Let's Face It! The Liturgy Wars Syro-Malabar Style

Ad Orientem Worship

https://www.pillarcatholic.com/p/man-vandalizes-altar-at-church-engulfed

[ READ TIME - 6 minutes]

An article at The Pillar captures the - at times - heated debate in our sister church, the Syro-Malabar Catholic Church.

After years of debate over variations in the way that the Syro-Malabar Eucharistic liturgy was celebrated, the majority of bishops endorsed a formula known as the “uniform mode,” in which the priest faces the people during the Liturgy of the Word, turns toward the altar for the Liturgy of the Eucharist, and then faces the people again after Communion.

But in the Ernakulam-Angamaly archeparchy, the vast majority of priests and lay people rejected the uniform mode, demanding that their preference for the Holy Qurbana facing the people be recognized as a legitimate liturgical variant.

They noted that the variant has been used in the archdiocese for more than 50 years and argued that it embodied Vatican II’s liturgical priorities more faithfully than the uniform mode.

Their resistance, involving street protests and mass rallies, thwarted attempts to introduce the change, despite a direct appeal by Pope Francis to adopt the uniform mode.

The uniform mode is a fair-minded proposition for the Novus Ordo Mass, too, that would help retain the focus on God in the Liturgy of the Eucharist.

Those identified in the article who oppose the "50-50" mode - and oppose it by insisting that versus populum worship is truer to the Second Council's vision of the Liturgy - are misinformed. The Council never stated that Mass facing the people was an absolute requirement. Of course, in the wake of the Council, the practice of versus populum liturgies sprung up using the same misinformed logic to which many still cling. That it was suggested that altars be built away from walls so that Mass could be - not must be - celebrated facing the people, and so that, for example, the incensation of the altar could proceed around the altar 360 degrees, are nuances that escape those who aggressively promote an agenda (that reorients the Mass) that is not based in all the facts.

The many negative consequences associated with versus populum worship, not the least of which is that versus populum worship most often results in a highly anthropocentric and clericalist liturgy, are ignored by certain factions.

Apparently, to the minds of those folk opposing the uniform mode, and who are attached to versus populum worship, 50 years of versus populum liturgies trumps the nearly 2000 year practice of ad orientem worship commonly practiced by Catholics and non-Catholic orthodox Christians.

The Syro-Malabar Church has ancient origins, thanks be to God and the Apostle Thomas. As with all churches prior to the Council and as the worship of most eastern churches remains to this day, the Holy Qurbana (Mass) of the Syro-Malabar Church was routinely celebrated ad orientem.

The Syro-Malabar Church descends from the Saint Thomas Christians who first aligned with the Catholic Church at the Synod of Diamper in 1599, and those who reunited with the Holy See under the leadership of Mar Palliveettil Chandy during the period between 1655 and 1663. - Menon, A. Sreedhara (1965). Portugese and the Malabar Church. Kerala District Gazetteers: Ernakulam. Trivandrum: The Superintendent of Government Presses, Government Press: 128, 131–144. (WP)

In the Latin Rite missal, that is, the Missal of Pope Saint Paul VI, the practice of ad orientem worship is still assumed. The priest is directed to turn towards the people at points during the sacred Liturgy. Why would the priest be directed to turn toward the people if he were not already facing them?

For a fuller treatment of the "orientation" issue, consult the Fœderatio Internationalis Una Voce article at https://unavoce.ru/pdf/FIUV_PP/FIUV_PP4_OrientationFinal.pdf

The Una Voce article reads in part:

9. Worship towards the East is worship towards the Lord, for according to ancient tradition the Lord departed towards the East, and will return again from the East. The rising sun is for this reason a profound symbol. Orientation, therefore, brings into the liturgy an important eschatalogical element—the expectation of the return of the Lord— and also expresses the direction of the journey the people are themselves undertaking, towards the Lord. As Christoph, Cardinal Schönborn has expressed it, celebration ad orientem manifests the attitude of worshipping ‘obviam Sponso’, ‘facing the Bridegroom’, and thus ‘a meeting with the Bridegroom, and an anticipation of Christ’s final coming’.

Consider a footnote from the same article:

1 Missale Romanum (2002), Institutio Generalis no 299: ‘Altare exstruatur a pariete seiunctum, ut facile circumiri et in eo celebration versus populum peragi possit, quod expedit ubicumque possibile sit.’ (‘Let the main altar be constructed separate from the wall so that one can easily walk around the altar and celebrate facing the people—which is desirable wherever possible.’ ‘Quod’ (‘which is’) naturally refers to the first clause of the sentence, not the second, which is subordinate to it. See C.M. Cullen and J.W. Koterski ‘The New IGMR and Mass versus populum’, Homiletic and Pastoral Review June 2001 pp51-54. Cf. Instruction Inter Oecumenici (1964) ‘It is better for the main altar to be constructed away from the wall so that one can easily walk around the altar and celebrate facing the people.’ (Praestat ut altare maius exstuatur a pariete seiunctum, ut facile circumiri et in eo celebration versus populum peragi possit.) AAS 56 (1967): 375. By contrast, see the Decree of the Sacred Congregation of Rites Sanctissimam Eucharistiam (1957) 4: ‘In churches, where there is only one altar, this cannot be built in such a way that the priest should celebrate facing the people’ (‘In ecclesiis, ubi unicum extat altare, hoc nequit ita aedificari, ut sacerdos celebret populum versus’). The decree is concerned with the position of the tabernacle in relation to the altar.

Joseph Shaw captures the versus populum conundrum in his 2022 article at Catholic Answers:

https://www.catholic.com/magazine/online-edition/the-apocalypse-facing-the-people

Cdl. Ratzinger was particularly critical of a tendency he detected in celebrations “toward the people.” On the one hand, the people in practice can end up looking not at what the priest is praying toward, but at the priest himself, introducing what Ratzinger called “an unprecedented clericalization.” On the other hand, the priest can end up focusing his attention on the people. The new result is what Ratzinger called a “closed circle”: a group of people addressing each other, when they should be opened out toward God. (Quotations are from Ratzinger, Spirit of the Liturgy, 2000.) This is particularly emphasized when the seating in church is arranged in a circle around the altar.

One wonders what Latin-rite parishioners in North America would think about the introduction of the 50-50 mode for the Ordinary Form of the Mass? That is, the priest faces the people during the Liturgy of the Word, then faces "East" toward the Lord, symbolized by the altar crucifix, for the Liturgy of the Eucharist, including the occasional turns toward the people indicated in the Pauline Missal. For example, the priest turns toward the people at the Pray brethren (that my sacrifice and yours... .), and at The Peace.

In Divine Worship, the Mass of the Personal Ordinariates, the normative direction in which Mass is prayed is toward the liturgical East, i.e., ad orientem.

Let's close with a brief quote from an article by Malcolm Schuluenderfritz that is a good example of preserving charity during conflict.

The two different liturgical orientations are not incompatible; they could exist side by side, each showing some different facet of our rich theology and spirituality. As the Catechism of the Catholic Church says: “The mystery of Christ is so unfathomably rich that it cannot be exhausted by its expression in any single liturgical tradition.” (CCC 1201) It goes on to say, however: “Liturgical diversity can be a source of enrichment, but it can also provoke tensions, mutual misunderstandings, and even schisms.” (CCC 1206)