The Blessed Virgin Mary Prefigured in the Old Testament...



"My Mother has been allowed to accept My cross. She did this of great heart for Her children. I do not like to watch, I sorrow to watch the abominations and the disrespect given to My Mother. It is only the enemies of the Father in Heaven that take this truth from you. You will not stop the words of My Mother. She is your co-Redemptrix, and as such, it is She Who has been given the mission to bring you back onto the road to the Kingdom. Without Her you will be lost."

- The Bayside Prophecies

Jesus, August 5, 1974


MOTHER OF THE WORLD

"Count not upon the frailties of human relationship, because they die and wither away. Whereas My Mother, in Her Immaculate Heart, will always be there to counsel you, to guide you; because no purer a love has ever been given to mankind, than expressed when She submitted to My persecution upon earth, and saw that I was to leave. Knowing the will of the Father, She accepted this, and in that way became truly the Mother of the world."

- The Bayside Prophecies

Jesus, May 30, 1981


The above Messages from Our Lord and Our Lady were given to Veronica Lueken at Bayside, New York.




The Blessed Virgin Mary Prefigured in the Old Testament...


LepantoInstitute.com reported on December 13, 2018:


by Carlos Caso-Rosendi


Christmas is approaching. This is a good time for a simple meditation on the many women of God who prefigured the perfection of the Mother of the Redeemer. This meditation shows how the Old Testament gradually reveals the many qualities of the woman mentioned in Genesis 3:15. Both the Messiah and his Mother were a mystery for many, many centuries. That mystery was finally unveiled the first Christmas in Bethlehem. The young maiden announced in the prophecy of Isaiah delivered the Blessed Son, Emmanuel, God with us.


The Bible relates the story of the Virgin Mary in both the Old and the New Testament. In the Old Testament we read about Our Blessed Mother in the prophecies and prophetic models used by God to teach us about her qualities.


Genesis 3, 15 — «I will put enmity between you and the woman, and between your offspring and hers; He will strike at your head, while you strike at his heel.»

In Genesis 3, 15 we find the first prophecy about Mary. She is the one who will inflict a mortal wound on the head of the original serpent. When the Hebrew scholars of ancient times translated this verse into the Greek language, they used the word gunai (woman, lady). She is the one who is going to bring the divine punishment upon the father of the “brood of vipers” (Matthew 12, 34) those whom Jesus refers to as “sons of your father, the Devil” (John 8, 44). In this small verse we find the first sign of the Gospel’s promise. The seed of the woman is also the seed of Abraham, the father of all the faithful. That seed is Christ, who comes to the world through Mary. This is explained by Saint Paul in Galatians 3, 16: “Now the promises were made to Abraham and to his descendant. It does not say, ‘And to descendants,’ as referring to many, but as referring to one, ‘And to your descendant,’ who is Christ.”


The enmity between the seed of the woman and the seed or progeny of the original serpent continues until the time of the end as it is shown in Saint John’s vision of the Apocalypse, in Revelation 11, 19 to 12, 6.


Isaiah 7, 10-14 — «Therefore the Lord himself will give you this sign: the virgin shall be with child, and bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel.»

God reiterates that He will bring a Messiah revealing for the first time that he will be the son of a young maiden: “the virgin shall be with child, and bear a son, and shall name him Immanuel.” The word used here for virgin is almah (a maiden or young woman). The name Immanuel means “God with us”. Isaiah reveals more about this son of the virgin.


Isaiah 11, 1-5 — «But a shoot shall sprout from the stump of Jesse, and from his roots a bud shall blossom. The spirit of the LORD shall rest upon him: a spirit of wisdom and of understanding, A spirit of counsel and of strength, a spirit of knowledge and of fear of the LORD, and his delight shall be the fear of the LORD. Not by appearance shall he judge, nor by hearsay shall he decide. But he shall judge the poor with justice, and decide aright for the land’s afflicted. He shall strike the ruthless with the rod of his mouth, and with the breath of his lips he shall slay the wicked. Justice shall be the band around his waist, and faithfulness a belt upon his hips.»


This prophecy confirms that a maiden from the tribe of Judah, and from the family of David will give birth to the promised Messiah. The Jesse mentioned here is the father of King David, who is from the tribe of Judah. Early in history, Jacob had prophesied that the Messiah would come from the tribe of Judah (Genesis 49, 10). Here Isaiah begins to reveal the role of the mother of the Messiah. In the New Testament, the final connection is made when we read how it was fulfilled in the Gospel of Matthew.


