May 26, 2016

Ad Orientem is the way ahead

Robert-Sarah

It would appear our little parish of Saint Anselm’s, Pembury is cutting edge trendy! For our beautification project saw an intentional shift in liturgical approach so that all main services are now celebrated ‘ad orientem’- a position encouraged within the Ordinariate; that is with priest facing East when addressing God and turning West, to face the people, when addressing them.

This week the man in charge of liturgy at the Vatican, Cardinal Sarah, underlined the benefit of this ancient approach. He suggested readers and listeners might face each other during the Liturgy of the Word but that change should occur when moving to the liturgy of the Sacrament. At that sacred moment, when the priest addresses the Almighty, Cardinal Sarah says ‘it is essential the priest and faithful look together towards the east. This corresponds exactly to what the Council Fathers wanted.” He suggests it should become the norm in places of excellence and especially within the world’s Cathedrals.

Cardinal Sarah went onto say “It is legitimate and complies with the letter and spirit of the Council. As prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, I wish to recall that the celebration versus orientem is authorised by the rubrics, which specify the times when the celebrant must turn to the people. It is therefore not necessary to have special permission to celebrate facing the Lord.’

I applaud these comments having witnessed how Eastward celebration re-orients Mass, infusing it with a greater sense of mystery and awe. It makes space for God by shifting the focus beyond the gathered assembly; thereby emphasising that vital supernatural aspect; one that is too often missing in modern celebrations. Which is not to suggest Westward Mass cannot be celebrated with dignity, it can, but that where the supernatural aspect has vanished- and it often is amidst Westward celebrations- there Mass has grown overly chummy and informal; a celebration of the community by the community. A problem more widespread than it should be.

For nearly 2000 years, of course, ad orientam was normative. It only fell out of vogue in the wake of the Second Vatican Council. At that time when enthusiasm for modernity encouraged a whole generation of sandal wearing clerics to ignore the  written instruction of Rome and spark, instead, a mini revolution. Dissent was in the air, altar rails ripped out, high altars abandoned, sacred images vanished and the creation of de-sacrilised space championed.

We witnessed a deliberate, and often politically motivated, shift away from ornate sanctuaries to brutalist concrete structures- an ever greater emphasis on man not God. And statistics now make the conclusions unavoidable. Jaw-dropping decline has plagued the church since this experiment began. The revolutionaries promised growth, through greater relevance, but ushered in an age of decline never before witnessed in history! And the unity of the church was damaged also as a tussle has emerged in recent time between the revolutionaries and those who oppose them.

Hence today we witness calls from Rome to reverse the decline through a renewed understanding of the council and the new evangelisation. Hence the introduction of new Missal and reform of the reform. Hence a revival of the Extra-Ordinary form. Hence the intended emphasis within the new liturgy of the Ordinariate where ad orientem worship is encouraged to place emphasis on beauty, tradition and holiness. Voices are calling then for a new approach but will they be heeded? I think three main issues make this difficult.

Firstly the problem of intransigence. Certain prelates and clergy will resist the call for change at any cost- because it is their baby! Never will they abandon the tired revolution for they are children of it. And having spent a lifetime as architects of modernity, sincerely believing the church was in need of their “greater relevance”, they cannot now bring themselves to join up the dots, ponder the evidence and accept that Cafeteria Catholicism has proved a disaster.

Understand this group will deny the need for change should they be the last Catholic standing! Yes even in the face of the latest shocking news; that for every new Catholic today – ten have left the church! The modernists will never accept that a kum-by-ah approach has largely scared off men, emptied seminaries and left most Catholics too ill educated to defend the faith, at least with any intellectual credulity, leaving them floundering and confused amidst a hostile secular culture. No this intransigent group are ideologues and far too rigid to change!

Then there are the overly timid clergy. Who know in their hearts that change is needed but are too afraid to take control of their sanctuaries and congregations. Those who would never dream of rocking the boat or standing up to modernist hierarchs and laity. Their hunger for popularity and the quiet life means that they might agree in private but will never act in public. For they dare not endure the short term pain that leads to change and long term gain. Until the majority move in the right direction they will continue to collude in what does not work for fear of the consequence of daring to be different.

