"And also with you" Gesture

[ncjohn]

No, they are here. They say customs need to be approved by legitimate authority.

Ah, ok, one final post to correct my own mistake…

You’re right…I misspoke by omission. I actually meant “tradition” rather than “custom”. None of the things discussed are customs, they are all traditions. And traditions do NOT need the approval of an authority.

 

[Orionthehunter]

No, they are here. They say customs need to be approved by legitimate authority.

Don’t reply! Don’t reply! You’ve already made this point at least 10 times. Don’t reply! Oh, go ahead:

Why do you ignore that customs start out as traditions that eminate from the faithful without approval? Do you have an agenda? Do you think we have now reached a point of development where we no longer should develop traditions for our successors?

There are those who say that Revelation stopped with the writing of Scripture and there is no need for Tradition. Sure sounds like different sides of the same coin.

From Fix: Authentic unity is when we all obey the rules, not when we go freestyle because we think the mass belongs to us.

I observe some people during the Mass who say Amen but don’t conform their posture to their word by raising their hands together but others do. This one is really important to me as I don’t know if I’ve ever not raised my hands together every time I say Amen. I’ve looked on it as bringing my posture and my mind/spirit into conformance. Should I stop? I think I’m in the minority but I’ve not really looked to see what others are doing.

I also observe people who cross themselves after the absolution in the Act of Penance and others who do not. My wife does this but I don’t. Should I stop her from fermenting disunity or do I need to get on board?

I also observe some who do the lippy thing and others who do not. And what about the Mexicans in our parish? They do this all the time instead of making the Sign I make. I guess that 700 mile wall is a good idea as then I won’t have to observe their obvious intentional acts of disunity.

I also observe some who cross themselves after recieving Communion and others who do not. I do this but a couple of Sunday’s I observed that our retired Deacon didn’t do this. I thought it was because after all the years of being on the altar, he forgot what he was supposed to do. Should I inform him of his defiant act of disunity or am I wrong?

Somebody is not practicing unity, going freestyle and thinking the Mass belongs to them. Somebody is wrong! Anethema!

 

[fix]

Ah, ok, one final post to correct my own mistake…

You’re right…I misspoke by omission. I actually meant “tradition” rather than “custom”. None of the things discussed are customs, they are all traditions. And traditions do NOT need the approval of an authority.

The problem is we have not defined what a tradition is and if we have the authority to claim the issue in this thread is consistent with canon law. I linked to a priest, who is very informed, who claims the gesture is a bad idea.

 

[ncjohn]

ncjohn;1601478:

1. Creativity in Liturgical Celebrations

Wow…how many ways are there to say “this is about celebrants and about changing text and prescribed items”? Nobody is sitting around planning about how to say “and also to you”. It isn’t a planned part of the liturgy; it is a spontaneous action of an individual. It is not adding to the liturgy. If someone was indeed sitting around planning to teach people that this is the required response, you would have a case. But it isn’t.

Point 2, one more time: The RS section DOES NOT APPLY to what the laity does. Why you insist on posting it over and over I just cannot comprehend. Your own citation ends with the statement “What the people are asking for every Sunday **from their pastor **is not a novelty but a celebration …”

I’m sure you’ll come back with this citation yet again, and I’ll manage to let myself get sucked into responding to it yet again. But it is kind of like doing any exercises. I’ll just keep using it to build up my strength until I can ignore it!

 

[fix]

Don’t reply! Don’t reply! You’ve already made this point at least 10 times. Don’t reply! Oh, go ahead:

Why do you ignore that customs start out as traditions that eminate from the faithful without approval? Do you have an agenda? Do you think we have now reached a point of development where we no longer should develop traditions for our successors?

There are those who say that Revelation stopped with the writing of Scripture and there is no need for Tradition. Sure sounds like different sides of the same coin.

Are you the authority in this matter? Can you say for sure the gesture here is consistent with canon law?

I observe some people during the Mass who say Amen but don’t conform their posture to their word by raising their hands together but others do. This one is really important to me as I don’t know if I’ve ever not raised my hands together every time I say Amen. I’ve looked on it as bringing my posture and my mind/spirit into conformance. Should I stop? I think I’m in the minority but I’ve not really looked to see what others are doing.