Matthew 1, 18-25 — «Now this is how the birth of Jesus Christ came about. When his mother Mary was betrothed to Joseph, but before they lived together, she was found with child through the holy Spirit. Joseph her husband, since he was a righteous man, yet unwilling to expose her to shame, decided to divorce her quietly. Such was his intention when, behold, the angel of the Lord appeared to him in a dream and said, “Joseph, son of David, do not be afraid to take Mary your wife into your home. For it is through the holy Spirit that this child has been conceived in her. She will bear a son and you are to name him Jesus, because he will save his people from their sins.” All this took place to fulfill what the Lord had said through the prophet: “Behold, the virgin shall be with child and bear a son, and they shall name him Emmanuel,” which means “God is with us.”»


A contemporary of Isaiah also mentions the mother of the Messiah:


Micah 5, 1-2 — «But you, Bethlehem Ephrathah too small to be among the clans of Judah, From you shall come forth for me one who is to be ruler in Israel; Whose origin is from of old, from ancient times. Therefore the Lord will give them up, until the time when she who is to give birth has borne, and the rest of his brethren shall return to the children of Israel.»


Also the prophet Jeremiah seems to mention the mother of the Messiah in this mysterious verse:

Jeremiah 31, 22 — «How long will you continue to stray, rebellious daughter? The LORD has created a new thing upon the earth: the woman must encompass the man with devotion.»


Here the “rebellious daughter” is Israel. The phrase seems to suggest that God is about to do something to cure the constant rebellions of His people. Saint Jerome explains this verse as a prophetic model of the virgin birth of Christ. The “new thing” that God is creating is Mary of Nazareth who will have the mission to conceive a perfect and complete man, not stained by original sin.

There are other prophetic types of Mary, like Sara, Hannah, Deborah, Jael, Judith, and Esther among others.


Sarah

Sarah is the wife of Abraham, the mother of Isaac and the grandmother of Jacob, the father of the twelve tribes of Israel. There are many parallels between Sarah and Mary of Nazareth. Like Mary she goes into Egypt for a while (Genesis 12, 10-20). She did not have any children (Genesis 16, 1) and her miraculous pregnancy was announced by a celestial messenger (Genesis 18, 10). She asks the angel a question very similar to the question asked by Mary:


Luke 1, 34 — «And Mary said to the angel, “How shall this be, since I know no man?”»


Genesis 18, 13 — «[…] ‘Shall I really bear a child, old as I am?’»


Both Sarah and Mary live at momentous times in history, when God is establishing a new covenant for His people.


Genesis 17, 2 — «Between you and me I will establish my covenant, and I will multiply you exceedingly.”»


Luke 1, 30-33 — «Then the angel said to her, “Do not be afraid, Mary, for you have found favor with God. Behold, you will conceive in your womb and bear a son, and you shall name him Jesus. He will be great and will be called Son of the Most High, 11 and the Lord God will give him the throne of David his father, and he will rule over the house of Jacob forever, and of his kingdom there will be no end.”»


Hannah

In ancient times children were the most worthy treasure of a family. It was considered a blessing from God to have many children. When a woman could not have children, she had to bear the shame of being barren. In many cases, the husband would add another woman to the household making the life of the original wife very difficult. That was the case of Hannah the wife of Elkanah, a man from the tribe of Ephraim. This faithful woman was barren but that did not stop her from praying to God for offspring.


But one year, at the time of the great religious festival at Shiloh, Hannah approached the Tabernacle and earnestly prayed to God for a child. She prays silently as the priest Eli, observes her from a distance. Eli notices that Hannah is in great distress and weeps bitterly as she prays. Eli concludes wrongly that she has been drinking too much wine during the celebration. He rebukes her for being drunk in the house of God. Let us remember that Mary, along with other Christians gathered in the upper room, were also accused of being drunk after celebrating the Pentecost. It happened the day when the Church received the Holy Spirit (see Acts 2, 1-13).


1 Samuel 1, 12-17 — «As she remained long at prayer before the LORD, Eli watched her mouth, for Hannah was praying silently; though her lips were moving, her voice could not be heard. Eli, thinking her drunk, said to her, “How long will you make a drunken show of yourself? Sober up from your wine!” “It isn’t that, my lord,” Hannah answered. “I am an unhappy woman. I have had neither wine nor liquor; I was only pouring out my troubles to the LORD. Do not think your handmaid a ne’er-do-well; my prayer has been prompted by my deep sorrow and misery.” Eli said, “Go in peace, and may the God of Israel grant you what you have asked of him.”»


After receiving the blessing of Eli, Hannah faithfully believes that God will grant her prayer. She promises God that if He gave her a son, she will consecrate him to the Lord to serve Him all his life. The answer to her prayer and vow was Samuel, the great prophet-priest of Israel who was born to her that year. Hannah fulfilled her promised and five years later she took Samuel to be raised by Eli, the priest of God in that place.