And finally there is the problem of ignorance. The revolution is not new and poorly formed clergy and laity now exist who have no memory at all of all that went before. This generation were raised to fear tradition; it has been drummed  into them (by the ideologues) that the very notion of ad orientem or tradition is unhealthy.

Alas this group, having only ever worshiped in a modernist way, have almost no sound appreciation of liturgy or sacred music. They bought the lie that anything other than dumbed down entertainment is elitist. And so they wouldn’t know a nurse and veil if it hit them in the face. And without extra education -they are going to struggle as regards to a revival of lost ways. They will remain limited by the gaps in their knowledge. More comfortable to stick with what is known, without thinking, than admit you need much help to move on.

Yet despite these various challenges before us hope exists.  Because the influence of the modernist ideologues is waning, despite a recent bounce under the current papacy. The reality is that the open minded clergy are coming to see, in increasing number, a value in restoring what was lost. Across the Catholic world, like the first shoots of spring in winter, orthodoxy is found flourishing. And people are increasingly drawn to that which authentically exudes both beauty and holiness whilst respecting the traditions of the past.

Realising a need to leave behind the old fashioned approach of the last Century- this group is working instead for a restoration of the sacred. And I am delighted that the Ordinariate finds itself a small but precious part of this group!  Let us who embrace the new evangelisation become children of a new revolution- not of dissent but fidelity! Not of rupture but continuation! A group to restore lost treasures to the church, to combat shoddy liturgy and point again to God not man. A people rooted in the past but growing in the present. That we might open a door to the Holy Spirit and rid ourselves at last of that fascination, instead, with the Spirit of the age…

Related Posts

Truth will judge the synod

Truth will judge the synod

To fulfil not abolish

To fulfil not abolish

Archbishop’s visitation

Archbishop’s visitation

Requiem for a Queen?

Requiem for a Queen?

Admin


Your Signature

  • Father, calm down.
    I agree with most, if not all, of what you say and what you say is very important but you really should try not to get so overexcited:
    -“encouraged a whole generation of sandal wearing clerics to ignore the written instruction of Rome and spark, instead, a mini revolution”
    -“Never will they abandon the tired revolution for they are children of it”.
    -” For they dare not endure the short term pain that leads to change and long term gain”
    Using such intemperate language makes it much easier to rubbish you. As well as risking sending your blood pressure soaring.
    Although why have you used the American spelling of “worshipped”?

    • People often think I am animated- tis just my style I guess. Point taken…must work on my diplomacy skills!

      For the record I do think a generation of clerics, enamoured with a modernist vision (understandable in the wake of two terrible wars) wilfully ignored the instruction from Rome. Who can deny there was a revolution- why such a blanket sweeping away in the sanctuaries of Britain otherwise? And I also stand by the fact, witnessed also when an Anglican, that there exists a breed of liberal who would rather the church died than gave orthodoxy a try. Not least those who are wedded to the ideals of the sexual revolution, itself at the heart of modernist experimentation.

      I did point out westward facing mass can be done with great dignity. There are also some very holy and decent minimalists. This is about pointing to the places where dissent is being presented as the mature contribution in a debate, which it isn’t.

    • Er…. Let’s not get carried away here. The various ceremonials which have arisen over time were and are designed to emphasise the sacred and lead to an atmosphere of respectful and prayerful worship – but congregations need to understand the siginificance of what is going on. how many folk tosay understand the symbolism of ‘looking East’? Some folk find one way of worship more productive of a dignified spiritual atmosphere others find another way more suitable.

      At the original Last Supper, The Lord would not have had His back to His people. At the Crucifixion He would have been in the midst of a crowd of onlookers.

      • Pat wrote:” …how many folk tosay understand the symbolism of ‘looking East’?” This is not an excuse for not asking the laity face East at Mass. This would be easily solved by informing the people of the liturgical reasons. Further, I do not think that a liturgical action should be premised on the vagaries of the congregation.

        • Quite. The argument that all should be dumbed down to the level of the most ignorant is hardly the way forward for any educational and worthwhile venture

        • Got no problem with that it rather makes my point about explanations. But beware, because too much emphasis on ritual etc. can mask the real nature of what is happening. The same goes for facing or back to the congregation. Both have their points.

      • “At the original Last Supper, The Lord would not have had His back to His people.”

