A Defense of the Most Holy Eucharist

In the modern world, Christians bicker about many things amongst themselves and others outside of the fold, but no other teaching of Jesus Christ sparks as much controversy as the “Bread of Life Discourse.” In multiple accounts of the Gospels and oral tradition, Jesus claims, “I am the living bread which came down from heaven; if any one eats of this bread, he will live for ever; and the bread which I shall give for the life of the world is my flesh” (John 6:51 RSV). This claim echoes in many of the disputes of denominations of Christianity. The question is tantamount to one's understanding of Christ. Thus, the defense of the Eucharist creates a necessary dialogue between the denominations in order to more deeply understand Who Christ is and what it is He intends for us.

To be fair to those who do not believe in a God, Christians defend God proclaiming a piece of bread to be His Presence amongst us as a rational claim. The claim's rationality hangs on the idea of whether or not Jesus Christ was truly God and Man, Who hung upon a cross, died for the salvation of all mankind and rose from the dead as a sign of hope for all. If Christ did not raise from the dead, the argument fails. It is important to note that the “Catholic doctrine says that Christ's sacrifice, besides being an atonement, was also a redemption – in other words, a buying back into spiritual liberty of the human race which had become the slave of evil”¹ Without the belief in a Supreme Being, this argument loses its support. Belief is not a thing that can be possessed, but rather is a gift given. An assent to faith is not man-made: it can not be. Man can not give himself something he does not possess. Therefore, the argument points directly back to the idea that Christ was either God or a liar.

Therefore, holding a belief in not only a God, but the Christian God, the Eucharist begins to take on importance due to the fact that Christ Himself stated that it is entirely dependent upon man's development of a relationship between Him and God (cf. John 6:56-58). Therefore, the Eucharist comes to the forefront of the Christian question. In order to prove that transubstantiation is possible, laying out an argument that any change at all for man becomes important. In his Summa Theologiae, St. Thomas Aquinas questions, “Whether the Body of Christ be in This Sacrament in Very Truth, or Merely As in a Figure or Sign?”² (III Q. 74, Art. 1). This serious question leads us to his reply which states, “Christ's true body and blood in this sacrament cannot be detected by sense, nor understanding, but by faith alone, which rests upon Divine authority. Hence, on Luke 22:19: 'This is My body which shall be delivered up for you,' Cyril says: 'Doubt not whether this be true; but take rather the Saviour's words with faith; for since He is the Truth, He lieth not.”³ The Scriptures do not speak of this moment solely in one Gospel, but rather it is found in multiple parts of the Gospel message. Thus, St. Cyril's claim holds very firm that if Christ is not held true to his statement, then the doubters declare Christ a liar. A god who lies is not God at all, because he would not be true (a transcendental).

Continuing with the argument, Aquinas points out that the Lord would not leave us as He stated (cf. Mk 16:8): “Yet meanwhile in our pilgrimage He does not deprive us of His bodily presence; but unites us with Himself in this sacrament through the truth of His body and blood. Hence (John 6:57) he says: 'He that eateth My flesh, and drinketh My blood, abideth in Me, and I in him.' Hence this sacrament is the sign of supreme charity, and the uplifter of our hope, from such familiar union of Christ with us.”⁴ Again, holding that the Lord is not a liar, a believer accepts the idea that Christ stated He would never leave us, and promises His presence amongst us. The Lord does this by means of His Sacraments. Particularly within the context of the Sacraments of Initiation, by which one becomes a full member of the Body of Christ, the Church.

Thus, man, as a soul-body composite must respond in two ways that are appropriate to him. Abbot Vonier points out St. Thomas Aquinas believes that “'the linking up which is by faith takes place through an act of the soul, while the linking up which is by the sacraments takes place through the use of external things.'”⁵ Vonier indicates that going through life without faith is entirely missing why Christ came in the first place. Vonier writes, “Without this contact of faith we are dead to Christ, the stream of His life passes us by without entering into us, as a rock in the midst of a river remains unaffected by the turbulent rush of waters.”⁶ Thus, man must respond with an assent to faith initially. Secondarily man responds to faith by deepening it by assenting to the Word of God, which reveals that “I am the Bread of Life, He Who eats of my Flesh and drinks of my Blood remains in me and I in him” (Jn 6:35). The Lord reestablishes the once lost relationship with man by coming to be with him in the Eucharist.

Pope Benedict XVI, in his Post-Synodal Apostolic Exhortation Sacramentum Caritatis, states:

Through the sacrament of the Eucharist Jesus draws the faithful into his 'hour'; he shows us the bond that he willed to establish between himself and us, between his own person and the Church. Indeed, in the sacrifice of the Cross, Christ gave birth to the Church as his Bride and his body. The Fathers of the Church often meditated on the relationship between Eve's coming forth from the side of Adam as he slept (cf. Gen 2:21-23) and the coming forth of the new Eve, the Church, from the open side of Christ sleeping in death: from Christ's pierced side, John recounts, there came forth blood and water (cf. Jn 19:34), the symbol of the sacraments.⁷

Echoing the ideas previously conveyed, Pope Benedict indicates that man's origins are fulfilled by Christ on the Cross. God mirror-images His act of creation by creating again a Church, which He gives life at that moment. With all humans suffering from the pains of the original sin, Christ dies on the Cross once, but it must be transmitted to all. The Sacraments provide the means to transmit God's saving Grace to the faithful. Thus, Benedict asserts, “Since the Eucharist makes present Christ's redeeming sacrifice, we must start by acknowledging that 'there is a causal influence of the Eucharist at the Church's very origins'”⁸. The Eucharist exists as Christ who gives himself to us and continually builds us up as his as his body. This is all found within the context of the relationship between the believer and God through the sacraments He provides.

God chooses and implements sacraments, because He knows us better than we even know ourselves. God comprehends that we are physical beings that perceive reality. Despite that all of creation points to an “other” that created or caused it. Man constantly seeks that individual without a chance to perceive it, until the incarnation: God became man, and therefore becomes tangible. Thus, St. Thomas Aquinas contends, “this belongs to Christ's love, out of which for our salvation He assumed a true body of our nature. And because it is the special feature of friendship to live together with friends, as the Philosopher says (Ethic. ix), He promises us His bodily presence as a reward, saying (Mt. 24:28) “Where the body is, there shall the eagles be gathered together”⁹. As the true friend, Christ has never left. He gives us the spirit to reside in our hearts, but He physically remains as well.

Other Christians support their counter claim by using Christ's words stating, “For you always have the poor with you, but you will not always have me” (Mt. 26:11). Within this context, it is clear that the Lord is speaking of His Passion to come. The relationship between Christ and the people entirely changes. This passage shows the necessity of conversion for Israel. As Christ defends St. Mary Magdalene he concludes the passage by teaching, “Truly, I say to you, wherever this gospel is preached in the whole world, what she has done will be told in memory of her” (Mt. 26:16). Our Lord shows that He provides forgiveness not only for the single prostitute, Mary Magdalene, but also the harlot Israel who lives in a state of betrayal of the covenant. The Lord comes to settle the score, and provides Himself as the door to union with God. His flesh and blood serve to be the food of the faithful according to His Words.

