Facing Of The Priest During Mass.

[lynn]

I attend the same parish church that I did as a kid. The priest is facing east when he is facing the people. The Tridentine Mass was offered facing west. At two other area churches the Tridentine would have been offered facing north!

God bless,
lynn

[Theoketos]

Really well written article.

Honestly I am torn on the Issue. I am want to be obdiant to which every opinion is right and worthy of the Lord, I just wish it was clearer (sorry Zach)

[quote]299. The altar should be built apart from the wall, in such a way that it is possible to walk around it easily and that Mass can be celebrated at it facing the people, which is desirable wherever possible. The altar should, moreover, be so placed as to be truly the center toward which the attention of the whole congregation of the faithful naturally turns.116 The altar is usually fixed and is dedicated.
[/quote]

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='qfnol31' date='Sep 22 2004, 05:40 PM']




cmom, what do you think of this, especially the last idea? [/quote]
Thank you Cappie for posting the rules. Our clergy rocks!


I think this is how it has been done for a long time. You have to build a church within the constraints of the area. Almost all the Catholic churches in my town are over 100 years old now. Only one of them has an altar that faces east.

Obviously this has not been a burning issue in the Church.

The crucifix in the front of my church is probably 12 foot high, in addition to the beautiful cross painted on our back wall.

[qfnol31]

LoL, I go to a campus where the church we have faces north. However, I wish we could have a Crucifix in the center that we all look at, including the Priest. That's how the Cistercians do it. According to what Cappie posted, there should be a Crucifix on the Altar first and foremost. Sadly, it is moved away often, and the symbolism is forgotten.

[littleflower+JMJ]

the GIRM Is very insteresting.....thanks cappie!

[Apotheoun]

The Eastern Catholic Churches have been instructed by the Holy See to maintain the unbroken universal Tradition of having the priest turn and face east while praying the Eucharistic Anaphora during the Divine Liturgy. The whole idea of having the priest face the people during the Eucharistic canon was a novelty devised by "liturgists" in the late 1960s, and as such it is contrary to the universal Apostolic Tradition of the Church.

Here is the pertinent section of the document issued by the Congregation for the Eastern Churches:

[quote name='Instruction for Applying the Liturgical Prescriptions of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches' date=' no. 107']Ever since ancient times, it has been customary in the prayer of the Eastern Churches to prostrate oneself to the ground, turning toward the east; the buildings themselves were constructed such that the altar would face the east. Saint John of Damascus explains the meaning of this tradition: "It is not for simplicity nor by chance that we pray turned toward the regions of the east (...). Since God is intelligible light (1 Jn. 1:5), and in the Scripture, Christ is called the Sun of justice (Mal. 3:20) and the East (Zec. 3:8 of the LXX), it is necessary to dedicate the east to him in order to render him worship. The Scripture says: 'Then the Lord God planted a garden in Eden, in the east, and he placed there the man whom he had formed' (Gen. 2:8). (...) In search of the ancient homeland and tending toward it, we worship God. Even the tent of Moses had its curtain veil and propitiatory facing the east. And the tribe of Judah, in as much as it was the most notable, encamped on the east side (cf. Nm. 2:3). In the temple of Solomon, the Lord's gate was facing the east (cf. Ez. 44:1). Finally, the Lord placed on the cross looked toward the west, and so we prostrate ourselves in his direction, facing him. When he ascended to heaven, he was raised toward the east, and thus his disciples adored him, and thus he will return, in the same way as they saw him go to heaven (cf. Acts 1:11), as the Lord himself said: 'For just as lightning comes from the east and is seen as far as the west, so will the coming of the Son of Man be' (Mt. 24:27). Waiting for him, we prostrate ourselves toward the east. It is an unwritten tradition, deriving from the Apostles."[85] 

[i]This rich and fascinating interpretation also explains the reason for which the celebrant who presides in the liturgical celebration prays facing the east, just as the people who participate. It is not a question, as is often claimed, of presiding the celebration with the back turned to the people, but rather of guiding the people in pilgrimage toward the Kingdom, invoked in prayer until the return of the Lord.[/i] 

Such practice, threatened in numerous Eastern Catholic Churches by a new and recent Latin influence, is thus of profound value and should be safeguarded as truly coherent with the Eastern liturgical spirituality.