        Actually, the Lord and his disciples would have been sitting (or, rather, reclining) at a curved (or sigma-shaped) table, all sitting on the same side – the other side was kept free for the placing and removal of courses by the servers – and so, as in traditional liturgical practice, all facing in the same direction. Leonardo da Vinci’s conceptualization of the Last Supper in his famous painting is an erroneous Renaissance conceit.

        • Either way it is quite beside the point. We are not gathering to remember the last supper as a meal but to recall the last supper as the institution of the sacrament bound up with the sacrifice on the cross.

  • Well done Father Ed being in the vanguard of liturgical sobriety and obedience to the rubrics as laid down. As a member of the pew for 50 years at a parish that had brought in all this protestantism I accepted as I should, after all the Priest knows best. Having become aware of the traditional rite by accident I feel a rage against the diocese that lead to the true liturgy having been hidden away from me and more importantly my children who have had as a result little contact with the beauty of the Mass and as a result like most of our children been turned off attending because of its banality.

    The Bishops have a lot to answer for!

    God bless even them,

    Patrick.

  • It’s a blog, Mary B, and blogs often bang drums! I loved it – but then I would; attending as I do the small-but-perfectly-formed church of St Birinus, Dorchester on Thames, where noone has tried to move the High Altar, the Sanctuary is utterly gorgeous, and every Mass is ad orientem. And it is what I am used to – this is where I was taught the faith and received into the Church on 30 June 2013, in my 60th year. Of course, I do get to Mass elsewhere but it is a distraction to be seeing the priest’s face all the time.

  • Father, please don’t calm down! That is a huge part of the problem. Few can handle true PASSION any more and when they encounter it they bustle about hushing everyone like an aged auntie.

    Although the traditional traditions tend to be more silent and collected and focused there is so much PASSION there because of the depth and breadth present and presented. Things Modernist are so shallow and safe and careful: don’t offend, don’t ruffle feathers, keep things carefully grounded and only merely hinting at the supernatural intensity of what is really taking place at the Mass and at any other time we Catholics engage in sacred activities that open the windows of Heaven so that the Light of Christ can invade this hurting world. Tsk, tsk! Can’t have that! So calm down and don’t get so worked up!

    Huh. Fat lot of good this finger-wagging Careful Auntie Syndrome has done for our holy Church. If we keep things chained to Earth and focused on “The Community” of Earth-bound mortals then we can expect empty pews and empty seminaries and hearts empty of the Faith.

    If we yearned for Things Earthly then everything would be inverted and the traditional Masses would be empty and the most goofy of guitar Masses would overflow, standing room only. But that is not the case.

    Be PASSIONATE, Father! Because for every finger-wagging husher upper, there are 10 of us pumping our fist in the air saying, “YES, exactly what he said!!”

    Oh, and go ahead and use American spellings. I still can’t figure out what the problem is with American spelling, as if we Americans have the plague or some such thing. It’s like someone comes across a nasty thing stuck to the sole of one’s shoe, “*American* spelling… ewww! Get it away!”

    …after 10 years here in the UK/Europe I can say that it probably has to do a lot with the fact that Americans are still very passionate, and most of us American Catholics even more passionate still. In these post-reformation lands where being Catholic would get you killed by some hideous means, Think Margaret Clitherow…, I can understand why Catholics have been so careful in the past. But that time is LONG GONE now and it is high time to put the heads above the fox holes, brush off the moss, and reclaim the passion for our Faith that is our God given right. Enough of this careful timid way. It is killing our Church here in the West.

    I wonder how do folk react to Cardinal Sara? Do they hush him up too?? He’d make a FINE Pope and would soon infuse the Western Church with some of his passion!

    God bless!

    • Blimey. Listen I don’t have any problem with people being passionate. You should hear me in the topic of ” Folk Masses”. But I don’t think it actually helps an argument to rubbish the opposition rather than the opposing arguments. And my enquiry about why Fr. Ed used an American spelling was borne of curiosity . By and large English people use English shelling because, er, we are English. Also that particular spelling should strictly, in English English, be pronounced to rhyme with sniped. As opposed to snipped.

  • {"email":"Email address invalid","url":"Website address invalid","required":"Required field missing"}
    >