Most importantly, other Christians seem to ride off the cultural context of this table-fellowship of the Lord. Many Protestants present the Lord in a way that makes it seem that all Christ desired was to sit down together at a table, eat, and enjoy the company. The Lord's mission includes this aspect, but it is not the end of the whole action. Dr. Scott Hahn states, “for in the culture that extended from Jeremiah to Jesus a covenant accomplished more than any testament could. In fact, a covenant was that culture. It was the bond that constituted Israel's law, liturgy and life”¹⁰. The profundity that God establishes a covenant with Israel that creates a culture of covenant shows that with the Christ's Mission He too shares in this covenant, but now has come to reveal it more deeply. Thus, the First Letter to the Corinthians indicates that the Church was not simply a Church of Word, but of Word and Sacrament. Paul expresses that Jesus “also [took] the cup, after supper, saying, 'This cup is the new covenant in my blood. Do this, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of me'” (1 Cor. 11:25).

Covenant, a word rooted with meaning, represents a whole divine pedagogy. The Lord states His terms extremely intentionally. As good and faithful Jews, the apostles would have understood that when Christ was establishing a new covenant there would be a role, a form and a sign. The apostles would have understood full well that the Lord was presenting Himself in the same way that God presented His Messages to the Fathers of Israel. Christ exists as the High Priest, the God-Man Who is both of the Davidic Line and also as God Himself. The form of God's covenant between His People presents itself by the Church, the Body of Christ. Thirdly, pointing to the importance of this defense, the Lord makes His sign the Eucharist: God's Presence amongst and with us always.

Thus, the Lord presents Himself, within the context of His culture-religion, established by His Father. Christ does not simply make this a moment of history, but rather extends it to all of salvation history. The Lord does not limit Himself, while maintaining the free will of His beloved. Therefore, Pope Benedict points out that “God's presence in the word and his presence in the Eucharist belong together, inseparably. The eucharistic Lord is himself the living Word. Only if we are living in the sphere of God's Word can we properly comprehend and properly receive the gift of the Eucharist”¹¹. According to the world-view of Christianity, the life of a Christian does not compartmentalize actions and participation in Church. Rather, the Christian sanctifies and brings God's Presence into the world by his/her life and can not separate themselves any longer: they are forever changed.

Although Roman Catholicism has remained true to these teachings, many Protestants, like the early Christians in the Gospel, turn away from Our Lord due to this teaching. For example, Martin Luther states, “It is real bread and real wine in which the true flesh and true blood of Christ are found, not less than as those people think who describe them as their accidents”¹². Going on, Luther declares that the transubstantiation is “without foundation in Scripture and reason”¹³. Luther was adamant on believing that the bread was both Christ's body and bread simultaneously. Despite his attempts to be true to reason and faith, the argument stands on neither the feet of reason or faith. It cannot be found within the context of Scripture without interpretation leading in that direction. Additionally, as for its validity in faith, then it seems that Luther doubts our Lord's statement of the term “is”. When “Esse” Himself utters that it is, it simply exists as such, and that is that. Genesis indicates that God made creation from nothing and assigns it meaning. Therefore, when Christ, as the God-Man declares the bread to be His Body it is. Secondarily, if Luther is claiming that something is two things simultaneously, then one can not comprehend anything verily. Just because something does not look or taste like something, external qualities, does not mean that substantially it is not something else. As Aquinas points out well in his great prayer the Tantum Ergo, senses fail the faithful frequently. Thus, Luther, fundamentally, questions God's truth, and ironically possesses a “faith” not even rooted in Scripture itself, but rather his personal interpretation of Scripture.

Thus, as Scott Hahn professes, “The Word was made flesh, and dwelt among us, and gave his flesh to be our life, Wisdom's Banquet. [Christians] live the dream of the prophets and seers, [Christians] live the promise of the divine covenant, [Christians] are given the bread of angels, whenever [the Church consumes] the Word”¹⁴. Christ has provided Himself in this form as a presence that can not be forgotten or taken advantage of. Thus, God manifests His meaning for us to be one with Him, which He accomplishes by His Sacraments. Truly, the Lord presents His intention for us to be in relation with Him so closely that we become part of His Body as His Spouse. The presence of the Blessed Sacrament is the Heart of the Church, for it is His Heart. It beats at the center of every Catholic Church and gives us life as His Body. Just as the body is contingent upon the heart for life, so too the Christian is contingent upon the Eucharist for life in the Church.

Bibliography

Aquinas, St. Thomas. Summa Theologiae. Fathers of the English Dominican Province.

Hahn, Scott. CONSUMING THE WORD. New York: Crown Publishing Group, 2013.

Lienhard, Marc. LUTHER: WITNESS TO JESUS CHRIST. Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1982.

Ratzinger, Joseph Cardinal. God is Near Us. San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2003.

SACRAMENTUM CARITATIS. Washington, D.C.: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2007.

Vonier, Abbot. A KEY TO THE DOCTRINE OF THE EUCHARIST. Bethesda: Zaccheus Press, 1925.

1 Abbot Vonier, A KEY TO THE DOCTRINE OF THE EUCHARIST, (Bethesda: Zaccheus Press, 1925).

2 St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, (Fathers of the English Dominican Province).

3 Ibid.

4Ibid.

5 Abbot Vonier, A KEY TO THE DOCTRINE OF THE EUCHARIST, (Bethesda: Zaccheus Press, 1925).

6Ibid.

7 SACRAMENTUM CARITATIS, (Washington, D.C.: Libreria Editrice Vaticana, 2007).

8Ibid.

9 St. Thomas Aquinas, Summa Theologiae, (Fathers of the English Dominican Province).

10 Scott Hahn, CONSUMING THE WORD, (New York: Crown Publishing Group, 2013).

11 Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger, God is Near Us, (San Francisco: Ignatius Press, 2003).

12 Marc Lienhard, LUTHER: WITNESS TO JESUS CHRIST, (Minneapolis: Augsburg Publishing House, 1982), 127.

13 Ibid., 127.

14 Scott Hahn, CONSUMING THE WORD, (New York: Crown Publishing Group, 2013).

The Didache

Tucked away in a quaint monastery in 1056, The Didache, also known as The Teaching of the Lord to the Gentiles, through the Twelve Apostles, was found. Divided into two distinct pieces, The Didache served the Church from Her origins as a guide for Christian perfection individually and through the Church as an organism. Although the author is unknown, the document is referenced by Church Fathers such as Athanasius, Clement of Alexandria, Eusebius, and Serapion. Just as the author is unknown, the date is subject to skepticism and uncertainty. The latest the piece can be dated is 150 AD, but many, due to it's voice and state of ecclesiastical structure, claim that it could have been written as early as the middle of the first century. However, the common position held is that the book is a “composite affair, in which materials of an early date have been used by the compiler and touched up with additions and alterations of his own”. The first part (chapters 1 to 6), known as 'the Two Ways', serves as a type of ancient catechism, which is “usable for the introduction of candidates for baptism”. The second part (chapters 7 to 16), according to Maxwell Staniforth, “reflect[s] the life of a primitive Christian community somewhere in Syria (or possibly Egypt) towards the close of the first century, at an epoch when traveling missioners were still the chief officers of the Church and bishops had not yet become distinguished from presbyters.”

