivered an unsettling exhortation about obedience and how we, as Catholics, were facing terrible hatred and oppression in the world today.

All in all, a bit unsettling.

But my question is – is this done commonly? To celebrate the vernacular Mass, according to the usual rite, but facing away from the congregation?

The Archdiocese of New York City has an excellent Office of Liturgy and Worship in its diocesan curia. That would be an excellent place to share your experience and your concerns, so they may take note of it and be aware of it.

 

[amsjj]

I agree with 1ke. Our priests also tend to say more instructional stuff when a group who may not be familiar with the routine attends an HDO Mass.

An article of possible interest:
newtheologicalmovement.blogspot.com/2016/07/how-to-celebrate-mass-ad-orientem.html?m=1

 

[Inisfallen]

The Archdiocese of New York City has an excellent Office of Liturgy and Worship in its diocesan curia. That would be an excellent place to share your experience and your concerns, so they may take note of it and be aware of it.

I don’t really have any concerns. It was just very unfamiliar to me, that’s all. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with it – I just thought ad orientem went with the Latin Mass, but not the vernacular.

 

[Inisfallen]

I don’t see anything strange in what you have described… Others commented on ad orientem… Regarding the other points, I don’t see why a priest can’t simply state the Church teaching in a homily? As for Catholicism being persecuted, I think it is… I don’t know it doesn’t seem strange to me!

Yes, the priest can state the church’s teaching in a homily. As I said, it’s his sermon, he can do what he wants. I always hope to hear a bit more than just a recitation of the catechism, that’s all.