See Mike Aquilina’a book The Mass of the Early Christians.
Well it really all depends how far back you want to go and which particular Church you want to check. In the really early Church there was NO continuity, nothing really concrete and about the only thing they had in common was the Eucharist itself. Every Church was different Most of the early Church groups met in private homes or in some secluded place such as the catacombs or what were the equivalent of warehouses. There were no actual physical churches for a very long time. They used different Gospels and other inspired writings because there was no standard Canon until late in the third century. There was no standard set of consecration prayers and no set way of receiving the Eucharist, which by the way was normally taken home for consumption during the rest of the week. In some Churches a small portion might be consumed at the altar but was usually brought back to the family and shared with them. In most Churches the women and children did not approach the altar…
and who advocate the practice as being that of the early church.If that table were used, it would mean that Jesus and all of the Apostles faced the same direction…traditionally to the East.
Well it really all depends how far back you want to go and which particular Church you want to check. In the really early Church there was NO continuity, nothing really concrete and about the only thing they had in common was the Eucharist itself. Every Church was different Most of the early Church groups met in private homes or in some secluded place such as the catacombs or what were the equivalent of warehouses. There were no actual physical churches for a very long time. They used different Gospels and other inspired writings because there was no standard Canon until late in the third century. There was no standard set of consecration prayers and no set way of receiving the Eucharist, which by the way was normally taken home for consumption during the rest of the week. In some Churches a small portion might be consumed at the altar but was usually brought back to the family and shared with them. In most Churches the women and children did not approach the altar…
I agree. I don’t know why people would care more about what happened in 5th century Syria as opposed to what happened in your own parish church 50 years ago.
I was an altar boy up until the end of my junior year in high school - 1968. All I can say is that it was a radical change and IMHO not for the best. And, yes, once the baby was thrown out with the bathwater, the abuses started right quickly. Does anyone understand how much I HATED singing Simon and Garfunkle at my HS graduation Mass from a Catholic HS?
Your not much of a history buff, I take it.Actually Maggieodae, CatholicNick is indeed correct. So are you. But the revisions of 1969 cannot be compared to previous revisions however much they may have been. The Roman liturgy has always built on what has came before. Inherently it has always been conservative. Very rarely has it really dumped prayers that were appended to it-perhaps pushed it into the background, or changed it a little. Added a lot, but not remodeled.
The Roman Missal was revised on a number of occasions after 1570. Pope Clement VIII made a general revision, as did Pope Urban VIII and other popes.
Almost all Latin-rite altars of recent centuries were accordingly built against a wall or backed by a reredos, with a tabernacle placed on the altar or inserted into the reredos. There were exceptions to this orientation, however. The Tridentine Missal itself speaks of celebrating “versus populum” (facing the people), and gives corresponding instructions for the priest when performing actions that in the other orientation involved turning for him to face the people (Ritus servandus in celebratione Missae, V, 3).
In several ancient churches in Rome, it was physically impossible for the priest to celebrate Mass facing away from the people, because of the presence, immediately in front of the altar, of the “confession” (Latin: Confessio), an area sunk below floor level to enable people to come close to the tomb of the saint buried beneath the altar.
The best-known such “confession” is that in St Peter’s Basilica, but several other churches in Rome have the same architectural feature, as for instance the Church of the Four Crowned Saints in Via dei Santi Quattro, which has the apse to the east. It is said that the reason the Pope traditionally faced the people when celebrating Mass in St Peter’s was because, due to the difficult terrain, the basilica was built with its apse to the west. “For whatever reason it was done, one can also see this arrangement (whereby the priest faced the people) in a whole series of church buildings within Saint Peter’s direct sphere of influence.”
The 2002-2006 excavations at the Basilica of Saint Paul Outside the Walls have shown that the original basilica there, built, like the Basilica of Saint Peter, at the time of the Emperor Constantine I, also had its apse to the west, although there were no constraints of terrain to impose this orientation.
The same orientation is seen in more of the oldest churches in Rome, confirming the statement that, before the sixth century, churches were usually constructed with the entrance to the east:
"When Christians in fourth-century Rome could first freely begin to build churches, they customarily located the sanctuary towards the** west end** of the building in imitation of the sanctuary of the Jerusalem Temple.
Although in the days of the Jerusalem Temple the high priest indeed faced east when sacrificing on Yom Kippur, the sanctuary within which he stood was located at the west end of the Temple. The Christian replication of the layout and the orientation of the Jerusalem Temple helped to dramatize the eschatological meaning attached to the sacrificial death of Jesus the High Priest in the Epistle to the Hebrews."
The people originally stood in the side aisles and for the first portion of the service faced the altar but at the approach of the consecration they all turned to face east towards the open church doors, the same direction the priest faced throughout the Eucharistic liturgy.
True…lots of goofy changes have gone on but that has been the norm for most revisions. They are NOT part of what the revisions were. They are just people taking too much liberty, as we have seen done since the 60’s…actually it began before that, hence the need for Vatican II. It was not all roses believe me before Vat II. I lived it and lots of goofy things went on then too.
True…lots of goofy changes have gone on but that has been the norm for most revisions. They are NOT part of what the revisions were. They are just people taking too much liberty, as we have seen done since the 60’s…actually it began before that, hence the need for Vatican II. It was not all roses believe me before Vat II. I lived it and lots of goofy things went on then too.
But as the OP was asking about the early Mass…that is where knowing history comes in.
Well, the Mass in the earliest days of the Church was usually celebrated in a large, whitewashed building that closely resembled a modern-day airplane hangar. There were no statues or crucifixes or stained-glass windows, because the faith of the people was so white-hot in those days that they didn’t need all the fancy externals: a few kindergarten scribblegrams placed strategically were sufficient to excite the advanced piety of the earliest Christians. The ugliest and cheapest vessels possible were chosen for Communion, as a statement against crass materialism. Communion was received in a seated position, in order not to alienate those who were not inclined to kneel. The music of the liturgy was deliberately mediocre, in order to cater to the ordinary folk whose intellects were insufficiently developed to deal with higher forms of music. Hymns were led by a group placed ostentatiously at the front of the sacred space, carefully chosen for their tone-deafness, accompanied by drums and a curious, stringed instrument that closely resembled an electric guitar without the electricity. It was considered taboo to preach about sin or about death, judgment, hell and heaven, because in those days when Christians were far closer to Jesus than we are, everybody knew that nobody goes to hell; it’s only centuries of autocratic rule by the power-hungry bishops and the hierarchy that have led us to believe otherwise, in order to keep the collection baskets full.
6glargento…if you want to go waaay back and see where all the customs of the Mass came from, I would highly recommend an old book by Father James Meagher, entitled