The first chapter opens with a line both clear and powerful: “There are two ways, one of life and one of death, but a great difference between the two ways.” The author defines the way of life as the call to “love God who made you; second, love your neighbor as yourself, and do not do to another what you would not want done to you.” This social call entails “[giving] to every one who asks you, and [asking] it not back; for the Father wills that to all should be given our own blessings (free gifts).” It goes to further describe the joys and pains incurred for accepting gifts out of necessity as right and just, while receiving gifts without need to be a grave offense. Thus, the author pushes for justice between man and God and man and fellow man.

Following the first chapter, the second serves as a litany of what not to do. Mirror-imaging the last seven commandments of the Decalogue, the author shares that grievous sin against one's neighbor can not be permitted, of which adultery, pederasty, magic, abortion, double-mindedness, and many others are included. Continuing into chapter three, sin is explained in its nature as a growing inclination in the human person and, if entertained and practiced, will grow to be destructive. The author beckons the Christian to seek suffering rather than worldly-pleasure: “Accept whatever happens to you as good, knowing that apart from God nothing comes to pass.”

Expounding on the previous comments, the author urges Christians to “seek out day by day the faces of the saints, in order that you may rest upon their words.” This cry calls the Christian to respect the missioners who bring the Gospel message to them. Sequentially, the author advises Christians to “not turn away from him who is in want; rather, share all things with your brother, and do not say that they are your own.” Additionally, the author points to the primacy of child-rearing with a Christian mindset stating, “[d]o not remove your hand from your son or daughter; rather, teach them the fear of God from their youth.” Upon closing the fourth chapter, the first mention of a church is made: “In the church you shall acknowledge your transgressions, and you shall not come near for your prayer with an evil conscience. This is the way of life.” Defining the way of life, the author, by pointing to acknowledgment of transgressions, indicates that the members are in a state of practice, not perfection. Additionally, acknowledging that one may have an evil conscience moves the Christian to begin to consider what one's conscience ought to reflect.

In chapter five, the description of “the way of death” is provided as a litany of sins that had been listed previously. After warning Christians twice in regard to sin and upright consciences, the author writes warning Christians of false teachers and about the food offered to the gods. The author warns about the food offered to the gods, because “it is the service of dead gods.” Utilizing familiar language, the author indicates that the gods are in direct opposition to the God of Christianity: a God of life.

The second part of The Didache opens with the author discussing the form and matter of baptism still recognized in the Church today and discusses separate disciplines involved at that time such as fasting for the baptizer prior to baptism and for the baptized to fast between one to two days before the sacrament is conferred. Continuing with the prayer and worship theme, the author guides the Christian towards fasting on “the fourth day and Preparation (Friday)”. Then, he urges the faithful to pray the Our Father as seen in scripture with the addition of “for Thine is the power and glory for ever.. Pray this three times each day.” Thus, the introduction of prayer constantly in the Church has been introduced while simultaneously the hours of the day for prayer. Furthering the discussion of prayer and worship, the author describes the Eucharist by discussing the cup of the covenant first. Secondly, he speaks of the “broken bread.” The only admonition given in regard to the Eucharist is to only permit the baptized to receive the Eucharist. The author gives the Prayer after communion, which asks the Lord to protect the faithful and the Church which they make up. Then, he teaches of the Lord's day (Sunday) and commands that all faithful meet and be at peace with one another in order that “your sacrifice may not be profaned.” All of these components point towards aspects that are present even in today's Church. Thus, the Liturgy and the Sacraments stand true to their origins.

In regard to hospitality, the author points out that hospitality must be given to “everyone who comes in the name of the Lord.” The standard that one may stay is no more than three days, and if he has a trade it is expected he perform it. If the person is without a trade, then, as a Christian, you are to make sure that the guest is not idle during his stay. Following, the author points towards those who bring the Gospel to the world: the teachers, prophets, and apostles. Those who teach have a responsibility to be faithful to the Truth both in word and deed. The Didache serves the faithful of the Church to be warned, while providing criterion that a faithful Christian might judge for him or herself whether it is good and right for them to listen to the prophet, teacher or apostle. It shows that signs of lack of fidelity to the truth include desiring and asking for money while in the spirit, residing in places more than two days, and one who preaches something while not practicing that which he preaches. Adversely, the author points out that it is good to have prophets and teachers among you. Therefore, assuming they are good, a Christian is to give the first press of the wine and the wool of the sheep and oxen to the prophets and teachers “for they are your high priests.” The men who follow in the footsteps of the Lord are to be provided and cared for, but if they act differently than the Gospel that they preach, “let no one speak, nor let him hear anything from you until he repents.”

Summing up all the warnings against false teachers, prophets, and bad clergy, the author, in his final chapter points towards awaiting the coming of the Lord. The signs of the time when the Lord will come will be when “love shall be turned into hate.” With love as the central doctrine of Christianity, it would be pointing to a time when Christians no longer live, follow, or teach the true faith.

Thus, with a way of life to live, and a church structure, the Church, in her infancy was found to be with life that is mirrored and shared today. Although there are many new aspects, we can see the roots of our faith found in this early Church document. This document points towards the integrity and individual unity with upright living each Christian ought to have, while simultaneously providing an understanding of the early church and her structure in mission to spread the Gospel to the world.

Genesis Exegesis

Before time, God was. A God that does not serve time, but rather created it. A God Who not only sums up perfections but exists as the summation of perfections. This Perfect God decided to create ex nihilo a creation that He presents as center stage of a drama in which a narrative about God and man begins:

“The Lord God took the man and put him in the garden of Eden to till it and keep it. And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, “You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die.”

Then the Lord God said, “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him.” So out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name. The man gave names to all cattle, and to the birds of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for the man there was not found a helper fit for him. So the Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh; and the rib which the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man. Then the man said, “This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.”

Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and clings to his wife, and they become one flesh. And the man and his wife were both naked, and were not ashamed”(Gn 2: 15-25 RSV).

The first act of creation “sets the stage for the drama that follows, introducing the story's central characters: God, man and woman.”¹ All that has been created is good, and our story is about to reveal the model of goodness and the creation that God chose to reveal Himself by. This particular creation account is the description of the gift of land from God to man, the relationship between man and creation, the relationship between man and woman, and the relationship between God and man prior to the fall. Thus, the creation account allows for us to understand the divinely revealed idea of why man was made, our earthly duties, and our duty to our Creator.

God made man and placed him in the garden of Eden. The passage places tantamount importance on the idea that man was taken and physically placed in the garden. It implies that prior to this moment Adam was somewhere else. Looking at the prior verses, the passage describes a picture of four rivers that set up the borders for the garden of Eden. Adam lived between the Pi'shon, Gi'hon, Tigris, and the Euphrates. Thus, the stage has been set in modern-day Iraq. The verbs “took” and “put” imply that despite the fact that man is a rational and free entity, in his beginnings he was placed and taken to a place. When God takes and places Adam into a location it does not only express something Adam experienced, but something all men undergo in their own particular creations. God creates man by parents not chosen by him, but by God. Thus, the first line expresses the first step into the human experience, which is vulnerability to a prior creator. Thus far in the Creation account, God is the sole creator.