Like Mary, Hannah was the mother of a great prophet whom she consecrated from infancy to the service of God. (compare 1 Samuel 1, 24 with Matthew 2, 22-40)

The song of Hannah, registered in the second chapter of 1 Samuel was most likely the inspiration for Mary’s Magnificat (Luke 1, 46-55).


1 Samuel 2, 1-10 — «and as she worshiped the LORD, she said: “My heart exults in the LORD, my horn is exalted in my God. I have swallowed up my enemies; I rejoice in my victory. There is no Holy One like the LORD; there in no Rock like our God. “Speak boastfully no longer, nor let arrogance issue from your mouths. For an all-knowing God is the LORD, a God who judges deeds. The bows of the mighty are broken, while the tottering gird on strength. The well-fed hire themselves out for bread, while the hungry batten on spoil. The barren wife bears seven sons, while the mother of many languishes. “The LORD puts to death and gives life; he casts down to the nether world; he raises up again. The LORD makes poor and makes rich, he humbles, he also exalts. He raises the needy from the dust; from the ash heap he lifts up the poor, To seat them with nobles and make a glorious throne their heritage. He gives to the vower his vow, and blesses the sleep of the just. “For the pillars of the earth are the LORD’S, and he has set the world upon them. He will guard the footsteps of his faithful ones, but the wicked shall perish in the darkness. For not by strength does man prevail; the LORD’S foes shall be shattered. The Most High in heaven thunders; The LORD judges the ends of the earth, Now may he give strength to his king, and exalt the horn of his anointed!”»


Deborah and Jael

Deborah is a model of wisdom, judging Israel from a place situated between Ramah and Lapidoth (Judges 4, 4). At a time when the Israelites were oppressed by the Canaanites she summoned the tribes of Zebulon and Nephtali to fight Sissera, the Canaanite commander. She prophesized that the mighty oppressor was going to be delivered into the hands of a woman. This is a prophetic model of Mary, who is going to fulfill the prophecy of Genesis 3, 15 by crushing the head of Satan, the original serpent. The woman chosen by God to end the life of Sissera is Jael. Both Deborah and Jael are prophetic types of Mary.

Judges 4, 17-21 — «Sissera, in the meantime, had fled on foot to the tent of Jael, wife of the Kenite Heber, since Jabin, king of Hazor, and the family of the Kenite Heber were at peace with one another. Jael went out to meet Sissera and said to him, “Come in, my lord, come in with me; do not be afraid.” So he went into her tent, and she covered him with a rug. He said to her, “Please give me a little water to drink. I am thirsty.” But she opened a jug of milk for him to drink, and then covered him over. “Stand at the entrance of the tent,” he said to her. “If anyone comes and asks, ‘Is there someone here?’ say, ‘No!’“ Instead Jael, wife of Heber, got a tent peg and took a mallet in her hand. While Sissera was sound asleep, she stealthily approached him and drove the peg through his temple down into the ground, so that he perished in death.»


Judith

The Book of Judith tells us how God delivered the Jewish people through Judith a brave woman who fears God. Judith’s name means “Jewess”. She exemplifies prophetically Mary’s unfailing trust in God. (Luke 1, 38-37). Like Mary, she intercedes before God for the salvation of His people.


Judith 9, 5-14 — «“O God, my God, hear me also, a widow. It is you who were the author of those events and of what preceded and followed them. The present, also, and the future you have planned. Whatever you devise comes into being; the things you decide on come forward and say, ‘Here we are!’ All your ways are in readiness, and your judgment is made with foreknowledge. “Here are the Assyrians, a vast force, priding themselves on horse and rider, boasting of the power of their infantry, trusting in shield and spear, bow and sling. They do not know that”. ‘You, the Lord, crush warfare; Lord is your name. Shatter their strength in your might, and crush their force in your wrath; for they have resolved to profane your sanctuary, to defile the tent where your glorious name resides, and to overthrow with iron the horns of your altar. See their pride, and send forth your wrath upon their heads. Give me, a widow, the strong hand to execute my plan. With the guile of my lips, smite the slave together with the ruler, the ruler together with his servant; crush their pride by the hand of a woman. “Your strength is not in numbers, nor does your power depend upon stalwart men; but you are the God of the lowly, the helper of the oppressed, the supporter of the weak, the protector of the forsaken, the savior of those without hope. “Please, please, God of my forefather, God of the heritage of Israel, Lord of heaven and earth, Creator of the waters, King of all you have created, hear my prayer! Let my guileful speech bring wound and wale on those who have planned dire things against your covenant, your holy temple, Mount Zion, and the homes your children have inherited. Let your whole nation and all the tribes know clearly that you are the God of all power and might, and that there is no other who protects the people of Israel but you alone.”»