I also observe people who cross themselves after the absolution in the Act of Penance and others who do not. My wife does this but I don’t. Should I stop her from fermenting disunity or do I need to get on board?

I also observe some who do the lippy thing and others who do not. And what about the Mexicans in our parish? They do this all the time instead of making the Sign I make. I guess that 700 mile wall is a good idea as then I won’t have to observe their obvious intentional acts of disunity.

I also observe some who cross themselves after recieving Communion and others who do not. I do this but a couple of Sunday’s I observed that our retired Deacon didn’t do this. I thought it was because after all the years of being on the altar, he forgot what he was supposed to do. Should I inform him of his defiant act of disunity or am I wrong?

Somebody is not practicing unity, going freestyle and thinking the Mass belongs to them. Somebody is wrong! Anethema!

In addition to serving as a vehicle for the prayer of beings composed of body and spirit, the postures and gestures in which we engage at Mass have another very important function. The Church sees in these common postures and gestures both a symbol of the unity of those who have come together to worship and a means of fostering that unity. We are not free to change these postures to suit our own individual piety, for the Church makes it clear that our unity of posture and gesture is an expression of our participation in the one Body formed by the baptized with Christ, our head. When we stand, kneel, sit, bow and sign ourselves in common action, we given unambiguous witness that we are indeed the Body of Christ, united in heart, mind and spirit. USCCB

I think I will stick with what we have.

 

[netmilsmom]

Why do you ignore that customs start out as traditions that eminate from the faithful without approval? Do you have an agenda? Do you think we have now reached a point of development where we no longer should develop traditions for our successors?

Why improve what is already perfect. That has been a big problem and has lead to the lack of unity. Go with what is traditional instead of trying to start a new tradition.

I observe some people during the Mass who say Amen but don’t conform their posture to their word by raising their hands together but others do. This one is really important to me as I don’t know if I’ve ever not raised my hands together every time I say Amen. I’ve looked on it as bringing my posture and my mind/spirit into conformance. Should I stop? I think I’m in the minority but I’ve not really looked to see what others are doing.

I also observe people who cross themselves after the absolution in the Act of Penance and others who do not. My wife does this but I don’t. Should I stop her from fermenting disunity or do I need to get on board?

I also observe some who do the lippy thing and others who do not. And what about the Mexicans in our parish? They do this all the time instead of making the Sign I make. I guess that 700 mile wall is a good idea as then I won’t have to observe their obvious intentional acts of disunity.

I also observe some who cross themselves after recieving Communion and others who do not. I do this but a couple of Sunday’s I observed that our retired Deacon didn’t do this. I thought it was because after all the years of being on the altar, he forgot what he was supposed to do. Should I inform him of his defiant act of disunity or am I wrong?

Somebody is not practicing unity, going freestyle and thinking the Mass belongs to them. Somebody is wrong! Anethema!

I don’t think that any of this is your place to correct. A good shepherd will however.
Our pastor stopped my hubby to correct him about the proper gestures after receiving. That is who should be stating that these innovative gestures and postures are not tradition and therefore just that, personal innovations.

Slowly, slowly as will all things from the Vatican, the right way and wrong way is being explained. God Love our Most Holy Father and may he live long enough to straighten all this out.

 

[Walking_Home]

Ah, ok, one final post to correct my own mistake…

You’re right…I misspoke by omission. I actually meant “tradition” rather than “custom”. None of the things discussed are customs, they are all traditions. And traditions do NOT need the approval of an authority.

---

Very slick—but they do need approval —since these “traditions” are being implemented thru adaptations and innovations—which the Church has expressed --are not allowed.

We cannot use the Church’s liturgical tradition–to try and justify the innovations that adaptations which have been occuring.

The Church herself has stated what is part of the Her liturgical tradition—and makes a distinction between this tradition and the innovations within the last 20-30 yrs.

 

[Orionthehunter]

From Fix: Are you the authority in this matter? Can you say for sure the gesture here is consistent with canon law?

Before I answer your question that was in response to my questions: “Why do you ignore that customs start out as traditions that eminate from the faithful without approval? Do you have an agenda? Do you think we have now reached a point of development where we no longer should develop traditions for our successors?”, why do you ignore my questions? Are they not worthy?