Immediately, the author states man's purpose in the garden: “to till it and keep it.” Thus far, God made man and placed him in a garden. God placed man in this garden to “till it and keep it.” God places Adam in Eden. The name Eden is very important because behind it, as with most names in Old Testament literature, is a very blunt meaning to its manner or essence, in this case a “fertile plain.” If the land is fertile, then the land must constantly be looked after. This richness implies a fullness of life: an allegory for both life with and in union with God. Although the Hebrew states a name that is a “fertile plain,” the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops utilizes an interpretation that also makes sure to keep open the consideration of a word that sounds similar to Eden in Hebrew that “means “delight,” which may lie behind the Greek translation, “The Lord God planted a paradise [= pleasure park] in Eden.””² Despite the fact that some assert that creation was made for man. The USCCB's commentary suggests that God did not make the garden for man, but rather for Himself. Therefore, the call to “till and keep it” leads man towards the end of honoring God by serving Him to delight Him.

With the understanding that we are tillers of God's Garden, it only comes natural to understand that the Lord can command man to do His Will. Thus, it is appropriate and good when God commands by stating, “You may freely eat of every tree of the garden; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil you shall not eat, for in the day that you eat of it you shall die” (Gn 2:16-17). Within the context of understanding the current scenario, the Lord explains, as a father explains to a child, what is permissible and impermissible to do in this creation. In this explanation, the Lord explains that the food is free. The explanation draws us back to the point that the garden is not man's but God's. The Lord grants permission for man to be both a steward and to share in the creation. Simply put, God fully possesses while He fully shares.

As God continues to concern for the parameters of man, the Lord continues with speaking by stating “It is not good that the man should be alone; I will make him a helper fit for him” (Gn 2:18). This line presents itself interestingly. Initially, the piece provides strong consideration to whom God is speaking. This moment isn't God simply speaking to man, rather it seems that the Lord within Himself is speaking to Himself: a reflection of His Trinitarian Existence.

After looking within Himself and speaking to Himself, “out of the ground the Lord God formed every beast of the field and every bird of the air, and brought them to the man to see what he would call them; and whatever the man called every living creature, that was its name.” (Gn 2:19). This shows that the Lord is not simply sharing, He wishes for us to have authority over creation. Adam is not simply a slave to his call, but rather Adam acts within his authority, and thus out of his own generosity. When God permits Adam to name the animals, it shows that man is over animal within the same spirit of understanding that the garden is God's first, and is presented to man as a gift to be cared for.

Continuing with the story, “The man gave names to all cattle, and to the birds of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for the man there was not a helper fit for him” (Gn 2:20). The motif of naming expresses, from the Old Testament lens, a metaphysical superiority and an authoritarian role for man amongst the other creatures. Man possesses both a gift and a duty within and towards creation, which is not truly his to possess of his own accord. According to the USCCB's commentary the literal translation for this line states “a helper in accord with him.”³ As the authority over all of the creatures within God's Paradise, man was given the authority to name the animals. Naming is significant because it signifies that there is a type of relationship between the person and the other being named. This phenomenon goes to reiterate that man and animal participate in a unity centered in being, but a hierarchy exists. Although very subtle, this particular passage is important to understand why animal worship is so far from the human person's call as seen in all of Israel's history. Simultaneously, God identifies Himself with this term “helper” in Deuteronomy 33:7 and Psalms 46:2. This “helper” is someone who will be made for Adam, but is compared to a self-identification of God. This quiet response describes the upcoming character in this story. This new being that Adam seeks represents how “God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them” (Gn 1:27). This very strong allusion leaves us in proper suspense: something amazing is about to take place!

Sequentially, the “Lord God caused a deep sleep to fall upon the man, and while he slept took one of his ribs and closed up its place with flesh; and the rib which the Lord God had taken from the man he made into a woman and brought her to the man” (Gn 2:22). Once more, the Lord uses very strong action verbs to describe his motions in creating man. “Caused” implies that all exists within His Own Person. All these actions find their beginning and source in Him: existing by Him, through Him, and with Him. The Lord caused a deep sleep to fall upon man. Sleeping is a constant motif throughout scripture. It can be both good and bad as we see with Noah in the field, which later leads to the sin of Ham. In this particular case, the sleep was a good type of sleep: it resulted in new life and another person, Eve. It shows the type of response that man ought to have to God's Will. Adam, in his ordered nature, is subject to the Lord and does not resist, but cooperates. Similar to resting in music, it might not seem that Adam is doing anything at all, but it is just as important for man to rest as it is for him to tend to the field, just as it is for some instruments to rest during particular points of different pieces.

Continuing, the Lord presents an important motif that He utilizes quite frequently: a gift of self. The Lord, in order to provide a good for man (a new person), requires that man give of Himself. Once more, the Lord reveals Himself through His Creation: the Lord shows how He gifts Himself and makes Himself a gift to Himself analogously to the man providing a woman for new life. Additionally, this is a covenant establishment: a type of quid pro quo. The Lord takes Adam's gift and makes a good for Him.

At this point, God responds to Adam's generosity with a gift. Adam's generosity lies in his obedience, commitment, and fulfillment of his role: to till and keep the Garden. Adam steps outside of himself for the service of others prior to the Lord providing woman. Within the spiritual sense of the anagogical lens, the Lord shows that man is not meant to be alone: he is to have a helper. This helper does not bow down and simply subject themselves to man, but rather helps as God aids man. God creates and shows how He co-creates with our gift of self: Adam gave a piece of himself for another to exist. This mentality forms the mindset for true covenant relationship between one another and God.

Finally, Adam cries, “This at last is bone of my bones and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man” (Gn 2:23). The text is leaping off the page with joy. The man who once was alone without a fulfillment has found his companion: an accompanying sojourner. The Lord, in His Goodness, provided for man an assistant with his mission: to till and care for the Garden.

The final piece provides an understanding of the purpose of the second creation account, which can be found in the final two verses of the chapter:

Therefore a man leaves his father and his mother and clings to his wife, and they

become one flesh. And the man and his wife were both naked and were not ashamed.

The finale has summed up that man's purpose lies entirely for God in matrimony: a divine union of persons three in one, and one in three. Blessed John Paul II declares that the final experience between man and woman in Genesis 2: 25 as:

The innocence of reciprocal experience of the body. The sentence, 'Both were naked, the man and his wife, but they did not feel shame,' expresses precisely such innocence in the reciprocal 'experience of the body,' an innocence that inspires the inner exchange of the gift of the person, which concretely realizes the spousal meaning of masculinity and femininity in their reciprocal relation. Thus, in order to understand the innocence of the mutual experience of the body, we must try to clarify what constitutes the inner innocence of a person. This exchange constitutes, in fact, the true source of the experience of innocence.⁴

To further the claim, the acknowledgment of man's nakedness while not being ashamed points towards the theological points of the preternatural gifts: immortality, integrity, and infused knowledge. This shows how “Man occupies a unique place in creation: (I) he is 'in the image of God'; (II) in his own nature he unites the spiritual and material worlds; (III) he is created 'male and female'; (IV) God established him in his friendship.”⁵

Modernity has provided a severely skeptical lens for the modern reader of scripture. For example, Joshua Moritz argues that men and women who believe in a creation story hold an “anthropocentrism of the gaps.” This lens allows for the religious person to avoid the possibility of evolution and other human-like creatures that once roamed the earth. As Mortiz states:

As the tide of empirical findings washes up new discoveries every day that call into question the singular status of human culture and behavior, the scientific gaps currently filled with a faith in anthropocentrism must give way to an acknowledgment of the reality of evolutionary continuity. In our discovery of the fact that at one time we, as human beings, were not alone in the universe, we ironically come closer to a more ancient understanding of the human place in the cosmos. Though Neanderthals may now take the taxonomical place of “the mighty men who were of old,” the “unique” human species may once again be regarded as one among many. The fact of finding ourselves once again among the company of other creatures raises a number of challenging theological questions surrounding the meaning of the imago Dei. Such questions need not, however, be cause for fear. For new questions—in time—provide occasions for new answers and bring us closer to the truth.⁶

Without going into much detail, Moritz equates burials and other similar rituals to existing as the same as rationality. Despite his belief that finding these coincidences amongst our two separate species, habits do not imply rationality, nor does it prove that the other “hominids” are thinking. This can not and should not debunk a creation account due to the fact that it proves nothing other than that there are shared characteristics between the two species. The particular worldview is entirely either unaware or does not care to acknowledge that Adam and Eve were made in the image and likeness of God and made with the purpose to glorify and serve him by “tilling and keeping” God's Eden. This requires that rationality be the likeness. Moritz deals with image and characteristics, but does not provide an argument for rational likeness.

