I am honestly struggling to understand why the inelegant and rather business-speak sounding word “preside” is supposed to be preferable, according to many in the know, to the word “celebrate.” This is especially prevalent now as churches refer to the priest celebrating mass as the “presider.” It might be helpful to look at the definition of the word “preside.”
pre·side (pr-zd)
1. To hold the position of authority; act as chairperson or president.
2. To possess or exercise authority or control.
3. Music To be the featured instrumental performer:
Supposedly, the shift in language is to represent the leveling of hierarchy and to imply that no longer will the priest be recognized as the only one “celebrating”- the entire congregation is celebrating too! However, read the definition of preside again.
There is nothing about the definition of preside that in any way suggests an anti-clerical move or a leveling of hierarchy. The very definition of “preside” is to control, hold authority, and to be the featured performer! This is not only an inelegant term but a profoundly counter-productive one if our goal is to truly bring a sense to the worshiping body that they are a vital part of the liturgical action.
One can look at the definition of celebrate and find theological excess within it.
cel·e·brate [sel-uh-breyt]
1. to observe (a day) or commemorate (an event) with ceremonies or festivities: to celebrate Christmas; to celebrate the success of a new play.
2. to make known publicly; proclaim: The newspaper celebrated the end of the war in red headlines.
3. to praise widely or to present to widespread and favorable public notice, as through newspapers or novels: the countryside celebrated in the novels of Hardy.
4. to perform with appropriate rites and ceremonies; solemnize: to celebrate a marriage.
To observe, commemorate, to make known, to proclaim, to praise widely, and to perform with appropriateness. Contrast that definition with “preside” which is suffused with language of control, authority, and management.
What are the synonyms and antonyms for each term?
Synonyms for Celebrate
1. honor, solemnize. 2. laud, glorify, honor, applaud, commend, give, grace, laud, magnify, praise, provide 3. immortalize, keep, memorialize, monument, monumentalize, observe, pay tribute to, perpetuate, remember, salute, solemnize
Antonyms for celebrate: disregard, forget, ignore, neglect, overlook
The synonyms for celebrate are full of the absolute essence of Christian worship! To honor, solemnize, laud, magnify, praise, memorialize, and remember are key elements of the Eucharistic action. They, in large part, define our life as a Body. Celebrate was chosen as the term for what we do for a reason!
Again, by contrast, look at what the synonyms and antonyms for “preside” are:
to preside (from google search)
Synonyms for Preside
administer, advise, be at the head of, be in driver’s seat, call the signals, carry on, chair, conduct, control, direct, do the honors, govern, handle, head, head up, keep, lead, manage, officiate, operate, ordain, oversee, pull the strings, run, run the show, sit on top of, supervise
Antonyms for preside: follow, serve
My eye can’t help but be drawn to the antonyms first as they are so striking. The antonyms for “preside” are to “follow” and “serve.” In the name of some sort of well-intentioned egalitarian impulse we have now made “serve” and “follow” antonyms of the priestly action!
Look at the synonyms for “preside.” One administers, is at the head of, controls, does the honors, pulls the strings, runs the show, and sits on top of. This is the language of manipulation and corporate finagling not the language of holy and life-giving encounter.
Instead of celebrants lauding and magnifying we have presiders managing and controlling. Worship is not a board meeting. It is not an exercise in human resource capitalization. Nor is it a concert in which the priest is the star of the show. It is an encounter with the Holy.
The drive to make worship more “personal” inevitably makes the person more and more central. Rather than the Spirit, the liturgy, and the congregation’s response drawing our energy forward the priest is tasked with entertaining, directing, and presiding over an experience – managing and manipulating emotions.
Good liturgy draws the celebrant in along with the congregation so that the whole Body is worshiping together. This is not the work of “presiding” but the work of “celebrating.”
The priest is not the star or the director or the manager. He or she is the celebrant. They are called to laud, honor, commend, and observe the Holy. They are called to celebrate. They welcome others to celebrate as well in the way they too are called. We are, indeed, all celebrating these Holy Mysteries together. Some in song, some it chant, some in reading, some in greeting, all in prayer, and all around the altar. One person’s voice begins the song and others join in. One person celebrates and others come ‘round. It is the use of the definite article that, perhaps, should be questioned not the verb.
Identifying the priest as the celebrant is not an act of elevation but an identification of their primary action and role in the liturgy – to celebrate. It is the unfortunate individualism of this age that draws so much attention to the role and title rather than to the significance of the Body’s action that undergirds that very title and labor. In other words the celebrant is the celebrant because of the action of the Body which has heard his or her call to the altar. Now that the priest is there, at the altar, he or she is celebrating those Sacred Mysteries with the congregation gathered around and joining in.
Ask yourself this. Would you rather be asked to celebrate or to preside? To celebrate a joy or to preside over a joy? To celebrate a mystery or to preside over a mystery? To celebrate a birth or to preside over a birth? To celebrate at a meal or to preside over a meal? To celebrate a memory or to preside over a memory? To celebrate a miracle or to preside over a miracle? To celebrate hope or to preside over hope?
You might notice over the course of these questions that it is not really possible for mortals to preside over many of them. God presides. God gives life, joy, mystery, sustenance, and hope. Above all, God has given us his Son made known in the elements. This is something we cannot preside over but only and ever and forever celebrate.
Robert+
PS: It is also worth googling the images for the two words to get a visceral sense of their definition, import, and connotations.
A Desert Father 
What a wonderful reflection. Thank you for the breath of fresh and renewing reminders.