And to answer your question: No and not once have I claimed to be the authority. I will repeat that I don’t even make this gesture. I’ve repeatedly said that until instructed one way or another, I won’t claim it is licit or illicit. You however have claimed it is an illicit and only properly reference (after more than once improperly referencing other documents) one learned Priest who won’t even make the statement it is illicit.

Finally, not one time has anyone addressed why the three traditions (plus my new one about whether our hands should come together when we say Amen or not) that are practiced by some and not by others are acceptable when this one is not. They all eminate from the faithful as all good traditions do.

 

[netmilsmom]

Finally, not one time has anyone addressed why the three traditions (plus my new one about whether our hands should come together when we say Amen or not) that are practiced by some and not by others are acceptable when this one is not. They all eminate from the faithful as all good traditions do.

Yes, this has been addressed many times here. Traditions, in the 2000+ years of the church are not those gestures done for 20-30 years. They are generation to generation.
tra·di·tion (trə-dĭsh**’**ən) http://content.answers.com/main/content/img/pron.gif
n.

1. 
   *] The passing down of elements of a culture from generation to generation, especially by oral communication.
   *]
   1. 
      *] A mode of thought or behavior followed by a people continuously from generation to generation; a custom or usage.
      *] A set of such customs and usages viewed as a coherent body of precedents influencing the present: followed family tradition in dress and manners. See synonyms at heritage.
      
      *] A body of unwritten religious precepts.
      *] A time-honored practice or set of such practices.
      *]Law. Transfer of property to another.
      [Middle English tradicion, from Old French, from Latin trāditiō, trāditiōn-, from trāditus, past participle of *trādere, to hand over, deliver, entrust : trā-, trāns-, trans- + dare, to give.]
      
      While one may skip a tradition, although if one is properly taught they should see why it should be done, one may not add a personal innovation stating that it is the beginning of a tradition.
      Sharing Oblatek on Christmas Eve is a wonderful Polish tradition. If it were introduced into a purely Mexican celebration with a “I want to make this a new tradition” it would be look upon as out of place.
      Same with personal innovations.

 

[ncjohn]

---

Very slick—but they do need approval —since these “traditions” are being implemented thru adaptations and innovations—which the Church has expressed --are not allowed.

We cannot use the Church’s liturgical tradition–to try and justify the innovations that adaptations which have been occuring.

The Church herself has stated what is part of the Her liturgical tradition—and makes a distinction between this tradition and the innovations within the last 20-30 yrs.

Good misdirection, but

. The Code of Canon Law acknowledges certain standards. **The tradition emanates from the community of the faithful rather than a legislator **although the custom must be approved by the latter (canon 23).

“Traditions emanate from the community”. Approval is necessary to become “custom”, to take on the force of law.

None of the actions cited are “customs” but simply traditions. While some of these, including the one being discussed may or may not have been around long enough to meet the thirty year test of a “tradition”, others clearly have and can be documented as such, including one other notable practice you have consistently claimed to be illicit.

And this gesture, whether a “tradition” or simply developing into one, is not being “implemented” as that implies that someone is directing it, which I have seen no one claim. And without “implementation” there is nothing being added to the liturgy. It is simply individuals expressing prayerful reverence.

And if you can find someplace where the Church quantifies the quality of the various traditions I’d really love to see that. I can just see it:

Sign of the cross: 5 thumbs up
Bowing during the creeed: 4 thumbs up
“Lippy thing”: three thumbs up
Genuflecting before the tabernacle: 5 thumbs up
Paying attention to God rather than what everyone else is doing: Eternal life

 

[fix]

Before I answer your question that was in response to my questions: “Why do you ignore that customs start out as traditions that eminate from the faithful without approval? Do you have an agenda? Do you think we have now reached a point of development where we no longer should develop traditions for our successors?”, why do you ignore my questions? Are they not worthy?

You are worthy…You are worthy…

I missed it. I think we should follow what those over us ask. I think we should be concerned with reforming ourselves rather than emotionalism and sentimentalism.

Almost every single time I read something about the masses from 1962 and earlier someone says those old ladies said the rosary during mass and were not participating. Now, for all I know those women were participating more fully than I do today. My point is what if one started to say the rosary and claimed that is a gesture they felt like doing and that it would become a “tradition” in 30 years?

Would those who claim the hand toss is acceptable be so eager to defend the rosary sayers?

Point? Let’s follow what I quoted from the USCCB and see what Rome has in store for reforming the reform.