Despite scientific struggle with understanding Genesis from a proper interpretive lens, Erin McMulen, a scientist of the journal Zygon: Journal of Religion and Science exemplifies how faith and reason are nestled together in a tight, with very little room for error, but organized fashion stating:

For those who believe in a Creator, God is active at all moments in the history of the universe, not just the first one. Thus a believer is entitled to describe the ordinary workings of the laws of nature as themselves a testimony to creation, at one remove admittedly, hence 'derivative.'⁷

With the Genesis account providing two stories for creation that seem to be contradictory, the modern man, as Joshua Moritz shows, could choose to throw out the creation stories, choose one or the other, or entirely throw the entirety of scripture out. Simply put, there is no need, the believer synthesizes what one knows scientifically with what has been divinely revealed to come to the understanding that God created and creates continuously, which shows that confining the scripture to a finite, literal moment would be fallacious. Rather, the allegory shows how man within his relation to nature, other men, and God continuously work in God's paradise, His Creation.

With a purely literal understanding of scripture, Genesis competes with its own ideas. Thus, the Church in Her Wisdom asserted:

For truth is set forth and expressed differently in texts which are variously historical, prophetic, poetic, or of other forms of discourse. The interpreter must investigate what meaning the sacred writer intended to express and actually expressed in particular circumstances by using contemporary literary forms in accordance with the situation of his own time and culture. (7) For the correct understanding of what the sacred author wanted to assert, due attention must be paid to the customary and characteristic styles of feeling, speaking and narrating which prevailed at the time of the sacred writer, and to the patterns men normally employed at that period in their everyday dealings with one another. (8)⁸

Thus, men can not interpret scripture without looking at both the literal and spiritual senses. The literal allows for man to see scripture as it presents itself in meaning. Concurrently, the spiritual sense amplifies scripture by providing an anagogical, tropological (moral), and allegorical understanding. With these provided, the man peruses through the ideas such as that of Moritz, despite seeming rational flow, and address and quite possibly even understand scripture from a hermeneutic of continuity.

Therefore, God made man in His image and likeness. God provided us with a gift of land. This land is to be cared for, because it is not truly ours, but rather a gift that we must care for and, as a consequence, share in. The Lord provided Adam with Eve, a “helper” like God, upon Adam's gift of himself with his rib. Thus, God finalizes and shares a family life with man. With creation established, the Lord solidifies that creation works around the family and He works through and with them, because He too is present. Thus, the Lord shows that the covenant relationship between God and man is modeled off of the initial parents relationship with God in Eden. This serves as both a beginning and leaves room for an even greater end, for life in and with Christ is even greater than living in the Garden.

Bibliography

Cavins, Jeff, and Tim Gray. Walking with God: A Journey Through the Bible. 1^st ed. Pennsylvania: Ascension Press, 2010.

Catechism of the Catholic Church , 2^nd ed. (Washington, DC: United States Catholic Conference, 1997).

Ernan, McMullin. "Responses to Darwin in the Religious." DARWIN AND THE OTHER CHRISTIAN TRADITION, JUNE 01, 2011. http://ehis.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=4&sid=640720a7-e67b-48fc-bda5-bb989d6ca3f7@sessionmgr12&hid=8 (accessed November 19, 2013).

John Paul II. Man and Woman He Created Them. Vatican City: Pauline Books and Media, 1986.

Moritz, Joshua. "HUMAN UNIQUENESS, THE OTHER HOMINIDS, AND." (2012): 65-96, 92-93.

Paul VI, Dei Verbum. http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651118_dei-verbum_en.html.

United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, "Genesis, Chapter 2." Accessed November 19, 2013. http://www.usccb.org/bible/genesis/2.

1. 1 Cavins, Jeff, and Tim Gray. Walking with God: A Journey Through the Bible. 1^st ed. Pennsylvania: Ascension Press, 2010.

1. 2 United States Conference of Catholic Bishops, "Genesis, Chapter 2." Accessed November 19, 2013. http://www.usccb.org/bible/genesis/2.

1. 3 Ibid., http://www.usccb.org/bible/genesis/2.

1. 4Man and Woman He Created Them, (Vatican City: Pauline Books and Media, 1986).
   

1. 5 Catechism of the Catholic Church , 2^nd ed. (Washington, DC: United States Catholic Conference, 1997), 335.

1. 6 Moritz, Joshua. "HUMAN UNIQUENESS, THE OTHER HOMINIDS, AND." (2012): 65-96, 92-93.

1. 7Ernan, McMullin. "Responses to Darwin in the Religious." DARWIN AND THE OTHER CHRISTIAN TRADITION, JUNE 01, 2011. http://ehis.ebscohost.com/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?vid=4&sid=640720a7-e67b-48fc-bda5-bb989d6ca3f7@sessionmgr12&hid=8 (accessed November 19, 2013).

1. 8Paul VI, Dei Verbum (1965), 12, http://www.vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19651118_dei-verbum_en.html.

Fumbling through the '62...

"What shall I render unto the Lord for all the things that He hath rendered unto me? I will take the chalice of salvation and will call upon the name of the Lord. With high praises will I call upon the Lord, and I shall be saved from all mine enemies."

(One of many favorite prayers in the Mass.)

Hola! :)

So lately we have been getting A LOT of messages, phone calls, texts, etc. in regards to the Traditional Latin Mass in general as well as questions in regard to what it's like attending a FSSP parish (Not to be confused with SSPX excommunicated parishes. FSSP are in total union with the Church.) so we have decided to start the blogorama up again and write some little entries to our experiences/things regarding to the TLM as well as our experiences being parishioners at a FSSP parish. 

We want to make it clear that we are not claiming to be the all knowing experts in this area but instead humbly hope that through these honest and truthful posts we may shed a little bit of light on the beautiful liturgical traditions of our faith and help with some questions that you may have amongst the stereotypes and false assumptions that are frequently made in todays world in regards to traditionalist/traditional minded catholics. 

So with that being said this is the start of a group of posts that will be called....

 "Fumbling through the '62." 

We pray that it may be fruitful in your spiritual journey to a greater love of Christ. 

