A bit of a rant in the admirable NLM. But I wonder if they are saying quite what they mean.
Take the Oxford Oratory. Currently, their OF masses are facing East; their EF masses they celebrate facing West.
Does NLM think this is wrong?
Putting it differently: are they arguing, like the Fathers of the Church, for Mass facing East; or do they want Mass with priest facing in the same direction as the people ... whatever that may be?
I think people should make up their minds. The Traditionalist Movement runs a real risk of superficiality.
skip to main |
skip to sidebar
was for nearly three decades at Lancing College; where he taught Latin and Greek language and literature, was Head of Theology, and Assistant Chaplain. He has served three curacies, been a Parish Priest, and Senior Research Fellow at Pusey House in Oxford. Since 2011, he has been in full communion with the See of S Peter. The opinions expressed on this Blog are not asserted as being those of the Magisterium of the Church, but as the writer's opinions as a private individual. Nevertheless, the writer strives, hopes, and prays that the views he expresses are conformable with and supportive of the Magisterium. In this blog, the letters PF stand for Pope Francis. On this blog, 'Argumentum ad hominem' refers solely to the Lockean definition, Pressing a man with the consequences of his own concessions'.
... once graced the high altar of the church of Sancta Maria in Ara Coeli on the Capitoline Hill.
Fr John Hunwicke
was for nearly three decades at Lancing College; where he taught Latin and Greek language and literature, was Head of Theology, and Assistant Chaplain. He has served three curacies, been a Parish Priest, and Senior Research Fellow at Pusey House in Oxford. Since 2011, he has been in full communion with the See of S Peter. The opinions expressed on this Blog are not asserted as being those of the Magisterium of the Church, but as the writer's opinions as a private individual. Nevertheless, the writer strives, hopes, and prays that the views he expresses are conformable with and supportive of the Magisterium. In this blog, the letters PF stand for Pope Francis. On this blog, 'Argumentum ad hominem' refers solely to the Lockean definition, Pressing a man with the consequences of his own concessions'.
Archive
-
▼
2009
(332)
-
▼
October
(35)
- 125 years
- Full communion?
- WONDERFUL!
- Anglican Clergy
- Pardon my language
- Apostolic Constitution
- Versus Orientem
- Calendars yet again
- Benedict XIV
- Canon Law
- My views on the Apostolic Constitution
- OrthoDix
- Accident prone
- Animabus
- The Solemnity of S Frideswide
- Another Grouse ...
- Gravestones
- The Prayer Book Office
- Have a snort
- Help needed
- Sacrosanctum Concilium
- Fauna and a bit of flora
- And Mohrmann again
- Laureata
- Our Lady's hair
- I need help ...
- CHANTRY??
- Pleae ...
- S Therese again
- Ave atque Vale
- Holiness
- Beatification
- In the Goolies
- What you want is the English Missal
- Frascati
-
▼
October
(35)
Popular Posts
-
More Update: Perhaps I should have been more explicit about the complete wrongheadedness of the sort of speculations which could be triggere...
-
There are wild rumours on the Internet about News due to break tomorrow, Sunday. They are, as far as I know, all wrong. Far too wild. Far to...
-
To refresh your memories, I reprint a piece I wrote when an earlier electronic edition of the Dictator Pope was published under a pseudonym:...
-
So a correspondent wrote on one of my threads. It set me thinking. I am convinced that PF is most certainly not the worst man ever to hav...
-
Perhaps a couple of years ago, in Western Ireland, I had the privilege to be in the company of a very great prelate just after he had offere...
-
"After this Magisterium, after this long journey, we can affirm with certainty and with Magisterial authority that the Liturgical Refor...
-
Lead us not into temptation. It is unlikely that the Greek and Latin words translated by temptation meant the sort of thing we mean by '...
-
Pope Francis breaks his silence! A "In authorising regular use of the older Mass, now referred to as the 'extraordinary form'...
-
The heart of the Bergoglianist error is, in my fallible opinion, to be found in such texts as the letter Archbishop Nichols wrote last year ...
Followers
Links
Raffaello's Madonna di Foligno
... once graced the high altar of the church of Sancta Maria in Ara Coeli on the Capitoline Hill.
9 comments:
It is quite clear that the tradition of the church has been for Mass to be said with the canon said with the celebrant(s) facing in the same direction as the people, or at least the same direction as the other clergy. The whole obsession with the actual direction on a compass of where the priest faces seems a secondary point to me.
OK, it does to you. But to the Fathers, what mattered was facing East. Easwards (not with your back to the people at ALL costs) is the "Tradition".
Well........