Queen Esther

Queen Esther is one of the most beautiful prophetic types of Our Blessed Mother. She is a model of trust in God and in the power of prayer and fasting. When the enemies of God’s people device an evil plan to exterminate them, she intercedes for them before the king, risking her life in the process. She is a model of Mary, the courageous Queen of God’s People.


Esther 8, 4-6 — «The king stretched forth the golden scepter to Esther. So she rose and, standing in his presence, said: “If it pleases your majesty and seems proper to you, and if I have found favor with you and you love me, let a document be issued to revoke the letters which that schemer Haman, son of Hammedatha the Agagite, wrote for the destruction of the Jews in all the royal provinces. For how can I witness the evil that is to befall my people, and how can I behold the destruction of my race?”»


The theme of Mary as the New Eve is prefigured in this story. In the ancient court of King Ahasuerus of Persia Queen Vashti is banished from the court because of her disobedience. Four years later, King Ahasuerus selects Esther for his wife and queen because she is beautiful and intelligent.


Later on some enemies of the Jews plot to destroy all the Jews in the empire. The only one who can save them from destruction is Esther but she cannot talk to King Ahasuerus unless she has been called. Anyone appearing before the King uninvited is punished with death. Esther decides to save her people. So she and her maidservants along with all the Jews of Persia fast and pray for three days. At the end of the three days Esther enters the King’s court unannounced, to petition for her people. This reminds us of the role of Mary as intercessor for the people of God. That intercession is made both through her prayers and sorrows, just like Esther prayed and fasted.


In the end, through the intervention of Queen Esther, the Jews are saved and their enemies are vanquished. That is why the Jewish people celebrate the feast of Purim. Originally the fast was observed by Esther and the entire people of Israel on the 14th, 15th and 16th of Nisan, in what would roughly correspond to the three days of Christ’s Passion. In that we observe a parallel: just like the Jews defeated their enemies in ancient Persia, so Jesus defeated the enemy of all mankind on the Cross on Nissan 14th, that is Good Friday.


Esther is presented to us in the Bible as a woman of deep faith and courage who loves his people, and is willing to risk her life for those she loves. She is an instrument of salvation provided by God to save and protect His people. In the same way Mary is God’s instrument of salvation. Through her we have received Our Lord. Like Esther, she is a permanent intercessor before the throne of God for the good of all her beloved children.


Devotion to the Virgin Mary is an essential part of being Catholic. In other Christian ecclesial groups some may have an inclination not to talk too much about the Mother of God. The great Christian apologist C. S. Lewis, made a very good analysis of that problem in his prologue to Mere Christianity:


“… there is no controversy between Christians which needs to be so delicately touched as this. The Roman Catholic beliefs on that subject are held not only with the ordinary fervour that attaches to all sincere religious belief, but (very naturally) with the peculiar and, as it were, chivalrous sensibility that a man feels when the honour of his mother or his beloved is at stake. It is very difficult so to dissent from them that you will not appear to them a cad as well as a heretic. And contrariwise, the opposed Protestant beliefs on this subject call forth feelings which go down to the very roots of all Monotheism whatever. To radical Protestants it seems that the distinction between Creator and creature (however holy) is imperilled: that Polytheism is risen again. Hence it is hard so to dissent from them that you will not appear something worse than a heretic—an idolater, a Pagan…”


Yet, merely thinking about Mary can prove beneficial for Catholics and other Christians as well. She was the first disciple of Christ, the very first one who believed in Him. Through Scripture she is still telling us “Do Whatever He tells you.” (John 2, 5) That is certainly good advice: if we do whatever Jesus tells us, we will have the honor of being called His friends (John 15, 14). Jesus trusted John, the beloved disciple, to the care of Mary (John 19, 26). There is no reason that He would not do the same with all the disciples He loves. We can think of Mary as the first disciple of Jesus and profit from her example by reading those passages of Holy Scripture that speak about her life.


When we talk to others about Christ we can point at Mary as a good example of a Christian life well lived. We are to deliver Christ to the world by declaring the Good News of salvation. Mary is the best model of that because through her the Word of God “became flesh and dwelt among us” (John 1, 14).


