The direction the priest faces during Mass

[dumspirospero]

It is the same here in Baton Rouge…the TLM is experiencing great attendance nation wide wherever there is an Indult available…I have talked to people who always tell me how lucky I am to live in a Diocese with an Indult…There are lots of fellow Catholics out there that would love to fill the pews at a Traditional Mass if just given the opportunity…

palmas85:

I don’t know where you are but down here in Southern California, we have a LOT that show up, and I do mean a lot. Not just the curious mind you, but week after week steady attendance. I travel extensively to New Orleans, Phoenix and Dallas. They amazingly have a lot showing up as well.

Of course these cities could just be aberrations, but there seems to be quite a demand for the Traditional Mass.

 

[James0235]

Julian Peters:

If you wish to discuss the Tridentine Mass, the shortage of Priests or any other topic aside from which direction you prefer Priests to face, please start a new thread or scan the currently active threads for related topics.

Maybe I’m missing something but the Tridentine Mass was not once brought up in this thread until after this reminder to avoid discussing it in this thread.

James

 

[rwoehmke]

Lux_et_veritas:

I don’t mean to drift with the thread here away from the main topic, but I can’t miss an opportunity to address this issue. There are some real ways to solve the priest shortage:

1. Close from 1/2 to 2/3 of all parishes right off the bat. There are way too many Catholics who can’t find one hour per week to give God and so the diocese are paying 2-3x the amount for utilities and the like. This way, they can combine priests and flock into fewer buildings.

Try telling that to members of certain parishes in Boston, New York, etc. You could end up like Tom Dooley.

1. Of course the Church has to address why the flock is not in the pews because THAT is one of the primary causes of priest shortages. The homilies need to start shifting in such a way to worry less about our self-esteem and more about our salvation. The Bishops need to send letters out to all registered Catholics to address those who don’t feel the need to give God one hour per week and give them a little pastoral admonishment. They might start by asking people how many hours a week they devote to prime-time television, physical sports and exercise, hobbies, and other things. God should not get what is left over.

That is a large part of our problem. People who give one hour per week and walk off feeling justified.

1. The Church needs to continue working to get rid of the theologians and seminary rectors that have supported “psychological” testing of young men who show signs of orthodoxy. They need to stop sanitizing the ranks of good men with this practice because enough damage has already occured as a result of it. In place of orthodox young men, who are devout (a bad word in liberal circles) we have a crisis involving sexual scandals.

It is interesting that a lot of pediophile priests were in seminary before Vat II happened. It is not just a recent innovation nor is it exclusive to priests although the press might have people believing that.

1. We need to hear more about contraception and abortion from the pulpits so people will have the larger families that yield priests and sisters. Too many parents have talked their only son or daughter out of religious life. If they had more sons and daughters they would be more giving.

I think here you have a valaid point, but how many working class wage earners can support more than a couple of kids. We had six who are now in their 40’s and there were times even with a good salary that it was nip and tuck. Course no ATVs, no snowmobiles, fancy boats, new furniture, or new carpeting. Is the church going to pay to send them to University? No!..

1. And finally, please click on the link in my sig and consider adopting a priest to pray for so that he stays on the straight path or gets back onto it, whichever the case may be. It’s a challenge to find the time, but well worth it when you realize that any prayers you offer for a priest indirectly helps all of the many people he comes in contact with. In fact, you can request the name of a seminarian in need of prayers. That will help the priest shortage.

Our K of C Council supports several seminarians with prayers and money and we still have cluster parishes where one priest must minister to three parishes.

Sorry if I sound full of sour grapes, but there are lots of young Catholic families out there who are struggling to make ends meet while the top one percent gets wealthier and wealthier.

 

[rwoehmke]

Sorry for the hijack. Our priests face East toward the people and toward the tabernacle which is in a chapel across the gathering area in the back of the main Church. When the Eucharist is confected on the alter both the people and the priest are facing Our Lord on the alter. We built a new Church when the Bishops rules wanted a seperate area for the Tabernacle. I guess that has changed once again. Seems like Bishops and liturgists just can’t make up their minds.

 

[cbromncath87]

What was the logic behind the Bishop mandating a different room for the tabernacle and why did you put it in the back of the people so that you always have your backs toward the tabernacle?

 

[Anna_Elizabeth]

Petertherock:

Personally, I think it’s ludicris that people worry about how people hold their hands when they pray, how people shake people’s hand during the sign of peace, saying Mass in Latin, and which way the priest faces when we obviously have bigger problems to worry about.

Well, Peter, perhaps you should contact the new Holy Father and set him straight.

I just finished reading his The Spirit of the Liturgy in which he very clearly states the rationale for facing east and is quite adamant that it is important that it should be done.

Meanwhile, I’ll repeat for the umpteenth time, that it is all those “little” “unimportant,” chipping-away things that you find so insignificant that have undermined the foundation of our faith.

