www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Maronite Liturgy

There is no validation whatsoever for versus populum in the ancient tradition. In fact, since early Christians emulated both the synagogue and Temple services with which they, as Jews, were familiar, we may assume that versus apidem was the norm from the beginning. Jews oriented their synagogues to point towards Jerusalem; Christians shifted that to true orientation, since the Light of Christ will come from the East.

In the synagogue service, the archesynagogos who leads the prayers faced the Torah scrolls in their tabernacle niche on the back wall. In the Temple service, the High Priest always faced the Holy of Holies, and never went behind it. Logically, then, Christians had good reasons to pray facing East, and to have the celebrant (who is, technically, either an Elder or an Overseer--both Synagogue titles--but not a "priest") facing East.

The only exceptions to the rule were the few churches that were "occidented" as opposed to oriented, among which would be the original St. Peters in Rome. Because Constantine wanted the altar immediately above the edicule of Peter's Tomb, the lay of the land forced the apse to be placed at the west, vs. east end of the church. Paradoxically, then, when the celebrant faced the people, he was "facing East", and he faced the people only because the requirement to face east overrode the requirement that people and celebrant face the same way. There is some evidence that, at various points in the Roman liturgy, the people at St. Peters actually turned their backs on the altar in order to face East together with the celebrant.

The main conclusions we can draw from all this are:

1. There is no basis for versus populum in Christian worship, except under unusual circumstances.
2. The near universal adoption of versus populum in the Roman rite is an abuse not sanctioned by the official rubrics (which assume versus apsidem)
3. Regardless of our personal feelings, we are not permitted to impose our own preferences or meanings on the facing of the celebrant in the liturgy, because the proper arrangements are embedded in the Tradition, and cannot be circumvented without doing serious damage to the symbolic matrix in which the liturgy is celebrated.

As I grow older, I find that I am craving more transcendency in worship. In my earlier years I was a champion of versus populi and a propenent of abandoning the "east wall" altar.

Now there are times and seasons when I want to stand facing the same direction as the people, seeking the mercy of Christ and the coming of His kingdom in solidarity with them.

This year, for the first time, I am celebrating ad orientum for the first two Sundays of Advent. I had never realized just how distracted I could be by the various actions in the pews and the expressions on the faces in the congregation; but one Sunday of ad orientum found me focussed as completely as humanly possible on our Lord and His sacrifice.

My theory is that this extends to the priest shortage as well. Which even mildly shy individual, wants to be staring at a bunch of folks who are staring directly back at them? One could possibly learn to ignore it for a few minutes here and there, but for up to two hours?

This actually reminds me of something I heard many years ago when the reforms of Vat II were being discussed,that at last the priest was leading his flock like a shepherd - and then I remembered seeing a flock of sheep ,possibly 1000 strong following their Shepherd down a flight of stairs in Salamanca, he didn't look back at them, and there were no helpers ,he then proceeded across a horrendously busy junction , and down a side street - and his flock just followed.

To lend support to what Stuart K has written, there is no basis for celebration of the Liturgy "versus populum" in the history of the Church. The late British writer Michael Davies has demonstrated (I think it was in his book Pope Paul's New Mass) that the whole thing was a Protestantization. The prime "author" of the Novus Ordo Missae was the late Archbishop Anibale Bugnini, with consultative help from a group of Protestant clergy. Abp. Anibale at first denied that this was the fact. But, subsequent to the denial, those Protestant clerical consultors went public with the information that they, indeed had had substantial input in the process of concocting a new Liturgy for the Western Church.

Dn. Robert

This reminds me of a joke I heard some time ago (from a traditionalist RC source in Belfast, Northern Ireland). It seems that when the Novus Ordo Missae was first promulgated, an Irish priest stepped up to the microphone to begin the celebration of Mass, and noticed that the mike wasn't working. He began to tinker with the mike, and was heard to mutter "there's something wrong with the microphone", and the congregation responded "and also with you."

Dn. Robert