 

[Walking_Home]

Good misdirection, but

“Traditions emanate from the community”. Approval is necessary to become “custom”, to take on the force of law.
None of the actions cited are “customs” but simply traditions. While some of these, including the one being discussed may or may not have been around long enough to meet the thirty year test of a “tradition”, others clearly have and can be documented as such, including one other notable practice you have consistently claimed to be illicit.

And this gesture, whether a “tradition” or simply developing into one, is not being “implemented” as that implies that someone is directing it, which I have seen no one claim. And without “implementation” there is nothing being added to the liturgy. It is simply individuals expressing prayerful reverence.

And if you can find someplace where the Church quantifies the quality of the various traditions I’d really love to see that. I can just see it:

Sign of the cross: 5 thumbs up
Bowing during the creeed: 4 thumbs up
“Lippy thing”: three thumbs up
Genuflecting before the tabernacle: 5 thumbs up
Paying attention to God rather than what everyone else is doing: Eternal life

---

When someone performs these gestures—are they not carrying into effect an action—implementing them. Are they not influencing others around them and imposing on the prayer of the Church.

When someone extends their hand —is not an implementation–of a gesture that imposes itself on others and on the Church.

The following statement in SC --put a stop to the development of any further “traditions” or “customs” without the direct approval from Rome. The other documents that have come from the Apostolic See further clarify this matter as do the statements from Card Arinze.

“Therefore no other person, even if he be priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority”.

 

[Orionthehunter]

Yes, this has been addressed many times here. Traditions, in the 2000+ years of the church are not those gestures done for 20-30 years. They are generation to generation.
tra·di·tion (trə-dĭsh**’**ən) http://content.answers.com/main/content/img/pron.gif
n.

1. 
   *] The passing down of elements of a culture from generation to generation, especially by oral communication.
   *]
   1. 
      *] A mode of thought or behavior followed by a people continuously from generation to generation; a custom or usage.
      *] A set of such customs and usages viewed as a coherent body of precedents influencing the present: followed family tradition in dress and manners. See synonyms at heritage.
      
      *] A body of unwritten religious precepts.
      *] A time-honored practice or set of such practices.
      *]Law. Transfer of property to another.
      [Middle English tradicion, from Old French, from Latin trāditiō, trāditiōn-, from trāditus, past participle of *trādere

1. 1. 
      , to hand over, deliver, entrust : trā-, trāns-, trans- + dare, to give.]
      
      While one may skip a tradition, although if one is properly taught they should see why it should be done, one may not add a personal innovation stating that it is the beginning of a tradition.
      Sharing Oblatek on Christmas Eve is a wonderful Polish tradition. If it were introduced into a purely Mexican celebration with a “I want to make this a new tradition” it would be look upon as out of place.
      Same with personal innovations.
      How do traditions start? A single person or a community began it. And it is determined by the faithful that it is meritorious, it spreads and it is passed on. Today, we might consider the Chaplet of Divine Mercy a tradition but in 1930, it was not. All traditions have a beginning point. Somebody started the three traditions I continually refer to and since they aren’t custom’s or enshrined in the rubrics or GIRM, they probably started with what one might call a “personal innovation”.
      
      As Catholics, we are always to presume the best from our brethren in Christ and not the worst. In this case the worst is probably as Fix characterized it: a personal “initiative (to) turn the celebration of the Holy sacrifice of the mass into our own personal property.”
      
      But what may be the best presumption?
      
      First of all the short prayer we are talking be is the faithful’s prayer that the Spirit be with the Pastor/Celebrant. I assume that besides legitimately being in the Liturgy, we all accept that this prayer, while short, is not an insignificant prayer. Additionally, I assume that in the context of the challenges facing our Priests we all accept that this prayer may have greater importance or at least relevance today.
      
      Second, what does the Church via the USCCB teach us about gestures: “Gestures too involve our bodies in prayer. . . .But there are other gestures that intensify our prayer at Mass.” Since gestures involve our bodies in prayer and intensify the prayer, there is nothing inherently wrong with gestures. Agreed?
      
      Third, we have gestures that are practiced by Catholics during the Mass that are traditions (eminated from the faithful and not required to be followed or adhered to or accepted) that are listed as allowed by the USCCB but that list is clearly not the limit but used as examples means that there may be additional allowable gestures. Agreed?
      