End Note:
[85] John of Damascus, "Expositio accurata fidei orthodoxae" IV, 12: <PG> 94, 1133-1136. [/quote]

To read the document in its entirety click the link below:

[url="http://www.byzcath.org/faith/documents/instruction.htm"]Instruction for Applying the Liturgical Prescriptions of the Code of Canons of the Eastern Churches [/url]

[Guest JeffCR07]

I might also point out that there is a mode by which the priest can face east AND face the people. If a hanging crucifix is placed between the people and the priest, then the people have the ability to gaze upon the crucifix, acting as our spiritual east, while at the same time the priest can also gaze upon it during the consecration, reminding him of the magnitude of the miracle that is taking place.

I suppose one could argue that this "doesn't count" because either the priest or the people would be looking at the back of the crucifix, however, I would view this as an exceedingly legalistic notion, and I personally would not give it credit.

personally, I think that the Cardinal is right about a great many things, however, I do not think he gives enough consideration to the notion that the priest, acting In Persona Christi, should consecrate the eucharist facing the congregation, thus representing Christ giving his body to the Church, thereby anticipating and foreshadowing the marriage of Christ to the Church, which is his Spotless Bride, at the end of time.

I see merits to both methods, and in no way whatsoever am I decrying the practice of facing East. In fact, I personally prefer it. What I [i]am[/i] saying is that it is a practice, and so is acceptible for the living Magisterium to allow for a change in this practice.

For this reason, I, and all others, should humbly submit to the decisions of our sheperds in this matter.

- Your Brother In Christ, Jeff

[HartfordWhalers]

[quote name='JeffCR07' date='Sep 26 2004, 11:05 AM'] I might also point out that there is a mode by which the priest can face east AND face the people. If a hanging crucifix is placed between the people and the priest, then the people have the ability to gaze upon the crucifix, acting as our spiritual east, while at the same time the priest can also gaze upon it during the consecration, reminding him of the magnitude of the miracle that is taking place.

I suppose one could argue that this "doesn't count" because either the priest or the people would be looking at the back of the crucifix, however, I would view this as an exceedingly legalistic notion, and I personally would not give it credit.

personally, I think that the Cardinal is right about a great many things, however, I do not think he gives enough consideration to the notion that the priest, acting In Persona Christi, should consecrate the eucharist facing the congregation, thus representing Christ giving his body to the Church, thereby anticipating and foreshadowing the marriage of Christ to the Church, which is his Spotless Bride, at the end of time.

I see merits to both methods, and in no way whatsoever am I decrying the practice of facing East. In fact, I personally prefer it. What I [i]am[/i] saying is that it is a practice, and so is acceptible for the living Magisterium to allow for a change in this practice.

For this reason, I, and all others, should humbly submit to the decisions of our sheperds in this matter.

- Your Brother In Christ, Jeff [/quote]
Why was it that the Church virtually exculsively adopted the practice of not facing the people in the Latin Rite for so many centuries, if both are acceptable? Would not the Church have taken an either/or approach in the past if this were the case? Why is it that it only comes back during[color=red] [b]edited by foundsheep [/b][/color]the 60s?

Edited October 3, 2004 by foundsheep

[qfnol31]

We used to have women deaconesses. Just because we do or haven't done something before or after the councils of Trent and Vatican II doesn't make it right or wrong.

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='HartfordWhalers' date='Oct 1 2004, 03:19 AM'] Why was it that the Church virtually exculsively adopted the practice of not facing the people in the Latin Rite for so many centuries, if both are acceptable? Would not the Church have taken an either/or approach in the past if this were the case? Why is it that it only comes back during the revolution in the 60s? [/quote]
I asked about facing east on another list.

Dear --- & All,

It was ALMOST the universal practice in the Infant Church for people
to face East for major prayer. It was a discipline, not a matter of
Doctrine of Faith. There were early famous exceptions to this.

That practice of praying while facing East is still common in the
Eastern Catholic Church, and amongst the Orthodox. But it isn't
anything like univeral with them today either.

And that ancient practice - is almost universally misrepresented by
the SuperTrads today. It is misrepresented as the priest facing away
from the people during Mass - instead of the priest and the people
facing East at the same time during Mass.

How do the UltraTrads misrepresent this? They claim that the change
from the priest facing away from the people during Mass in the old
Tridentine Mass was evilly changed in the New Order of the Mass which
Pope Paul VI instituted after Vatican Council II.

Real scholars of Church History and the Liturgy don't know whether to
laugh or cry when they see false statements like that coming from
UltraTrads.

