There are some in the Church, mostly academics, who hate the new English translation of the Mass, especially they hate that the Vatican made some decisions about it that they feel others should have. They hate certain aspects of it too. However, we know that no translation will be liked by everyone and you can indeed translate from Latin into a variety of ways, pre-Vatican II laity missals certainly prove that.
Australia has begun to implement the new translation. READ ALL ABOUT IT HERE!
My concern as ever, in terms of comparing EF and OF styles of the Mass is that the EF Mass emphasizes the role of the priest, meaning his cultic role, but it does not emphasize the personality of the priest, his piety, looks or physical features that might point to reverence. Rather following the rubrics while facing ad orientem is where the emphasis is. It could be the pope, a bishop or a newly ordained priest, it doesn't matter.
Whereas with the OF, so often the qualities of the priest either enhance or destroy the worship of the laity who are looking at the face of the priest and his demeanor.
I have no doubt about the sincerity of the priest in this photograph, but if you were at Mass and looking at him, would his demeanor help or distract your prayer?
7 comments:
I read three articles/blog postings on the introduction of the new translation in Australia. This one was indeed "gushing" about the success.
A second review provides a more mixed (but perhaps realistic?) experience, Sydney Parish.
The third (which I won't link to) was an unhelpful mixed bag of criticisms.
I hope more parishes and priests begin the preparation your own parish has embarked upon.
How would you describe his "demeanor"? Is he angry, perplexed, uncharitable, doughty?
If you cannot recognize Jesus in the priest celebrating mass, can you claim to recognize him under the form of bread and wine?
The danger in facing the congregation is that the look of reverence you have can move people. That is a non-issue in the ad orientem position. I can only speak for myself, but if I were in the congregation watching a priest affecting piety, I would be distracted to no end and would end up not looking at his face or simply closing my eyes.
Anon, Of course, Christ's Presence and the efficacy of the Sacrament is not predicated upon our "recognizing" Him. The issue is, does He recognize us. LOL!
In the OF, I always appreciate (or not) the demeanor and personality of the Priest, realizing that it is totally irrelevant to the efficacy of the Sacrament. It is a damned good thing, too, given some of the unusual ideas some Priests have about how to say Mass and what constitutes appropriate liturgics...
I've gone to daily Mass for many years, and I have to admit that I close my eyes through most of the Mass so that I'm not distracted. Ad orientem is top of my list for a welcome change. The few times in my travels I've encountered it, the Mass was so much better for me. I realize it's about worshiping God and not me, but my participation is in a better place. Thanks, Father.
That particular facial expression of piety was off putting as I had so many teachers roll their eyes as they bore the burden of my presence. It ruined a lot of great art for me. It makes me want to put a tongue depressor between the poor fellows teeth and a pillow behind his head.
I like to look where the priest gestures or points. This make the ad orientem seem more logical.
rcg
Here's a solution.
Celebrate Mass Ad Orientem with a big giant mirror above the altar (Ya' know...like a used in cooking demonstrations)so that the congregaton can what the chef, I mean priest, is doing.
It's a perfect solution to address the 'I can't see what he's doing." complaint of Ad Orintem.
The other complaint of "He's turned his back on us." can be remedied by the explanation of 'He's facing the same way as us. Just like one of us.' That will make the laity feel more important and not dismissed.
Problem Solved, tongue in cheek style.
~SqueekerLamb
Post a Comment