www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Latin Rite, Facing East re: Liturgy of the Eucharist

Alex,

I'm about 60% Eastern and 40% Western now, chalk it up to 3 years of study and a little knowledge of the East & West.

Guess I'm a little unsettled after eating from the tree of knowledge .

james

ps - I'm getting those suggested books also.

pss - I have nothing against free standing altars, only the direction of prayer and worship.

The versus populum experiment was going on in at least some places (as an abuse) previous to the council. I know in my own diocese that was the case. So the seeds of dissent were certainly there, which later laid out for greater abuses after somethings became legitimate options.

Vatican II did mention the possibility of versus populum celebration when it spoke of free-standing altars, however, it did not mandate it, only allowed for the possiblility. It most certainly didn't mandate that high altars, altars fixed to a reredos, etc. be removed.

As for the position of earlier churches, Lang in his book speaks of this with regards some of the Roman basilicas. Some where pre-existing from civil Roman usage, which dictated the position of the sanctuary. In other cases, streets and surrounding architecture also dictated the position. I cannot confirm this off hand, but I believe there developed a sense of "liturgical eastwardness" as opposed to literal directional eastwardness on the compass. Hence, the idea may have been developed that the common direction of priest and people represented the eschatological and cosmological significance of the Eastward position -- that of all, priest and laity, looking together toward God and the Kingdom of Heaven, etc.

I must admit, of all the Eastern churches I've been in, not one of them has yet been actually "oriented" either -- e.g. Eastward facing. Of the Eastern Orthodox churches, they seem to have retained the idea of a literal compass direction toward the East. I think its probably representative of a different interpretation and the possibility of a "liturgical Eastwardness" which developed in the Catholic Church.

Personally, while I like the idea of actual Eastward direction, where possible, I think it more important that we represent that symbolically in our common direction, whatever direction that ends up being actually on a compass.

Shawn,
The Document of the Second Vatican Council on the liturgy, Sacrosanctum Concilium does not even mention free-standing altars. As such, it presumes no change in direction. It was only the documents promulgated subsequent to the Second Vatican Council that mention is made of free-standing altars and also of Mass facing the people.
Bugnini was appointed to the Concilium on the Liturgy only AFTER the Vatican Council, at which time he pounded away at Paul VI to allow for these changes.

Benedict will certainly not make the Traditional Rite normative in the West again. And I honestly don't think he will call for a change in the direction of the priest either.

In short, I'd say no and yes. No for a full out dismissal of the current Roman liturgical books for the sake of the older, but yes in the sense that he is favourable to the presence of those books and they are allowed.

What he might do is help those communities to more easily spread despite the opposition some have against them. But hard to say.

Pope Benedict is also a father of the "reform of the reform" movement, and I think you're more likely to see that be a focus, at least in his writings. They are works underway to re-translate the Missal into the vernacular in a more poetic and literal way. That would go a long way. All the rest are options already available, its a matter of helping people to actually utilize those options.

That means a change in liturgical culture amongst a certain generation, as well as clearing up misconceptions of what Vatican II actually mandated.

Benedict XVI actually says something along these lines as a critique in 'Spirit of the Liturgy'. He says the liturgy degenerates into the banal when it becomes people centred, which he adds it has become in many places. However Miliardo although he thinks a wider indult for the Tridentine Mass is a good idea he is more concerned with the reform of the Mass of the 1970 Breviary.

PS) Pray for ICEL

That reminds me of the Greek Orthodox parish in East Pittsburgh, Pa. One enters into the church by walking around the church to a side entrance. The back of the church actually faces the street, where one usually finds the main entrace of a church. The church was built this way to ensure the altar is facing east!

Christos Anesti! Alithos Anesti!

I am not favorable to new translations. I do not think they will help. There have been new translations after new translations, sometimes they are better, sometimes worse. The fact is that Vatican II mandated the retention of the Latin language. Yet the venacular was partially allowed, for say the epistles or gospels, which I think is fine. The West has continually used Latin since at least the fourth century and the venacular is foreign to its spirit. The West needs to be the West and the East needs to be the East.
Benedict has already made moves back toward the sacred Latin language. And I hope this will give further impetus to the traditional movement.

Hi,

I am going to be blunt and a little bit cynical with my reply.