      Thus, might the relatively new practice of involving the body to intensify our prayer for our Priests be the beginning of a new licit tradition? Or it might it be a gesture that flickers because of the special need for divine protection of our Priests at that is time but dies out when this challenge passes.
      
      In either case, as a faith community:
      
      1. 
         *]who hold that is important the Christ is with us beyond just spiritually,
         *]who hold dear our traditions and rituals that involve and engage body, mind and spirit in union,
         *]who understand that not only as individuals we are made in God’s image but also when we are joined together as man and wife,
         
         why do we resist the addition of a simple discrete spontaneous (I’ve never heard it taught by anyone that this gesture should be done) physical gesture to intensify a particular important communal prayer for the aid, comfort, counsel, and protection of our Priests?
         
         Are we doing a disservice to ourselves and the Church to lump this personal act of piety and prayer into what we all know are abuses?

 

[pnewton]

Sign of the cross: 5 thumbs up
Bowing during the creeed: 4 thumbs up
“Lippy thing”: three thumbs up
Genuflecting before the tabernacle: 5 thumbs up
Paying attention to God rather than what everyone else is doing: Eternal life

:clapping: The communal aspect of Mass was never designed to be a neighborhood watch program.

 

[Walking_Home]

Originally Posted by ncjohn

Sign of the cross: 5 thumbs up
Bowing during the creeed: 4 thumbs up
“Lippy thing”: three thumbs up
Genuflecting before the tabernacle: 5 thumbs up
Paying attention to God rather than what everyone else is doing: Eternal life

:clapping: The communal aspect of Mass was never designed to be a neighborhood watch program.

---

Now—if we all follow what the Church intends—more attention to God and a greater chance for Eternal life.

 

[ncjohn]

The following statement in SC --put a stop to the development of any further “traditions” or “customs” without the direct approval from Rome. The other documents that have come from the Apostolic See further clarify this matter as do the statements from Card Arinze.

“Therefore no other person, even if he be priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority”.

Darn, I lost the bet.

I was sure it would take you longer than that to again quote this misapplied and inapplicable, out-of-context statement.

If I offer to split the pot with you next time, will you tell me how long you’re going to wait? (I think you might have also outdone yourself on the number of times in a single thread you’ve tried to apply this one!)

“Oops! I sneezed! Honest Father, I wasn’t trying to add to the liturgy! Holding the missalette? Not specified? I’m sorry, I won’t do it again.”

 

[Walking_Home]

Darn, I lost the bet.

I was sure it would take you longer than that to again quote this misapplied and inapplicable, out-of-context statement.

If I offer to split the pot with you next time, will you tell me how long you’re going to wait? (I think you might have also outdone yourself on the number of times in a single thread you’ve tried to apply this one!)

“Oops! I sneezed! Honest Father, I wasn’t trying to add to the liturgy! Holding the missalette? Not specified? I’m sorry, I won’t do it again.”

---

My,my,my—ncjohn—still picking at straws I see.

 

[netmilsmom]

Darn, I lost the bet.

I was sure it would take you longer than that to again quote this misapplied and inapplicable, out-of-context statement.

If I offer to split the pot with you next time, will you tell me how long you’re going to wait? (I think you might have also outdone yourself on the number of times in a single thread you’ve tried to apply this one!)

“Oops! I sneezed! Honest Father, I wasn’t trying to add to the liturgy! Holding the missalette? Not specified? I’m sorry, I won’t do it again.”

Come on John, WH is talking about prayer postures.
If everyone adds their own posture, be it “lifting up their heart”, waving for the alleuia, handholding or shorkling for the Our Father, it does not breed unity at all. It becomes a private show and not a mass. It’s what prayer posture one injects. It’s not acceptable to shout alleulia after the Creed or as one poster put here, say “And also with you FATHER”
If words are not acceptable, how can gestures be? If a priest cannot add to the liturgy, why would you think that a member of the laity can?

Personally, I think that an innovative mass is acceptable as long as the Historically Catholic mass is offered as well. But when we accept the innovations by finding a loophole, all masses become innovative and we lose our history.

 

[Shellie]

… or shorkling for the Our Father,.

What is shorkling? Thanks.

 

[netmilsmom]

What is shorkling? Thanks.

Small, short bows over and over.