With much love,

-us. :)

Things. Just. Got. Real. :)

Things. Just. Got. Real People.... As I went grocery shopping the other day I noticed all of the Christmas decorations out and about. It hit me HARD.... Our wedding is in a month! :)

I can't believe how fast time has gone by! These past eight months of being betrothed have been amazing. There have been many great and wonderful moments as well as many extremely difficult moments but I must say that I think that this time of preparing for marriage has been some of the most fruitful, purifying and blessed moments of our lives up till now. I have grown to love my hubby-to-be more than I ever thought I could and I can not waaaaiitt to become his wife! He has been such a strong and loving man during this time that I do not know what I would do without him.

At the beginning of our betrothal journey in our relationship we made it very clear that we wanted to adamantly embrace this time preparing for marriage. We have seen the heartbreaking fall of the family in our world with its many, many, effects resulting from so many that do not realize or live out their vocation to marriage as God calls them to. We knew that God was, as He has always, called for holy marriages and we wanted to do our best to live that out.

As time continued on it became really obvious how seriously couples took the planning for the ceremony/reception and how little time that they take to plan and prepare for the actual marriage. It was literally mind boggling at times. This is one of the most important times in your LIFE! This is the VOCATION that GOD has blessed you with as a means to get to HEAVEN!... and it seems that there is little to no thought of the seriousness of that and the preparation that it/the couple deserves. Craziness I tell you! :P
I remember talking with a seminarian a few months ago about the his process to become a priest. They spend years preparing for their vocation.... YEARS! and we think that a marriage prep WEEKEND retreat is enough, if a couple even goes to one. To be honest I personally had never even heard of marriage prep classes until I moved to Texas and I'm sure that I am not the only one.

I must say that Anastacio and I can not speak highly enough about the priest that has been helping us prepare for marriage. He may have his silly moments but he is seriously one of the wisest men I have ever met! He has really help to stretch our thinking/understanding about marriage in general as well as our specific call to marriage to each other. I don't know how many times we sat there utterly confused as to what the question was that he was even asking but man, by the end of each meeting with him we would feel like we were left completely dumbfounded by the wisdom that he shared with us. I can't not encourage an engaged couple to seek out a good, holy priest for marriage prep before you get engaged or very early on so that you can take full advantage of the time spent to prepare. Try not to fall into the prideful trap that you are prepared enough and it is not necessary to seek guidance. You will get out what you put into it so take the time to put some effort into your time of preparation. It makes a world of difference! :)

As I come to an end of this random post I would like to leave you with some things (in no particular order) that we have personal felt have been a great help during the time of preparing for our marriage. I am sure that each couple has different ways or things that have helped in their time of preparing for marriage but these are some of the things that have been a big help for us. (If anyone has some other ideas I would love it if you would share. I am always open to hearing other ideas that can be helpful.)

1) Find a good holy priest that is in line with the teachings of the Church to help with your marriage prep. (sad that I have to be specific with that but unfortunately I have found that it is needed.) Not all priests are the same and not all couples are the same, that being said it may take some effort to find a priest that works best with you and your hubby/wife-to-be. (Works best does not mean makes it easy. It means really helps foster the two of you to grow spiritually and really prepare for the sacrament of marriage.) Once you find a priest that you think that will be best and will really challenge you as a couple to really prepare for marriage take advantage of the time that you have been given. Meet as often as you can. Trust me, you will not regret the time and effort put into it.

2) The Sacraments. Hopefully this is a no brainer and is already done before the engagement time. If not, there is no time like now! ;) Immerse yourself in the sacraments. Go to confession regularly (weekly or monthly if you can.). Go to Mass. Set time aside for Adoration. If you are not Catholic I would wholeheartedly and with complete love encourage you to look into the Catholic church. Words can not even come close to describing how much the sacraments will alter your life.
"The Eucharist is the Sacrament of Love; It signifies Love, It produces Love. The Eucharist is the consummation of the whole spiritual life." -Saint Thomas Aquinas


3) Pray TOGETHER often.  I know it is cheesy and I know that it has been said a thousands times but it so true!.... "A couple that prays together, stays together." If you are not already praying together make a big effort to do so. Get into a habit of praying together at a certain time in the day...every day. Marriage is a big thing and it is near impossible to do alone and with out God's loving guidance. Bring Him into your marriage.
Suggestions:
-Rosary
-Chaplet
-Liturgy of the hours
-Divine office
-Prayers from the heart
-Consecrations
-Novenas

4) Communication. Communication. Communication.  Can not say how important this is (especially for times of long distance.) From this moment on it is a time to continuous to grow closer together. Take time to share your thoughts, what happened during your day, your struggles, goals, etc etc. But most of all.... LISTEN. And when I mean listening I do not just mean to receive the audible sounds, I mean to really take the time to listen and hear what it is the other is trying to share with you. I feel that our world views communication as just talking and the art of listening has been thrown to the side. Show your betrothed/fiancé the respect and love that you are called to give them, as well as all others around you.
“There's a lot of difference between listening and hearing.”  -G.K. Chesterton

5) Spiritual reading. This was such a comfort during this time of betrothal. (Reading the lives of the saints was especially helpful during the really tough times.) I personally found spiritual reading to be something that really helped to refocus my day on its/my purpose; to know, love, and serve God. It's only natural that in coming to a better understanding of the practical ways of doing that that it will benefit and strengthen the true charity between a couple. I'm not saying you or your betrothed will be instant saints and everything will be sheer perfection after a spiritual reading but with a true open mind/heart along with a will conformed to truth it can be a tool to help you on that journey to become one. I know for myself it really helped to come to a better understanding that becoming a saint is not for a special few but a call of us all and the saints that we know were ordinary people just like you and I.
Some books that I read during these last eight months were:
- Marriage: The Mystery of Faithful Love. by Dietrich Von Hildebrand
-By Love Refined-Letters to a Young Bride. by Alice Von Hildebrand
-Man and Woman: A divine Invention. by Alice Von Hildebrand
-On True Love. Short article by Alice Von Hildebrand
(I'm a big Von Hildebrand fan. jaja :) )
-Deus Cartitas Est ("God is Love"). Encyclical by Pope Benedict XVI
-St. Padre Pio: A Man of Hope. by Renzo Allegri
-Dressing with Dignity. by Colleen Hammond
-Spirit of the Liturgy. by Pope Benedict XVI 

6) Get your head out of the clouds and plan out the specifics.  This was one that Fr. S. opened our minds/hearts to a lot during marriage prep... getting to the specifics. We understood the purpose of marriage, we knew God was calling us to marriage, we understood theology of body, we knew we were open to life, we knew about our different love languages, about our different temperaments, about finances, about nfp, about praying together, about the sacraments.... we understood and knew the general things about marriage. Not going to lie, we felt pretty dang good going into marriage prep day one and was hit with another holy two-by-four by Fr. S. when he told us "I know, I know. but that's TOO abstract!" and would tell us to get MOOORRREEE specific. Hours later we would finally be getting into the nitty-gritty of what he was talking about and left with a homework assignment to discuss and plan out for next week.
We knew that we should pray together in marriage but when?, where?, what days?, what time?, what prayers?. What were the specifics of "praying together in our marriage"?
We knew about our finances and our budget but when would talk about our finances?, what day and time?, how often would we talk about our finances?, What specifically would be talked about?, If we had extra money what would we plan to do with it?, If we were short financially what would we do to help stretch our budget? What were the specifics of our "finances"?
We knew that we wanted to strive for holiness in our family but how? How specifically through out the day?, What was our personal soon to be family's SPECIFIC mission (To live a holy life is not specific enough.)? What was God calling our family to specifically? Each of our future children will have their own calling by God, how will we foster that SPECIFICALLY? as time goes on how specifically will we re-evaluate and altar these specifics as new things are given to us to do/strive for? etc etc.
I know that a lot of it you may think "How are you supposed to know those specific things before marriage and plan with such detail for things that probably will not go as planned. You should be more go-with-the-flow." (<---Seriously have heard this.) You would be surprised how planning like this can really aid in helping prepare for marriage, not only practically but spiritually as well. As Fr. S. would always say, "Your thinking TOO abstract! Get your head out of the clouds and think about the specifics. How are you going to make your abstract thoughts and plans a reality?"
You can think and have great ideas that you are going to heaven, that you plan on going to heaven but if you don't tackle the specifics it can become really difficult to actually do it and it may remain just a thought. :P