God is more present in the people the priest faces in the Latin Rite than on the wall the priest faces in the Byzantine Rite.

Now, I need to add that I do respect and appreciate the richness of the symbol of the priest facing east and in the same direction than the people.

My point is that it is not really all that important where the priest faces, but why he faces that way, that *he* knwos why he's facing that way and that *the people* knows why he's facing that way.

Shalom,
Memo

What a discussion! Is this real?

Is the tone of this thread anything like what is being talked about in the Roman Catholic Church? ...or is this a sub-culture of Byzantines and Tridentinists?

Is there really any call or desire (among the clergy or among the people) for a return to facing East in the Roman Catholic Church?

Nick

At my church, the priest is not able to face east during the liturgy (we're in a mission parish that was put into an old protestant church); however, he does face away from the people. BTW, we're Byzantine Catholic.

I see the symbolism of the priest facing away from the people to be very important. In the celebration of the Divine Liturgy, the priest only faces us when he is blessing us or if something else is happening that comes done from God (ie, the Gospel reading, Communion, etc.). However, all the offering of the gifts, etc, is done facing the altar (away from the people).

This shows that while the priest acts as a medium of sorts (yes, I'm aware of how that could be interpreted), the blessing, the Eucharist, and the Gospel of Jesus Christ all come from God Himself, and are given to the people, with the priest only making signs (like when Moses raised his staff and such things as that). Likewise, the offering of the gifts is not an offering to the people, hence it should not be done facing the people. While no one on Earth can "face God," we must remind ourselves through the liturgy that it is praise and worship directed towards God, and not kept between the priest and his parish.

Christos Voskres!

Rodriquez,
Yes, but Christ is NOT more present in the people than in the Sacred Eucharist. Christ IS the Eucharist. And when facing the altar he faces the Eucharist. Saying the priest faces a wall is a misunderstanding of a very significant posture. (I know I haven't addressed facing EAST per se in this post).

Nick,
The position of the priest when offering Mass has been debated in the West since the Second Vatican Council when the 1900 year old tradition was changed from facing the tabernacle, altar and crucifix to facing the people. Eminent clergy members, including Pope Benedict, have discussed the matter in a serious and concerned manner.

While I'm not a scholar on facing east during liturgy, I was told it has something to do with the symbolism of the sun rising in the east, just as the Son rose from death. Quite honestly, that idea rather frightens me, considering the sort of sun worship that was so prevalent among pagans.

Christos Voskres!

St. Peter's, mentioned in an early post, is unique. In churches built by Constantine and his mother, the priest and the people faced east, where doors were opened to the rising sun during the liturgy. When the new St. Peter's was built, the altar area of the old church was not disturbed. The primary reason being that it is where St. Peter is buried. The altar direction in St. Peter's is because of the lay of the new building, not a compass direction. As for the turning around of the altars after Vatican II, this is my opinion, which may or may not agree with yours. I think there was a deliberate effort to emphasize the table or meal aspect, rather than the sacrificial aspect of the mass. Again, I think this was seen as being more acceptable to Protestants who, as I mentioned in another post, would come to us if we were only more like them. Now it appears to me that the mass is primarily a sacrifice, and only secondarily a meal. But I do think that if competent historians examine Bugnini, they will find he operated on the basis of either faulty scholarship, or a personal agenda. Although it is out of print, the book, "The Reform of the Roman Liturgy: It's Problems and Background" by Klaus Gamber is one of the better sources on the history of the mass. It can be a little hard to lay hands on, but is well worth reading.

The symbolism of facing the east is because that is the direction from which Christ is supposed to return.

Chotkimeister,
Remember, however, that the universe was created by God. Therefore it should not be at all surprizing to find things which smack of the Sacred Doctrine we hold. God would have it no other way. For instance, as Saint Patrick taught, the clover is one and yet three, a sign of the Trinity. The sun is a particularly poignant physical reminder of the Resurrection.

Now when incense is used in the liturgy, one does not cringe at possible pagan references (pagans used to use incense too), but rather it is a physical sign that lifts the mind up to heaven. In the same way, facing East is a powerful physical reminder of the Resurrection. It lifts the mind up to the Powerful one who is Resurrected.