See Hatchett’s “What’s in a Rubric”? wherein he argues that “celebrant” through the BCP is an abbreviation of the “Concerning the Service’s” “principal celebrant”, which is the term I actually prefer.
…and lest we forget, “presider” is not a real word. One who presides is a “president.” When was the last time you attended a Eucharist with a “president?” And would you want to?
“President,” to refer to the priest leading the Assembly at the Eucharist, is the standard expression in the Church of England. And several other churches, so far as I know.
I prefer “President” to “Presider,” which in turn I greatly prefer to “Celebrant.” The epxression simply does not carry the implications of power-superiority which Fr Henderson has attempted to attribute to it. This argument based on dictionary definition is not at all compelling.
Scott, I’m afraid I remain unconvinced by your argument, when all you have to support it is that you don’t agree with the dictionary.
It is almost impossible to imagine any derivative of president/presider, without the common implications of those words and their associations (government, law etc). Celebrant is much more in keeping with what I think I am doing at the altar.
I didn’t make an argument. I expressed a preference, and described an experience. Two, really.
Amen, Father! Preach it! It is ironic that people wanting to diminish the sacerdotal nature of priesthood resort to using a word of such worldly authority. Of course, clergy have increasingly been turned into administrators by the church’s current desperation to replace the Gospel of God with some pragmatic substitute such as the language and tenets of management and “leadership” as part of the “corporate” church, that is, an institution that sees itself more as a business corporation than a spiritual creation of the Holy Spirit.
Pingback: All the Livelong Day | What's in Kelvin's Head
Although I am unable to cite sources, I’m certain that it is not unusual in early Christian documents to read the word presider, or even president, used in reference to what we call the priest, and the word in that context means something like “someone who stands guard over,” referring, I assume, to guarding the sacred mysteries of the Eucharist. So the usage is quite ancient.
Bleah. Didactic, ponderous and ultimately vain.
I have a suggestion. Let’s call the priest
The Decider. It has some precedence…
A superbly and elegantly written statement. Very theologically grounded too.
It reminded me of a local Episcopal church which referred to a woman in the Great Vigil of Easter liturgy as the “Master of Ceremonies.” I suppose she was in charge of making sure everything was properly orchestrated. He He.
Thank you for this post.
“Preside” seems to be the more favourite option for many Anglican Church at the moment – including the shif from “priest” to “president” or “presider”. This is quite remarkable given the current shift towards “all members ministry” and things like that. President does not really inspire a sense of common royal priesthood, rather a sense of a bunch of people blindly following someone in charge. “Celebrate” seems much more apt given that the celebrant’s vocation to priesthood arises from the celebrating community and its needs.
Presumably you aren’t using a theological of liturgical dictionary. Many words have specific meanings in specific contexts as does preside which you correctly interpret as:
“to imply that no longer will the priest be recognized as the only one “celebrating”- the entire congregation is celebrating too!”
Well done – you know what it means.
Tony
Well done, Robert. At least (so far) the BCP agrees. “Celebrant” is used throughout. You won’t find “Presider” used in the prayer book, other than at every place that has decided “Celebrant” is a bad word and shouldn’t be used.
Thanks
Ronald A Fox, BSG
Chicago
I had forgotten that “celebrant” is the uniform BCP usage–thanks for reminding me of it. As usual, the prayer book is a reliable guide.
Since the notions of celebration and presidency in the Eucharist are quite old, I’m not sure why it’s valuable to focus on modern English connotations with these words. The president is a servant at the Eucharist, as they serve the people and assist the High Priesthood of Christ in providing his sacrifice offered once for all, and serving the people in offering in the name of the whole Body our selves, our souls and bodies, to be living sacrifices. This does not make worship into a board meeting. That’s reading modern connotations into ancient practice. Here is one the early liturgy reformers on the theological grounds for presidency over celebrant:
“But the last and most powerful line of defence in this perimeter within which the clergy live is, of course, theology. The clergy man is seen from the theological point of view as having the power to do what the others cannot do—and at this point no-one can touch him. Like the priesthood of the Old Testament, he mediates between the people and God. Religion is still his preserve, and the Sacraments at any rate are firmly in his hands. . . . It is at this theological point, at the heart of the matter, that I am convinced we have got to begin if we are going to try to reform the whole system. For unhappily, or perhaps happily, it simply will not stand up to a truly biblical doctrine of the Church. In the Old Testament, indeed, the priesthood was vicarious in the sense that the priest did on behalf of the people what they could not do: there was one tribe in Israel which was priestly, and eleven that were not. But in the New Testament this kind of division is utterly abolished. There is one mediator between God and man, the High Priest, Christ Jesus, and no priestly caste within the Body. The entire Body is a royal priesthood, and every member has his share in that priesthood by virtue of his baptism. The ordained ministry, within this covenant, is not a vicarious one, but a representative one. It is commissioned and set apart to exercise in the name of the Body, Head and members alike, the ministry which belongs to the whole. What is given to the ordained minister is formal authority to preach and proclaim in the name of the whole Church what every member has not only the right but the duty to proclaim. He is given formal authority to exercise the ministry of reconciliation and forgiveness which belongs by right to every member of the healing community. He is given formal authority to lead and preside at the celebration which is the con-celebration of the whole people of God. For in this sense every celebration is a lay celebration. The celebrant is the entire laos, of which the bishop or presbyter is “the president”. (The early Church never used the term “the celebrant” as we do, of an individual.) [John A. T. Robinson, “The Ministry and the Laity,” 1963]