Anywhooooo. Those are just some things that helped us out. If they help you out too, great. If you have other ways, I'm sure those are great too. :)

One more month and it won't be a matter of it feeling real but it is going to be a reality and I am so thankful to everyone that has helped us prepare for this wonderful sacrament that will take place. It has been a time in my life that I have thoroughly enjoyed and one that will lead me to one of the happiest moments of my life. Eeee!!!! Can't wait!!! :)

ONE MORE MONTH!!!!! :D

Feliz Cumpleaños 2013

This weekend went by so very fast but it was so wonderful as well. :) It was our birthday weekend! and when I say "our" I mean me, Anastacio, and my mom.... we all have the same birthday! :)

Best part of it all: Anastacio was able to fly down to SA for the weekend!!! I was beyond excited! It felt like so long since I had seen him. He flew down late Friday night and his parents, brothers and I went to the airport to pick him up. I seriously had butterflies in my stomach as we waited. :)
After a little while we finally saw him come down the stairs... neither of us could stop smiling and it was so unreal that we were together again. The distance has been a real difficult thing for us but it has brought us so much closer together as well and really help to push us more towards prayer which is always a good thing. :)

Saturday was the day of our birthday and we kicked it off with some pro-life work with SACFL. (Very fitting for our birthday I think.) We did door to door outreach telling the local area about 40 Days For Life. After that we drove downtown to St. Joseph's (were Anastacio used to work and where we will be getting married) and went to mass. We got to visit with Fr. Mario for a little while which was really nice as always. :)

Afterward Anastacio took me out for lunch and we finally got some time to catch up and relax a little. It was so good to be able to talk and be in the same room with him. There are so many things that we take for granted and the distance has really made us more thankful for all the time we have together.

Once done with lunch we went to pick out our wedding bands! It started to make the wedding seem so soon. about 3 months people... 3 months! Eee! :)

From there we went to Anastacio's family's house and had a nice BBQ dinner to celebrate. It was delish and I ate too much as always. jaja. Both of us received great books on the faith that I am sure we will be starting soon. (I need a bigger bookcase....)

After dinner we went to my parents house and had dessert. It was hilarious... we put 98 candles on the cake for the total amount of years between my mom, Anastacio and I. Lighting it was so funny! I'm glad we didn't burn the house down. It seriously was so hot that the candles where melting extremely fast and some of them where almost completely melted by the time that we got to the last  few candles. When we blew them all out we had a cake completely covered in wax. lol. It made an awesome tie-dye look on the cake. jaja.  We got mom her first 1962 Missal that she had been wanting for Mass and Anastacio and I got our own kayak for Denver! We were both really excited. We are so excited to move to Denver and has the ability to go on hikes and kayak on our weekends. :)

After cake and presents we played shuffleboard all night. It was a blast! It was a couples tournament and Anastacio and I didn't do half bad. Especially since it was his first time playing. My mom and dad dominated when we played them though. It was the game they played when they were dating so they had the upper hand for the night. jaja.

Sunday was wonderful as well. In the morning we went to the Little Flower Basilica and got to see the relics of St. Therese (her bone, her book, and her writing instruments). She is a saint that has had a real presence in my life so I was really excited that we got to see the relics. We were also able to write and put our prayer intentions in the drawer of her writing desk which will later be taken to her tomb! Super cool! :)

From there we went to mass at St. Pius for the traditional form. Both sides of the family came to mass with us which was really nice. Anastacio got to see some of our friends that attend that mass with us and we also got to go over some things regarding the mass for our wedding as well. It was a bitter sweet time. We were both so very happy to be able to attend Sunday mass together but it also meant that his time in SA was coming to an end. Before taking him to the airport both sides of the family and some of our friends that attended mass all went out to eat.

We got to spend some time at the airport together with is family as we waited for his flight to come in. While we both hate saying good bye to each other we were so happy  to have spent our birthday weekend together. We are so blessed to share such a wonderful day together. :)

Side note: I have to document this.... I did NOT cry this time. jaja. I was fighting the tears but I won. weelllll at least until I got home. But hey, I'm getting better. :P

Good Read: Ad Orientem

Seriously... Who is this guy?! :)

Below is a great read from a regular diocesan priest in Connecticut! It is a beautifully written and well document explanation of why the priest is to celebrate the mass Ad Orientem (Toward the altar, back to the people). Seriously this priest is awesome! 

You can find the original post HERE on his parish website.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Why does St. Mary Church offer the Mass facing east (ad orientem)?
            Offering the Mass versus populum (facing the people) is only a recent development in Church history.  In fact, offering the Mass ad orientem (facing the altar) was the common liturgical practice for the entire Church’s history only up until our generation.  Experiments were done with the versus populum position prior to Second Vatican Council (1962-65), but it became more popular when the Ordinary Form, the Missal of Pope Paul VI, was introduced in 1970.  While most Catholics who lived through this period think that this change in orientation was mandated by the Second Vatican Council, there is actually nothing in the documents of Vatican II (Sacrosancum Concilium) that asked for a reversal in the altar direction. 

            Today, offering the Mass ad orientem and versus populum are both acceptable options in the Missal of Paul VI.  However, the official rubrical guide of Paul VI’s Mass, The General Introduction of the Roman Missal, assumes that there is a common direction between the priest and the people: that everyone is facing the altar.  For example, at the Orate fratres (Pray brethren that your and my sacrifice...) the Pax Domini (The Peace of the Lord be with you), and Ecce, Agnus Dei (Behold the Lamb of God), and the Ritus conclusionis (Concluding Rite), the rubrics specifically state that the priest should now turn to the people.
            Liturgical scholars like Fr. Louis Bouyer and Msgr. Klaus Gamber have recently shown that offering the Mass with the priest and the people facing in a common direction goes all the way back to the Last Supper.  Jesus and His apostles sat around a “C” shaped table, with all of them sitting around the outside.  Da Vinci’s famous painting of the Last Supper with everyone sitting on one side helps one to visualize the idea of all of these first priests facing the same direction for prayer. 

