Hey MD, I've read numerous times on these threads where the priests as well as the congregation face EAST...That is, with the priests back to the congregation...
So which is it???
Long answer: (Entirely from memory, I'm supposed to be doing something else here, so no time for research or checking) As to East: The association between Jesus and the rising Sun is Biblical: Whereby the day-spring from on high hath visited us - Somewhere in Luke, Zacary's song. At least when I was young the architectural association with east was so strong that the "altar end" of a church was often called the "East end" whichever direction it happened to be in the real world.
AS to which way the priest faces. I don't know the canons, but I do know at least the custom up to the 1960s was that most of the time the priest and the people all faced the same way - "east". The GOOD side of that is that it "says" that the priest is kind of the spokesperson for this crowd behind him and they all together are addressing God, it's just that he's the one doing the talking. To ,me it emphasizes the oneness of people and priest.
The bad sides are that it feels funny talking to a wall and, more seriously, the thinking was that ad orientem (I think it's called) was seen as suggesting that God was "out there" somewhere, rather than "Immanuel", God with us.
Some older churches seem to suggest that "Ad orientem" was NOT universal in the middle or towards the end of the first half of the first millenium. But, be that as it may, the versus populum position was touted in the 60's (era from hell) as being more intimate and as stressing the presence of God.
My problem with it is that it sort of separates (as one might NOT expect) the priest from the people. An Episcopal friend's grandmother said, "You look like the clerk at the Bon Temps! (I take it that was a lady's clothing store - anyway it cracked me up.)
But what we have with versus populumIS all the offishul clergydudes on ONE side of the altar, with maybe a couple of acolytes and lay helpers, and on the other side, us slobs. It's less like something we're all doing together, and more like something the clergy are doing for us.
In my current parish the church is a kind of "in the round" affair, which makes me always feel like I'm watching the umpire at a tennis match -- a SLOW tennis match, his head oscillating from right to left, when he preaches. There was an Episcopal Church, St. Clements in Alexandria VA, where I was almost getting seasick watching the poor man!
The deal, as far as I'm concerned, is that each of these "Styles" has its merits and its faults, and NO style can say everything that is to be said anymore than a paragraph or sonnet can be utterly comprehensive. A rigid adherence either to versus populum or ad orientem is to me a sign that people don't have enough to worry about.
I hope that was responsive and useful.