To cure the world of the evil of selfishness, it would be great if more and more people would think of Mary and her generous surrender to the will of God. Mary patiently suffered poverty, slander, exile and shame for our sake, so we could have salvation in Jesus. Before the Great Sacrifice on the Cross, Mary sacrificed all she had for our benefit as well. We should certainly show our gratitude by meditating on her exemplary life.


We should strive to imitate her. We can learn of her extraordinary virtues in Scripture, and follow her example of simplicity and obedience. No one will ever receive a greater honor from God than having Him dwell as a Son, as he did in Mary’s own body. At the end of time, when all the saints are counted and meet in the Heaven to praise God: who will be like Mary who had the privilege of being the mother of the Redeemer?


Mary leads us to Jesus through her perfect example. Let us listen carefully to all she says. Let us imitate her in all we do.





"To give Me honor does not detract or take from the honor to My Son. I say this, My child, to you and My children in all humility. I, your Mother, I, too, am but an instrument of the Father in Heaven. My Son has chosen to send Me to you as a Mediatrix between your world and the world of the Father."

- The Bayside Prophecies

Our Lady of the Roses, December 24, 1974


"Remember, My children, come to My Mother; for in Her memory of Her human days upon earth, She above all humans created--sinless, without the stigma of sin, a perfect life upon earth without sin, and assumed into Heaven, body and spirit—She above all can direct you because She is your Mother; She is the Queen of Heaven, and the Mother of every human being upon earth."

- The Bayside Prophecies

Jesus, August 14, 1979




SOURCE:

The electronic form of this document is copyrighted.

Quotations are permissible as long as this web site is acknowledged with a hyperlink to: https://www.tldm.org

Copyright © These Last Days Ministries, Inc. 1996 - 2018 All rights reserved.




Ad Orientem Sacrifice Over Versus Populum Banquet: Bishop Schneider On The Urgent Need To Reorient Worship...



REVERENCE

"My children, you must join your hands in reverence at the Sacrifice of My Son. It is an expression of love, gratitude, and respect. Reverence and respect and holiness must be returned to My Son's Houses, churches, throughout the world, reverence, holiness, and respect from the beginning to the end of the sacred service!"

- The Bayside Prophecies

Our Lady of the Roses, September 6, 1975


ALL HONOR MUST BE GIVEN

“All honor must be given to My Son in the Eucharist. Man must kneel. My Son’s House is the House of God and a house of prayer, and it must not be turned into a meeting hall.”

- The Bayside Prophecies

Our Lady of the Roses, July 25, 1979


The above Messages from Our Lady were given to Veronica Lueken at Bayside, New York.




Ad Orientem Sacrifice Over Versus Populum Banquet: Bishop Schneider On The Urgent Need To Reorient Worship...


OnePeterFive.com reported on March 19, 2026:


By Bishop Athanasius Schneider


In one of his addresses in July 2016, Cardinal Robert Sarah said, “It is very important that we return as soon as possible to a common orientation, of priests and the faithful turned together in the same direction—eastwards or at least toward the apse—to the Lord who comes. I think it is a very important step in ensuring that in our celebrations the Lord is truly at the center.” This is a constant thread in his speeches, interviews and books. As the famous liturgist Klaus Gamber and Cardinal Joseph Ratzinger have shown in detail, the current way of celebrating Mass facing the people has no roots in the transmitted, immutable Tradition. The versus populum orientation is something entirely new, unfamiliar to earlier generations of Catholics, and in that sense it repre-sents a clear break with the Church’s liturgical tradition. Therefore, Cardinal Sarah has been calling for some time now for a return to this ancient, authentic practice. Why has this general return to the old practice still not been successful?


The proponents of the liturgical reform, who, unfortunately, were vic-torious, wanted a liturgy more suited to the mentality and customs of the world. Cunningly, they made appeals to history. They would say, we must return to the ancient Church, to the Church of the first centuries, we must restore the original practice of the first Christians.


But in re-establishing this “original” practice, they used an arbitrary and selective method, underpinned by certain ideological prejudices. Their approach was shaped by anthropocentrism and naturalism. They wanted to introduce prayer and liturgy that would correspond to this anthropocentric approach. Liturgy was to be stripped of what distinguished it most: theocentrism and Christocentrism.


The story of a return to antiquity turned out to be mostly a ruse. True science turns to facts and forms theories based on the facts. In the case of the study of ancient liturgy, the opposite was true. Inconvenient facts were ignored or, as a last resort, interpreted to fit preconceived, anthropocentric ideas.


Let me give you an example. In some ancient basilicas, the altar was separated from the wall of the apse. Archaeological research conducted since the nineteenth century shows that this is the case. Instead of examining the various possible explanations for the altar being separated from the wall, these liturgical ideologues immediately concluded that the priest celebrated the Mass facing the faithful. This conclusion was already in their heads before they began their research, so it’s not surprising that it immediately occurred to them as soon as the information about the altars being separated from the wall reached them.