     (Same direction. Different view point)

       Msgr. Klaus Gamber (1919–1987) was a German liturgist who enthusiastically supported the liturgical reform of the Second Vatican Council, Sacrosanctum Concilium, but then later became one of the chief critics of how it was implemented.   Then-Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger wrote the introduction to Gamber’s famous book on this topic, The Reform of the Roman Liturgy, and called Gamber, “the one scholar who, among the army of pseudo-liturgists, truly represents the liturgical thinking at the center of the Church.”
            Gamber argues that this new altar arrangement, facing the people, is an aberration in the organic development of the liturgy.  He explains that scholars have shown that, “...the custom of praying in the direction of sunrise is an ancient one, practiced by Jews and pagans alike.  The custom was adopted early on by the Christians.  For example, to face east in prayer was a common practice for Tertullian, as early as 197.  In his Apologeticum he speaks about Christians ‘praying in the direction of the rising sun’.  The sun served as a symbol for the Lord having ascended to heaven and of His return from there.”
            When the Lord ascended into heaven (Acts 1:10), He was fulfilling the messianic prophecies in Psalm 67.  For example, “Sing ye to God, who mounteth above the heaven of heavens, to the east (ad orientem)” (verses 33-34).  As the apostles looked upon this mystery, angels then appeared to them further prophesying, “This Jesus, who was taken up from you into heaven, will come in the same way you saw him go into heaven” (Acts 1:11).  In other words, at the second coming of Jesus, He will come from the east. “For as lightening comes from the east, and shines as far as the west, so will be the coming of the Son of man” (Matthew 24:27).  Therefore, the Mass throughout the centuries was offered facing east, in joyful anticipation of His second coming. 
            Gamber explains, “We can say and convincingly demonstrate that neither in the Eastern nor the Western Church was there ever a celebration versum populum – rather, there was only the practice of turning towards the east while praying.  Martin Luther was the first person to demand that the priest at the altar face the people.”
            Furthermore, the ad orientem position represents an opening up of the faithful toward God, with an active and forward movement toward heaven.  In the book of Genesis, the Lord “planted the Garden of Eden in the east” (2:8), and when Adam and Eve sinned, they were driven out from this garden (3:24).  With the priest facing the east, he is leading the people in procession back toward their original paradise.  As Gamber wrote, “Facing the east was to indicate the direction and destination of this procession: the lost paradise to be found in the east.  The celebrant and his assistants formed the vanguard of the procession to the east...When we expect the arrival of an important person, the group of waiting people will form into the shape of a semi-circle to receive the expected person into their midst.”
             Traditionally, Catholic churches fulfilled this reality by having the sanctuary built facing east, but over time churches were built facing “liturgical east”, meaning that even if the sanctuary did not literally face east, the priest and the people were all united in a common direction, facing the Lord together. 
           If offering the Holy Mass ad orientem was the common practice of the Church from its beginning, and offering the Mass versus populum was never proposed by the documents of the Second Vatican Council, how did the Church come to adopt this position as a common practice today?  Offering Mass versus populum became fashionable during the Liturgical Movement of the mid-20th century, led by priests such as Fr. Romano Guardini and Fr. Pius Parsch.  They perceived a need for a more active participation on the part of the people and assumed that in the early church offering the Mass versus populum was the norm. 
            However, more recent scholarship has shown this understanding of the early Church to be decisively flawed.  While there were certain churches that had an altar that faced the people, such as St. Peter’s Basilica in Rome, this had nothing to do with pastoral sensitivity, but because of a desire to have the celebrant facing East.  This recent decision to have the Mass versus populum is an example of how the Liturgical Movement of the 20th century adapted at times to passing fads without taking the proper time to reflect on the scholarship behind those decisions.
            Some today negatively explain the ad orientem position as the “the priest with his back to the people”.  Nonetheless, the person in the front pew also has his back to the people behind him, and we know that he is not being rude.  It should be remembered that when the priest faces the people, he actually has his back to Christ in the tabernacle. The reality is that the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is being offered to God, not the people, and the symbolism of the ad orientem position is a fuller representation of this reality.  Notice how the prayers of the Eucharistic Sacrifice are all offered to the Father.  When the priest offers the Mass facing the people, it gives the false and confusing impression that the Mass is being offered to the people.
            Finally, offering the Mass ad orientem helps the priest to better fulfill his role in persona Christi, in the person of Christ.  By his sacred ordination, the priest offers the Mass in the person of Jesus Christ.  The priest’s personality should disappear when he offers the Mass so that Christ can offer His own perfect Sacrifice.  When the priest offers the Mass versus populum, it is more difficult for his personality to disappear.  However, when he offers the Mass ad orientem, the intimacy that exists between Christ and Father can now become actualized, free from the curious eyes of the crowds, in imitation of Christ who “withdrew to the wilderness to pray” (Luke 5:16).  
            As stated earlier, both positions, ad orientem and versum populum, are permitted by the law of the Church for the Ordinary Form of the Mass.  The Congregation for Divine Worship stated on April 10, 2000:  “Both positions are in accord with liturgical law; both are to be considered correct...a priest’s choice of position to offer Holy Mass, whether facing the apse or facing the people may never be used to call into question his adherence to Catholic Doctrine.”  Furthermore, later that year, on September 25, 2000, the Congregation for Divine Worship rejected the position that there is a general obligation in the Ordinary Form of the Mass for the priest to offer the Sacrifice of the Mass versum populum.
            Prior to becoming the Pope, Cardinal Ratzinger promoted the value of once again offering Mass ad orientem.  In 2000, Cardinal Ratzinger wrote in his book, Spirit of the Liturgy, “A common turning to the east during the Eucharist Prayer remains essential.  This is not a case of something accidental, but of what is essential.  Looking at the priest has no importance.  What matters is looking together at the Lord. It is not now a question of dialogue but of common worship, of setting off toward the One who is to come.  What corresponds with the reality of what is happening is not the closed circle, but the common movement forward, expressed in a common direction for prayer.” 
            Now as the Vicar of Christ, Pope Benedict XVI has begun to offer the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass in the Ordinary Form ad orientem at times.  Evidently he sees our current atmosphere as the proper time to reorient ourselves with this common practice of our 2000 year history:  “Historical research has made the controversy less partisan, and among the faithful there is an increasing sense of the problems inherent in an arrangement that hardly shows the liturgy to be open to the things that are above and to the world to come.”
            We are unfortunately living through a historical period of great liturgical confusion.  However, here at St. Mary Church I try to do what is correct, making sure that we are “free to worship Him without fear” (Luke 1:73), according to the teachings and Traditions of the Church.  I think most people in the parish understand why we have the oriented altar position, but if you still struggle with it, remind yourself that in Mass we are processing toward the Garden of Eden, and awaiting the second coming of Our Lord Jesus Christ who will come from the east.  Please pray for the Holy Father, that he would lead us in an authentic liturgical renewal, as he often writes, in “continuity” with the Traditions that we have received from the saints who have gone before us.
          In closing, we can reflect on the words of St. Josemaria Escriva who when asked how to obtain the most spiritual nourishment from the Mass, answered: "First of all, listen to the Mass with great veneration, preparing oneself perhaps with a small Missal, even if it is old, in order to realize that the Holy Mass is the unbloody re-presentation of the Divine Sacrifice at Calvary.  It has nothing to do with dinners and food!  The priest is Christ.  When I am at the altar I am a president of nothing, I am Christ Himself, I let Him use my poor body and my voice.  That is why, when I take the Bread in my hands I say: This is my Body, and taking the Chalice of the wine, I say: This is my Blood.  It is beautiful that the priest shows his back to the people, because we cannot with our poor human face represent the divine Face of Jesus Christ."