Such claims can only have an affect (outside of laughter or pity for
the ignorance of the people making such claims) - such claims can
only have an effect on people who don't know the history of the Mass.

I discuss this paricular problem this at some length in 'Trial,
Tribulation & Triumph'.

Example:

1. In the Infant Church (whenever possible) all the people at Mass
faced East - both all the clergy, and all the laity.

2. As a practice, all the members of the Infant Church said their
morning and evening prayers (particularly family prayer) facing East.

You are probably wondering why?

I will give you quotes from two men - who are both Fathers and
Doctors of the Church - to explain the reasoning behind this
practice. This text comes from St. John Damascene's book 'De Fide
Orthodoxa'. It is the very first full 'Summa' of the Catholic Faith.
St. John Damascene is the last 'Father of the Church'. He is
explaining why Catholics usually pray facing East.

"And when he was taken up, He [Jesus] ascended to the East, and thus
the Apostles worshipped Him and thus He shall come in the same way as
they had seen Him going into heaven, as the Lord Himself said:
"As the lightning cometh out of the east and appeareth even into the
west: so shall also the coming of the Son of man be." And so while
we are awaiting Him, we worship toward the East. This is more-over,
the unwritten tradition of the Apostles, for they have handed many
things down to us unwritten."
[De Fide Orthodoxa, St. John Damascene, Pub.: The Fathers of The
Church, Vol. 37, (Ed. Dr. Roy Deferrari, The Fathers of the Church,
Inc., New York, 1958), pp. 353&354.]

In the early Church, prayer (especially morning prayer) was almost
universally said facing East in both the Western and Eastern Church.
As St. Augustine says,

"When we rise to pray, we turn East, where heaven begins."
[Patrologia Latina, 34:1277, De sermone Domini in monte (The sermon
of the Lord on the Mount) St. Augustine.]

St. Augustine is referring to the same reason for 'prayer facing
East' which St. John Damascene would give more details on 3 centuries
later in his quote given above.

---, with rare exception, in the infant Church the priest didn't say
Mass facing the people. The priest said the Mass facing East. The
laity prayed the Mass facing East.

There was only one way for them to do that - without the people
turning their back on the priest. The Bishop, priests, and Deacons
faced East. And the people behind them also faced East.

The older list members will remember that prior to the 1960's, Latin
Rite priests all said Mass facing the altar. i.e., The priest and
the people were both facing the same way. Up until the Middle Ages
most of the Latin Rite churches were built facing the East, just as
they still for the most part do in the Eastern Rite.

A rare "Eastern" exception was the Basilica which Constantine built
in the 4th Century at Tyre. The land chosen for the site of that
Basilica did not readily all for an entrace from the West. So the
altar was set up at the West end of the Church/Basilica - SO THAT THE
CELEBRANT, THE BISHOP, COULD SAY MASS FACING EAST. So in order to see
the Bishop praying Mass, the people had to face West.

Most of the early "Western" exceptions to both the Celebrant and the
people facing East during Mass (the most famous exceptions were in
Rome) are cases where the geography of donated land/building for a
Church/Basilica did not readily allow for a Western entrance.

When that happened, the only way the priest could celebrate the
Liturgy of the Eucharist facing East was to face the people. With
those rare exceptions, the earliest Christian churches were set up
with the altar, the Clergy, and the congregation facing East.

SO IT WAS NEVER A MATTER OF THE PRIEST SAYING MASS WITH HIS BACK TO
THE PEOPLE. IT WAS A SIMPLE MATTER OF ALL LIGURGICAL PRAYER FACING
EAST WHENEVER POSSIBLE.

It was not considered either important or unimportant whether the
priest faced the people. It was important that in offering the
sacrifice of the Mass to God (not to the people) that he face East.
This is still the almost universal practice in all the Eastern Rites.

But for centuries in the West, that practice and understanding has
been lost - not only by the Laity - but most of the Clergy. Most of
those in the West simply do not understand the original reason for
the priest and the people facing the same way during Mass. The REAL
REASON was so both the Clergy and Laity could face East.

[u]Over time (particularly in the West) that understanding was lost. And
even some great Western theologians waxed eloquent about how the
priest faces away from the people because he is offering prayer and
sacriifice to God - and not to the people.[/u]
Of course, since the insurgence of the UltraTrads, you see this kind
of nonsense peddled all over the place.