There are at least 2 80 to 100-year-old churches in Milwaukee (ironically, both occupied by 'traditionalist' folk--one EF, one OF) in which, when the priest celebrates Mass, he is facing WEST.
So the Fathers were not in charge of land-acquisition/architecture concerns during that time in Milwaukee.
And then there are the churches that face north and south. Offhand I can think of seven in our vicariate, all among the oldest churches in the area dating from 1850-1900 (our part of the wild North American prairie was settled in the 1820s).
Even Jungman recognizes, perhaps with regret, that geographical orientation has lost it's attraction nowadays but he speaks in favour of priest and people facing the same direction.
In North America, churches and even Cathedrals face in all the directions of the compass and geographical oriention became a dead letter at least a century ago.
Fr. Hunwicke,
Thanks for your thoughts. I would like to suggest that the issue is more complicated than this, with various angles having to be taken into account.
First, let me state that evidently being turned to the (geographic) East was important, and I don't disagree with your idea here that we should be taking a look at this again, particularly when building new churches.
This said, we have also seen the development of the concept of a symbolic or liturgical East which is not necessarily tied to geography and many churches have been so built accordingly with the apse and altar directed toward any number of points on the compass, including north and south. (And here I would note that this is the root of Jeffrey's piece, which is really an artistic/architectural consideration -- and we must also recall that the later addition of different altars in front of the original altar in these churches did not necessarily orient the celebrant East since that was not really the consideration, even if the basilica model was used as a justification.)
That expression of symbolic or liturgical "Eastwardness" was manifest by the common direction of the priest and the people, towards the apse, altar, cross, etc. which retained at least that aspect of how this was historically manifest. (For let us recall that even, as in the case of the Roman basilicas, where by some reason or circumstance -- in the Roman instances Ratzinger cites topographical circumstances -- the altar was in the Western end, and the priest would go to the Western side of the altar and face toward the nave, the people too, at least at certain points of the liturgy, would also turn to the East; thus the priest and people shared a common, united direction at that point. Bouyer quoting Cyril Vogel: "Even when the orientation of the church allowed the priest to pray facing the people, we must not forget that it was not just the priest who turned to the East, but the whole congregation with him.")
Ratzinger, looking at the situation today, has further proposed this can be the common turning toward the cross:
"Facing toward the East, as we heard, was linked with the "sign of the Son of Man", with the Cross, which announces Our Lord's Second Coming. That is why, very early on, the East was linked with the sign of the cross. Where a direct common turning toward the East is not possible, the cross can serve as the interior "East" of faith. It should stand in the middle of the altar and be the common point of focus for both priest and praying community." [You will note he gives a priority to the turning toward the East, but notes a common turning toward the East and then goes on to consider symbolic manifestations of Eastwardness.]
So we see here two manifestations of turning "East" in a symbolic sense.
Finally, the other aspect I think we must consider in all this (which Jeffrey also raised) is the prudential aspect tied to our experience in the past decades as tied to versus populum. That aspect has been adequately summarized by Ratzinger this way:
"The turning of the priest toward the people has turned the community into a self-enclosed circle."
Evidently the idea of the altar cross mentioned above as per the "Benedictine arrangement" is one way of beginning to address this, and so too is the shared direction of the priest and faithful as it has been manifest both in our recent history with our understanding of a symbolic, liturgical East, and as it was manifest when this was much more rooted in the geographic East.
In both instances of course, geographic Eastwardness may or may not enter in, and so that aspect of the consideration you are raising yet remains, but it is really a question of whether that development was desirable or satisfactory, and in that regard, is a very broad question. In considering it, I think we now not only have to consider it from a historical perspective, but also as a question of development, and further from the prudential aspect.
What those who enthuse about ad orientem (including Papa Ratzi) have not realised is that the altar is the symbol of Christ. When we are all facing the altar, from whatever point of the compass, we are all facing in the same direction – ie. facing Christ. Whether the presider is on one side of the altar and the assembly on the other makes no difference at all.
The Cadinal says the Altar symbolizes Christ.
Really? Does he mean it really isn't the communal table that we gather 'round to celebrate the communal supper of the Lord in COMMUNITY?
Seriously Eminenza, some symbols just don't work and yours is obscured by the fact that the people are looking over the altar at each other, as is only natural.
The altar does indeed symbolize Christ. It has always done so. But in "versus populum" masses - with the celebrant on the other side, looking at us, that symbol is destroyed. Because one ends up looking over the altar. The symbol works only if both people and celebant are in front of the altar, looking towards it.
- Kjetil Kringlebotten
Post a Comment