I hope you are young, and I suggest you bone up on what made Rudy Giuliani such a success in his first term as New York City mayor. It will enlighten you as to the relationship of little things vis a vis “bigger problems to worry about.”

Peace,

Anna

 

[Petertherock]

I respect the pope’s opinion (and that’s all it is until he speaks infallibly about this issue) but I still say that the direction the priest faces has nothing to do with undermining the foundation of our faith.

Our faith will be undermined by the liberals whether or not we have latin in the mass, whether or not the priest faces away from the people or towards the people, whether or not people hold hands or use the orans position during the Lord’s Prayer or anything else.

The issues that are undermining our faith our issues like abortion, birth control, feminsm, and other moral issues. You can have a reverend, respectful mass without having a TLM.

I will also say just because you force the TLM on everyone doesn’t mean that the people will have any more reverence for the Mass. In fact the opposite could happen. People won’t understand what is going on so they won’t pay attention to what is happening. I have been to a TLM and I had a missle with the translations. I still couldn’t follow along.

The way to get people to have more reverence for the Mass is to educate them. Priests should be pointing out liturgical abuses and informing the people why such things are abuses. If the priests are the ones responsible for the liturgical abuses then it’s up to the laity that knows such things to mention it to the priest in a respectful way (with documentation to back it up) and if the priest doesn’t change or gives an unsatisfactory answer then go to the Bishop. Anyone can do that. I have been in a parish where people wrote to the bishop about a priest just because they didn’t like him and didn’t agree with the financial decisions he was making. I actually quit the parish council because it was just an attack on the pastor and they didn’t accomplish anything except giving me a list of their complaints to give the the pastor (at the time I was working as a part time custodian so I was their “vehicle” to get complaints to the pastor. Basically before I quit the council I told them if they didn’t like the way the pastor ran things there was 3 other parishes in the city they could go to.

But back to the topic at hand, a TLM isn’t going to do anything to stop people from undermining our faith, education of both children and adults is what will prevent people from undermining our faith. Even then, certain groups will always be trying to undermine our faith.

 

[mosher]

I don’t know when the last time you polled Catholics (as I have done) about whether they know what is going on at mass now even though it is in their own language and I was not supprised to find out that only a tiny minority even had a clue. They just knew that they had to be there.

But again, the point is that the direction the priest faces firms up his vocation in the role of priest as head and leader and the firmer the definition of the role of the priest the more probable that others who are being called wll discern more fully because they will understand even fuller the great mystery of being a priest and desire to aspire to such a role int he community of believers. All these things are related.

 

[But_for_Grace]

If the priest is to do his part, which is to act in persona Christi, then the direction he faces is very important. Christ is our mediatior, standing before us before the judgement of heaven, petitioning heaven on our behalf. If this is the view being taken then the priest should face the same direction as the people, however, if the priest is to represent as bringing the things of heaven to the people (the eucharist, as the bread of heaven) then he should face the people. To use the typology of Moses as Christ, when Moses went to get the commandments the people were behind him, when he brought them back down the mountian, then the people were in front of him.

 

[TOME]

Petertherock - Well said!!!

 

[oat_soda]

It is true that mass attendance is already on the decline but going back to the priest facing away from the people would not help things. All you have to do is look at attendence of the Latin Mass’s they currently have. They are hardly any people that show up now.

the subject of the thread is on the orientation of the priest during mass, not about how to encourage more people to attend the mass. the latin mass where i live is totally packed with people with some driving hours to attend. this is not my experiance.

I will also say just because you force the TLM on everyone doesn’t mean that the people will have any more reverence for the Mass.

ad orientem isn’t particular to the latin mass -the normative mass may be celebrated either way and all of the oriental liturgies have the priest facing “east” as well.

The way to get people to have more reverence for the Mass is to educate them.

i agree this can help but you know the primary educators of the faith resides in the family. all of the problems we are experiancing today are a result of the attack and break down of the family. but this is a whole other subject.

also, education isn’t carried out only in the homily or catechisis, but also by example -the priests physcial orientation, our physical gestures, sound and smells, all educate us about our faith.

 

[mosher]

It can also be said that in the Novus Ordo it is proper for the priest to be facing “ad orientem” because if you read the GIRM in latin there are places where it tells the priest to turn and face the people thus implying that the priest is not facing the people at that time. It is well known by most skilled liturgists that the mass being celebrated versus populum is a streatch of an interpretation.

 

[rwoehmke]

cbromncath87:

What was the logic behind the Bishop mandating a different room for the tabernacle and why did you put it in the back of the people so that you always have your backs toward the tabernacle?