They didn’t notice that this conclusion was impossible to accept, because it was contradicted by the unambiguous statements of the Church Fathers. It was also contradicted by more thorough archaeological research. This is clearly shown in a monograph by the German archaeologist Joseph Braun, The Christian Altar in Its Historical Development. He proved, using all the archaeological excavations known and performed up till that point, that over 90 percent of the churches and chapels of the first millennium of Christianity were oriented toward the east, and thus the sanctuary with the main altar was directed toward the east. The direction toward the east was marked in churches by the apse.


The only exceptions can be found in Rome, but those were determined by particular circumstances. For example, when it comes to St. Peter’s Basilica, its original purpose was to commemorate and venerate the tomb of St. Peter. The altar was built over the tomb, and the basilica was formed in such a way as to take into account the characteristics of the terrain, that is, the fact that it was located on a hill. For this reason, the apse is on the west side, and there is a door on the east side, so the pope, when celebrating Mass, stood behind the altar and looked toward the east, where the front door was. Not toward the people, but toward the east.


Moreover, the papal altar was covered during the liturgy until the early Middle Ages, more or less until the ninth century. Curtains separated the pope and the altar from the gaze of the people in the basilica. When the pope would begin to recite the Canon of the Mass, the deacons would draw the curtains so that people could not see the pope’s face during the Eucharistic Prayer. Also later, when the use of curtains was abandoned, a large crucifix and candlesticks were placed on the altar, which served the same function as the curtains. This can be seen in the photographs from the pre-conciliar era: although the pope is celebrating Mass in the basilica nominally facing the people, in fact he can’t actually be seen because of the crucifix and the candlesticks. The papal Masses were not about people looking at each other, but about people looking together toward the crucifix. However, let me emphasize it again, St. Peter’s Basilica is an exception. You can’t use a unique architectural situation, which was atypical and resulted from the topography, as an argument in favor of a celebration toward the people.


These liturgical ideologues also ignored and disregarded all the testimonies of the Fathers of the Church, who as early as the second century stated that Christians always turn to the east when praying. And the Eucharist was after all the most solemn Christian prayer. From this, it follows clearly that the priest and the faithful would turn together in prayer to face the east. The priest stood on the same side of the altar, regardless of whether it was separated from the wall or not, as the faithful behind him.


This is exactly the practice in all Eastern-rite churches and Orthodox churches where the altar is not adjacent to the wall. Whether we’re talking about the Byzantine or other Eastern rites, the altar is located in the middle of the sanctuary, but the liturgical action is directed toward the east. St. Basil mentioned that this orientation toward the east was handed down to the Church by the apostles. That means that already in the fourth century after Christ there was a strong conviction that the orientation toward the east, the common orientation of the prayer of the priest and the faithful, has its source in the apostolic tradition.


To support their new ideology, the liturgical reformers tried to invoke later depictions without reflecting on their meaning. And so they pointed, for example, to Leonardo da Vinci’s famous painting The Last Supper, in which Christ is seated behind a rectangular table with His disciples. However, this painting, regardless of its artistic value, historically misrepresents reality. This is caused by ignorance. Leonardo da Vinci assumed that people at the time of Christ sat at the table just as they did in his time, in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries. However, as archaeological research has shown, the earliest reliefs and depictions of the Last Supper from the first centuries show not the rectangular table that we know, but a sigma-shaped table, like a semi-circle. People would not sit at it as we do, but would recline.


Moreover, according to Jewish custom, the most important, most dignified place wasn’t in the middle of the table, among the others, but at the head of the table, at its right side or right corner. There, at the right corner of the table, sat the most important, most honored guest. It was therefore the place that Jesus certainly occupied during the Last Supper. That is why John, and not Peter, was seated next to Him, and why when Peter wanted to understand who Jesus was referring to as the traitor, he addressed the question not directly to Jesus, but rather through John, since the latter reclined upon the bosom of the Lord. If Jesus had been sitting in the middle of the table, then John and Peter would have been sitting on either side of Him and Peter would not have had to ask through John. However, Holy Scripture says that John was Jesus’ beloved disciple and rested on His bosom, so Peter had to relay the question through John. There was no one on the other side of Jesus—Jesus was sitting at the right side of the sigma-shaped table.


In the same way, during supper everyone was looking in the same direction—they were not looking at each other. In one of the targums (a targum is an early Aramaic translation dating back to the first century after Christ, provided along with a commentary on the words of Scripture) it’s written that the Messiah will come during the Passover feast. Therefore, all participants in the Passover must look in the direction from which He is to come. So it’s assumed here that the participants in the Passover are looking in the same direction.