All my love in Christ,

Desmond

Edited October 1, 2004 by cmotherofpirl

[HartfordWhalers]

[quote name='qfnol31' date='Oct 1 2004, 09:45 AM'] We used to have women deaconesses. Just because we do or haven't done something before or after the councils of Trent and Vatican II doesn't make it right or wrong. [/quote]
That is not true. Women were never ordained... since a deacon has Holy Orders, only a man can be a deacon.

[qfnol31]

[url="http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/04651a.htm"]New Advent[/url]

That was just an example. My point was simply that Church Tradition is not defined (in dates) by councils, that is, we don't say that Tradition stopped with Trent or began with Vatican II, etc.

[qfnol31]

[quote]It was important that in offering the
sacrifice of the Mass to God (not to the people) that he face East.
This is still the almost universal practice in all the Eastern Rites.

But for centuries in the West, that practice and understanding has
been lost - not only by the Laity - but most of the Clergy. Most of
those in the West simply do not understand the original reason for
the priest and the people facing the same way during Mass. The REAL
REASON was so both the Clergy and Laity could face East.[/quote]

That was the reason I originally posted this. Just what we've lost through the years. Then again, sometimes the best way to see what you've lost is to take it away and reorder it.

[Apotheoun]

[quote name='qfnol31' date='Oct 1 2004, 07:45 AM'] We used to have women deaconesses.  Just because we do or haven't done something before or after the councils of Trent and Vatican II doesn't make it right or wrong. [/quote]
The deaconesses of the past were not ordained; instead, they were, like nuns of today, consecrated, but they never received a sacred power to serve at the altar during the Divine Liturgy. Women have never received sacred orders, nor is it possible for them to receive sacred orders.

God bless,
Todd

[Theoketos]

From my understanding the deaconess were indeed not ordained, and their main function was to assit with the part of the Baptism of disrobed women....

[Apotheoun]

[quote]Most of the early "Western" exceptions to both the Celebrant and the
people facing East during Mass (the most famous exceptions were in
Rome) are cases where the geography of donated land/building for a
Church/Basilica did not readily allow for a Western entrance.[/quote]
As Fr. Bouyer has shown in his studies on the liturgy, in Churches built where the priest had to stand behind the altar and face the people in order to pray facing east; the people, during the Eucharistic anaphora (canon), would turn their backs to the priest and face east as well. There has never been a time in the history of the Church, where the priest and people faced each other during the recitation of the Eucharistic prayer itself; instead, they would only face each other during the dialogue portions of the Mass.

God bless,
Todd

[Colleen]

[quote name='Theoketos' date='Oct 1 2004, 01:45 PM'] From my understanding the deaconess were indeed not ordained, and their main function was to assit with the part of the Baptism of disrobed women.... [/quote]
That was my understanding as well.

[qfnol31]

Yep. The point was just that we don't use them anymore (and the reasons why not is funny.

[popestpiusx]

[quote name='Apotheoun' date='Oct 1 2004, 02:45 PM'] As Fr. Bouyer has shown in his studies on the liturgy, in Churches built where the priest had to stand behind the altar and face the people in order to pray facing east; the people, during the Eucharistic anaphora (canon), would turn their backs to the priest and face east as well. There has never been a time in the history of the Church, where the priest and people faced each other during the recitation of the Eucharistic prayer itself; instead, they would only face each other during the dialogue portions of the Mass.

God bless,
Todd [/quote]
That is exactly right. The practice of Mass being said "facing the people" is quite novel. Msgr. Klaus Gamber, who was not a tradionalist, proves this point quite well in his book "The Reform of the Roman Liturgy".

[qfnol31]

[quote]157. When the prayer is concluded, the priest genuflects, takes the host consecrated in the same Mass, and, holding it slightly raised above the paten or above the chalice, [color=red]while facing the people[/color], says, Ecce Agnus Dei (This is the Lamb of God). With the people he adds, Domine, non sum dignus (Lord, I am not worthy).

158. After this, standing and [color=red]turned toward the altar[/color], the priest says quietly, Corpus Christi custodiat me in vitam aeternam (May the Body of Christ bring me to everlasting life) and reverently receives the Body of Christ. Then he takes the chalice, saying quietly, Sanguis Christi custodiat me in vitam aeternam (May the Blood of Christ bring me to everlasting life), and reverently receives the Blood of Christ.[/quote]

I think this might imply that the Priest is normally facing away from the people, for it says the words "turned toward the altar" and "facing the people" as if they are normally seperate things.