It was not just our Bishop but a set of archetectrual guidelines by the US Bishops that placed the tabernacle in a seperate space from where Mass is normally offered. Since then the guideline has been changed. Our tabernacle and Rooms for reconcilation are placed in a separate chapel that is used for daily Mass and Perpetual Adoration except during Mass. The logic was that the Mass was to be offered and the Eucharist for that Mass would be confected at that Mass and that Christ would not be substantially present until the consecration. Someones idea of Liturgical Correctness which in some ways is about as neat as Political Correctness. Our backs are not really turned on the tabernacle which is on the East side of the Church in this totally seperate room with its own doors. We’re talking than in the back of the main worship space a set of doors, a large foyer like gathering area, another set of doors, the chapel, a set of Glass doors and than a small alter with the Tabernacle. The glass doors are opened during perpetual adoration, but closed during the daily mass. My wife says she likes to come in for Mass on Sunday and see the tabernacle and the red light right up front. We don’t have that anymore.

 

[Petertherock]

OK something is confusing me. If I understand this correct some people are saying the Priest should face away from the people because he is facing God. Well, how do we know where God is? Where does it say God is only in the East? As far as I know it’s only Muslims that face the east when they pray to Allah or Muhammed or whoever they pray to.

Some people say the priest should face the tabernacle. Well, what if the tabernacle isn’t on the altar? Why do we assume that Jesus is only in the tabernacle? Didn’t you hear what Jesus said…“Wherever 2 or 3 gather in my name there I am in your midst.” Jesus is in each and every one of us. Not just in some building or in a tabernacle. Of course I believe the real presence is in the tabernacle but the real presence is also in each and every person you meet in church and out in the street.

I personally think God cares more about how you treat your fellow man than he does about which way the priest faces during Mass.

I do agree with the person who said that a big problem with the church is the degradation of the family. That is absolutely true. The Church must continue to preach this loudly and even stronger than it does now. The destruction of the family through divorce, gay marriage, birth control and the total lack of morals in America and a lot of other countries is what is going to bring down the Church and the Church must remain firm on this and be even more bold about proclaiming this to the world.

 

[otm]

But for Grace:

If the priest is to do his part, which is to act in persona Christi, then the direction he faces is very important. Christ is our mediatior, standing before us before the judgement of heaven, petitioning heaven on our behalf. If this is the view being taken then the priest should face the same direction as the people, however, if the priest is to represent as bringing the things of heaven to the people (the eucharist, as the bread of heaven) then he should face the people. To use the typology of Moses as Christ, when Moses went to get the commandments the people were behind him, when he brought them back down the mountian, then the people were in front of him.

And when Christ said the first Mass, He was participating in the Passover meal, which has no place for the celebrant “turning his back” or “facing East” in it. It was a meal in which all were gathered around the table.

 

[Gottle_of_Geer]

mosher:

Because the direction the priest faces and the proper gestures at mass are intrinsically united with the vocation of the priest.

As the gestures have varied a great deal in the past, and were reduced even before V2, this is a bit hard to believe. Was the Church less the Church in 1960 than in 1910 because several Signs of the Cross in the Canon had been abolished during the interval ? ​

 

[Katie1723]

Petertherock:

How about instead of worrying about which way the priest faces why don’t we worry about if we are going to have any priests to face in any direction?

Personally, I think it’s ludicris that people worry about how people hold their hands when they pray, how people shake people’s hand during the sign of peace, saying Mass in Latin, and which way the priest faces when we obviously have bigger problems to worry about.

Oh my goodness…did you ever hit the nail on the head!!! :tiphat:
~ Kathy ~

 

[totustuusmaria]

It isn’t so much the priest facing “away from the people” as the priest facing “ad orientem” – toward the East and toward heaven. The two directions are called “ad orientum” (toward the East) and “vertus populum” (turned to the people). The problem with vertus populum is that it obscurres the sacrificial nature of the liturgy and makes an enclosed circule between the people and the priest with very little room for God. When the people and the priest face the same direction, it emphasizes that they are together offering the same sacrifice to the Father.

 

[totustuusmaria]

Petertherock:

OK something is confusing me. If I understand this correct some people are saying the Priest should face away from the people because he is facing God. Well, how do we know where God is? Where does it say God is only in the East? As far as I know it’s only Muslims that face the east when they pray to Allah or Muhammed or whoever they pray to.

It isn’t that God is “in the East” but that the East represents the kingdom of Heaven. In other words, it’s symbolic. In the Church today we’ve lost the power of symbols. The East is a common direction that all the people in the Church face (when the priest isn’t ministering to the people) in order to worship God.

 

[mike182d]

otm:

And when Christ said the first Mass, He was participating in the Passover meal, which has no place for the celebrant “turning his back” or “facing East” in it. It was a meal in which all were gathered around the table.

Christ never wore a stole, or read from the Gospels, or chose between Eucharistic prayer I, II, III, or IV, or placed Himself in a tabernacle, or used unleavened “wafers,” or had a gold chalice…

I guess we should get rid of all those, then.

Technically, if I’m not mistaken, the Last Supper is not the “first mass,” its when the Eucharist was instituted as a Sacrament. Since Christ had not yet died, and the Mass itself is a rememberance of Christ’s death on the cross, I don’t believe the Last Supper could be considered a true “Mass.”