This is also the case with the Holy Mass: we should all be looking in the same direction, toward the east, whence the Lord will come to us. He Himself speaks of this clearly, “For as lightning cometh out of the east, and appeareth even into the west: so shall the coming of the Son of man be” (Matt. 24:27). The lightning from the east heralds the coming of the Son of Man from the east. Similar symbolism can be found in the Canticle of Zechariah, “through the bowels of the mercy of our God, in which the Orient from on high hath visited us: to enlighten them that sit in darkness, and in the shadow of death: to direct our feet into the way of peace” (Luke 1:78–79).


Oriens ex alto: Jesus is that rising Sun (Oriens) coming from on high (ex alto). The Lord Himself is the rising of the Sun. The east, then, is the eschatological direction of prayer for Christians. From there, Christians await the coming of the Lord. This refers not only to the literal, geographical east (for a variety of reasons not all churches could be oriented in this direction, especially in later eras), but also to the east understood symbolically. As a rule, it was the apse in churches. The name itself comes from the Greek apsis, axis. The apse therefore became the symbolically understood east, which was further reinforced by the fact that a cross was placed in it. In the apse there was an altar, on which the cross was also placed. Thus, regardless of the literal geographic direction, for Christians the “spiritual east” was marked out by the apse, the altar, and the cross, usually placed on the altar; prayers and liturgies were addressed in this direction.


We must remember that the direction of prayer was never neutral for the ancients. Space wasn’t symbolically abstract or indifferent. This is also perfectly evident in the behavior of the Jews and in Jewish customs from that period, from the time of the Old Testament. During prayer, everyone turned toward the place where the Ark of the Covenant was kept. If the priest were to turn his back on it, it would be considered a sacrilege. And yet we in the Church have something greater than the Ark of the Covenant. The Ark of the Covenant was only a symbol, while Jesus clearly said that His Body is the temple, the living temple (see John 2:21)….


Even today in synagogues there are niches where the scrolls of the Torah are kept, and this is the direction the Jews face during prayer. It is unthinkable to pray with your back to the Torah. Jesus and the apostles, when they went to the synagogue, faced the same direction together when they prayed.


Now if we gather all these accounts: the common customs of antiquity, the manner of sitting at the table during a banquet, accounts of early Fathers of the Church—it’s undeniable that from the beginning Christians prayed together with the priest, always facing the same direction, toward the Lord. For me, the current form of celebration, in which the priest continuously faces the people, is nothing other than a manifestation of anthropocentrism. It’s a confirmation of those assertions found in the conciliar texts we have already mentioned, such as the assertion in Gaudium et Spes that man is the center and crown of all things.


Admittedly, Sacrosanctum Concilium, the constitution on the liturgy, teaches beautifully that “the human is directed and subordinated to the divine, the visible likewise to the invisible, action to contemplation, and this present world to that city yet to come, which we seek.” It’s obvious that the celebration versus populum contravenes the principles outlined in the Council’s constitution on the liturgy.


A recent book Altar and Church, a major monograph by Stefan Heid (one of the foremost experts on Christian antiquity) describing in detail the earliest Christian places of worship, makes it abundantly clear that Paul VI’s reforms of the Mass and liturgy were based on faulty premises. Heid described this erroneous approach as follows: “Today’s scholars almost unanimously and ecumenically claim that the earliest Christians knew neither altars nor sacred places; moreover, that these early Christians rejected both altars and sacred places.” But this claim, which led to the introduction of tables instead of altars in Catholic churches, has no historical foundation. On the contrary, Heid proves that all early Christian testimonies point to the reverence shown to the altar on which Christ’s sacrifice was celebrated. The Eucharist was sacrificial from the beginning and was celebrated on an altar, not on a plain secular table. You just spoke about the direction of prayer. From all this it follows that the changes made to the liturgy under Paul VI are a complete novelty; they have no basis in Tradition, but rather amount to a rupture with it.


With regard to the direction of the celebration, it’s obvious. So it is also with the tables. Some might say: but what does it really matter? For sure, God is present everywhere. However, we Christians are not Gnostics; we profess the religion of the God who became man. We believe in the Incarnation. God revealed Himself concretely, in history. That is why concrete, palpable, tangible signs are so important. The Ark of the Covenant was such a sign, a symbol for the Jews. Similarly, we turn to Christ, who is present in the Eucharist, we worship His Cross, we venerate the altar on which transubstantiation takes place. Catholicism is an acceptance of the Incarnation, not a set of abstract ideas.


