Monday, 18 July 2016

Lord to whom shall we turn?
Part Three :
Some thoughts on “presidency” and posture for prayer

Although there is a great deal of discussion now and a body of scholarship concerning the revival of the celebration of the Roman Rite Mass ad orientem, it is found that this discussion is almost entirely limited to the Liturgy of the Eucharist in the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite. Yet, the principle concerns the orientation of Liturgical prayer throughout the entirety of the Mass. Amongst the many innovations introduced after the Council was a provision (Ritus Servandus 1965, no. 23) for the celebrant to pray the Kyrie, Gloria, Collect and Creed at a sedilia, rather than at the altar (as had previously obtained). This provision, of course, is derived from the practice where a bishop celebrates Mass solemnly, either at the faldstool or at the throne. The 1965 provision was taken a step further with the introduction of the new Missal in 1970.

The Prefect of the Congregation for Divine Worship, Cardinal Sarah spoke about this very matter in a 2015 interview reproduced in the L'Osservatore Romano and translated here. He has said :

Contrary to what has at times been sustained, and in conformity with the Conciliar Constitution , it is absolutely fitting that during the Penitential Rite, the singing of the Gloria, the orations and Eucharistic Prayer, for everyone – the priest and the congregation alike – to face ad orientem together, expressing their will to participate in the work of worship and redemption accomplished by Christ. This way of doing things could be fittingly carried out in the cathedrals where the liturgical life must be exemplary (n. 4).

As is well known, the Cardinal has recently raised this matter again, offering a suggestion to priests attending a Liturgical Conference in London. The pitiful reaction to His Eminence's remarks has been written about extensively elsewhere and is a cause for concern on many levels.  Consequently, it is timely to republish here this article (with one or two modifications) which appeared on the blog The New Liturgical Movement in 2009, as follows.

Dom Emmanuel of the Benedictine Abbey of Le Barroux gave a paper to the 1997 CIEL Conference about this topic. In a comprehensive analysis, which discusses firstly the position of the celebrant during the Kyrie, Gloria, Collect and Creed and secondly, the celebrant during the readings from the Scripture, he reached this conclusion:
Do we find that the law in force until 1962 is universally attested in the history of the Roman Mass, or do we find that there are exceptions? Having finished our enquiry we may now answer this question: as far we can judge from the texts currently available, the Roman Mass, both according to the use of the [Roman] Curia and those of the dioceses and religious orders, show us that the simple priest is at the altar for the Gloria, the Collect and the Creed, and that this is the case until 1962. So the Ordo Missae of 1965 departs from the common (and almost universal) practice up to that point when it prescribes that the simple priest may carry out these functions at his seat. For the readings the celebrant goes to his chair near the altar. By having the celebrant positioned at the sedilia for the readings, the Ordo Missae of 1965 (and then that of 1970) do depart from what we know of Roman usage (taken as a whole) through the centuries.
Dom Emmanuel's study and of course many other works on liturgical history, reveal that in the early church (and we know that from archaeological evidence as well the ancient churches which still exist) the Cathedra of the bishop was mostly placed in the apse, behind the altar, with benches for the presbyters on either side. This was a position, as Dom Emmanuel concludes, which emphasised the jurisdiction of the Bishop. He argues, however, that it never was customary in the Western liturgy for the priest-celebrant to occupy such a position, because he did not have jurisdiction.

Instead, as Dom Emmanuel discusses, the priest celebrant recited the Kyrie, Gloria and Collect at or near to the altar ad orientem. Similarly, a bishop who did not have jurisdiction occupied a seat on the right of the altar, but read those prayers from that position ad orientem (for example, the rites of Pontifical Mass at the faldstool according to the Extraordinary Form).

Leaving aside the issue of the priest-celebrant facing the people at the altar during the Liturgy of the Eucharist (for which there is some precedent in liturgical history which was used as the basis for the introduction of "Mass facing the people"), what we would like to identify is that an entirely new concept has been introduced into the 1970 Mass, namely, the priest-celebrant as Presider. 

This seems nowhere more prominent in the New Order of Mass than in the Introductory Rite: the structure of which is an innovation in the history of the Western liturgy. Furthermore, this role of Presider is codified by the instruction on where the chair of the celebrant is to be placed within the sanctuary: namely at the head of the sanctuary in an apse; in short behind the altar (GIRM 271):
The chair of the celebrant should indicate his role of presiding over the assembly and of leading the prayers. Hence the most suitable position is at the head of the sanctuary facing the people, unless the construction of the building or other circumstances prevents this; for instance, if communication between the priest and the assembly of the faithful is made difficult because of too great a distance.
Both the position of the chair of the priest-celebrant (which emphasises "presidence") and the offering of prayers (facing the congregation) from that chair, instead of before the altar, represent a break with Liturgical Tradition. We would like to suggest that this particular break with Tradition has largely facilitated the widespread distortion where right from the beginning of the Liturgy the priest becomes more of a compere or emcee, rather than a celebrant.  

Ongoing discussions that the celebration of the Ordinary Form of Mass may be divided into being partly ad orientem (the Liturgy of the Eucharist) and partly versus populum (the Liturgy of the Word) are not an adequate solution or compromise.

Part Four follows, continuing these observations.