Reflections from the North Side

One of the theological maxims is ‘Convention is not canon’. Just because a practice is normative does not mean that it is required. I have always been comfortable thinking outside the box while also abiding by prescribed boundaries. The 1979 American Prayer Book has (as its greatest strength and greatest weakness) flexibility in terms of how the service(s) can be conducted. Often, when given the green light of ‘the celebrant may’, I look back to Cranmer and earlier iterations of the Prayer Book in an attempt to make liturgical decisions that are scriptural, Protestant, and pastoral. For example, I use the post-Communion prayer on p. 366 of the 1979 as it is closer to the post-Communion prayer in the old Prayer Book. 

The vast majority of clergy in the Episcopal Church preside at Holy Communion from behind the holy table facing the congregation (ad populum). This position became the default among Anglicans and Roman Catholics following the Second Vatican Council, and the vast majority of them assume this convention is a canon, having never encountered any other way of celebrating. A few, especially Anglo-Catholics and those old enough to remember the time before the new Prayer Book will know another position that the presider at Holy Communion – facing the table with back to the congregation. This Eastward position (ad orientem) still has adherents but is not as common as it once was.

What many Episcopalians (both laity and clergy) do not realize is that there is a third historic position for the presider at  Holy Communion. This position was prescribed by the rubrics of the Prayer Book from 1552 until 1928 (indeed, it was the only legal option in the Church of England until the canonical revisions of the 20th century). Moreover, surprising as it may seem, it better reflects the rubrics of the 1979 Prayer Book than the (now) conventional ad populum position. The 1552 Prayer Book required the presider to stand at the north side of the table (when all English churches were situated with the chancel facing east), and that requirement continued down to the 1662 English and the American revisions of the Prayer Book before 1928 (which prescribed ad orientem). In practice, north-side presidency can have a few different forms. It seems that Cranmer intended the Table (and yes, a specifically movable table and not a stone altar) to be longways in the middle of the chancel . The Laudian arrangement, which became normative, was for the table to stand against the eastern wall of the chancel, so that the north side was the short end (that’s why this position is often called “north end”). When fixed stone altars began to return in many parishes in the late-19th and early 20th Century, the north end presidency continued. 

A.M. Stibbs writes, 

Archbishop Cranmer enjoined that the minister should stand at the north side of the table. This new and distinctive arrangement made two truths visibly plain. On the one hand, by moving the minister from the eastward position, common in the Roman Mass, it made plain that he was not a priest offering sacrifice Godward. On the other hand, by refusing to put him into the westward position facing the people from behind a crosswise table, it made plain that Christian ministers are not a presiding hierarchy, on which the laity are dependent for sacramental grace.

I believe that Stibbs and others (see Motyer and Stott in the same pamphlet) are correct in arguing that north-side presidency more clearly demonstrates and illustrates what is occurring at the communion table than the alternative positions. The rubrics of the 1979 Prayer Book not only allow for such a posture, but this rubric on p. 361 only makes sense with an eastward or north-side position, ‘The Celebrant… faces [the congregation] & Then, facing the Holy Table, the Celebrant proceeds’. Also the rubric on p. 364, ‘Facing the people, the Celebrant says’  is unnecessary if the presider is already situated ad populum. These rubrics assume the presider turns to face the table when praying and turns again to face the people, signally clearly when the presider is addressing God or the people. Ad populum eliminates this significant turning. 

In my parish, I have begun to introduce several “new” old practices. Clergy and acolytes, for example, are now wearing cassocks and surplices instead of cassock-albs with the presider in a chasuble. Fortunately, a movable wooden “altar” that has some resemblance to a table and the chancel/nave setup has allowed me to easily make the switch from ad populum to the north end. Currently our table is set up on a raised platform upon which our choir also has chairs. Now, having celebrated from the north end since Lent 1 of this year, the next change I plan to implement is to bring the table down to ground level and have parishioners commune around the table in small groups. 

Again Stibbs says,

By ordering…that the minister should stand at the north side of the Table in the body of the church, the Reformers were visibly indicating that there is no end of the church, or side of the table, which is holier than or superior to the rest. They were virtually indicating that all sides of the Table are equal, and that the minister is but one of the priesthood of the laity, who all alike have equal access to, and place at, the table. They were indicating that he is not a priest at an altar, nor a mediator in either direction between God and men, but one with his brethren in Christ as a guest at the Lord’s table.

Episcopalians like to say, ‘This is God’s table’. Presiding from the north side, done correctly, helps to express this idea. One of the images I’ve used with my parish is that presiding from the north side is a way of showing that the table isn’t mine as the minister. It is God’s. I’m setting the table and serving the food, but I’m not making the food or hosting the meal. As the hymn ‘At the Lamb’s High Feast’ says: ‘Christ the victim, Christ the priest’.