I think it would be wonderful if, as a sign of our return to the Faith, all priests in the whole Catholic Church would return to authentic liturgical practice and begin to celebrate the Masses in the new rite also toward the east, toward the altar, toward Christ. We must turn again to God. Conversio signifies precisely such a turning. Although the priest is another Christ, alter Christus, he is not God. He is neither a monstrance nor a tabernacle. He is merely an instrument of God. Therefore, people shouldn’t keep looking at his face—he must disappear and Christ should appear before the eyes of the faithful. The priest must point to Christ, refer to Him. The attention of the faithful should be directed not to the face of the priest, but to the Cross: the cross on the chasuble, the crucifix on the altar, or the cross in the apse.


I have also sometimes heard this argument: the altar is a symbol of Christ, so the faithful together with the priest, looking at each other, gather around the altar. But this is not serious. It goes against everything we know about human psychology. After all, such a closed circle doesn’t communicate this message. The altar is not a real point of reference for those standing around it. It doesn’t serve as an object of contemplation for them—no, their attention is directed to themselves, to their faces, and to the face of the priest. Only when the priest turns toward the altar does the attention of the faithful turn, as does his, toward the altar, the cross, and the apse. From a purely visual point of view, the closed circle suggests anthropocentrism. It has nothing dynamic, nothing eschatological about it.


The same is true of the tables that have replaced the altars. Even St. Paul wrote, “Know you not, that they who work in the holy place, eat the things that are of the holy place; and they that serve the altar, partake with the altar? So also the Lord ordained that they who preach the gospel, should live by the gospel” (1 Cor. 9:13–14). For him, the gospel is the same as serving at the altar. He clarifies it even further:


Behold Israel according to the flesh: are not they, that eat of the sacrifices, partakers of the altar? What then? Do I say, that what is offered in sacrifice to idols, is any thing? Or, that the idol is any thing? But the things which the heathens sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God. And I would not that you should be made partakers with devils. You cannot drink the chalice of the Lord, and the chalice of devils: you cannot be partakers of the table of the Lord, and of the table of devils. (1 Cor. 10:18–21)


For Paul, the table on which the Eucharist is offered to the Lord and the altar are two interchangeable terms. In pagan temples, the table of demons was simply the altar on which pagans offered sacrifices. Here, then, we have indirect evidence that, in the eyes of the early Christians, the table on which they offered the Eucharistic sacrifice was to them what the altar was to the pagans. Except that for pagans, the altar was a place of demon worship, whereas for Christians, the altar was a place of true worship.


The widespread introduction of tables into Catholic churches shows how strong the Protestant tendency was. For it is Protestants who understand the Mass as a supper, as a meal and a banquet. While an altar is necessary for sacrifice, a table is sufficient for the banquet. The essence of the Mass is the sacrifice. Therefore, if altars disappear and tables appear in their place, this essence is obviously called into question. At the table you don’t offer a sacrifice, you feast.


The Mass is a sacramental reenactment, a re-presentation of the sacrifice of the Cross on Golgotha, not primarily a sacramental re-presentation of the Last Supper. The memory of the supper, of the banquet, only comes from and is subordinate to the sacramental sacrifice. The principle and foundation of the Mass is the sacramental re-presentation of Christ’s sacrifice on Golgotha. The aspect of the banquet appears at the moment of Communion, but the Mass as such is not a meal or primarily a banquet.


The meal is an integral aspect of the Holy Mass, but it’s not the key aspect. Only at the reception of Communion is a table needed. For this purpose the Church used altar rails, which in some languages are called the “table of Holy Communion.” These are openwork partitions separating the sanctuary from the nave. Usually they take the form of a balustrade. They are made of precious material: marble, stone, wood, or metal. They serve as kneelers for the faithful during the reception of the Eucharist. Often, they are covered with a white tablecloth. The faithful approach and receive the Body of the Lord from the hands of the priest with a devout posture, kneeling at the altar rails.





"The judgment of your God is not akin to the judgment of man. The Eternal Father will only judge by the heart. Your rank, your accumulation of worldly goods does not set you up before another. Many have sold their souls within the holy House of God. Better that you strip yourself and remove all worldly interests now while you have the time to make amends to your God, for many mitres will fall into hell."

- The Bayside Prophecies

St. Thomas Aquinas, August 21, 1972




SOURCE:

The electronic form of this document is copyrighted.

Quotations are permissible as long as this web site is acknowledged with a hyperlink to: http://www.tldm.org

Copyright © These Last Days Ministries, Inc. 1996 - 2025 All rights reserved.