Hand "Posture"

  • Thread starter Thread starter Pariah_Pirana
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I posted a link to a speech by Cardinal Arinze on Liturgical Norms and Liturgical Piety in this thread.

It speaks to these issues rather well.
 
40.png
OhioBob:
I posted a link to a speech by Cardinal Arinze on Liturgical Norms and Liturgical Piety in this thread.

It speaks to these issues rather well.
Click to expand...
Thanks Bob!
(please check your mail in a minute)
 
Lets take each case.
Code: 
          **Our Father**. The intention for lay people using the Orans position at           this time is, I suppose, that we pray ***Our*** Father, and the unity           of people and priest together is expressed by this common gesture of prayer. Although this           gesture is not called for in the rubrics, it does at least seem, on the surface, to ***not***           be in conflict with the sacramental sign system at the point when we pray ***Our***           Father. I say on the surface, however, since while lay people are doing this the deacon,           whose postures ***are*** governed by the rubrics, may not do it. So,           we have the awkward disunity created by the priest making an appropriate liturgical           gesture *in accordance with the rubrics*, the deacon ***not***           making the same gesture *in accordance with the rubrics*, ***some***           laity making the same gesture as the priest ***not** in accordance with           the rubrics*, and other laity not making the gesture (for various reasons, including           knowing it is not part of their liturgical role). In the end, the desire of the Church for           liturgical unity is           defeated.

        **After Our Father**. This liturgical disunity continues after the Our           Father when some, though not all, who assumed the Orans position during the Our Father           continue it through the balance of the prayers, until after "For thine is the          kingdom etc." The rubrics provide that priest-concelebrants lower their extended hands, so           that the main celebrant alone continues praying with hands extended, since he represents           all, including his brother priests. So, we have the very anomalous situation that no           matter how many clergy are present only one of them is praying with hands extended,           accompanied by numbers of the laity.

        So, while we shouldn't attribute bad will to those who honestly have felt that there           was some virtue in doing this during the Mass, it is yet another case where good will can           achieve the opposite of what it intends when not imbued with the truth, in this case the           truth about the sacramental nature of the postures at Mass and their meaning.
 
40.png
ddimitro:
The hands posture has already been definitively settled by The Congregation for Divine Worship:

–It is an inappropriate “sign” at every moment of the Mass
–It has been introduced on personal initiative

Thus, to do it or encourage others to do it is disobedient to the Holy See. Now, since every one reading this has the knowledge part, exercising your free will by engaging in or continuing to use this posture at any time in public worship is committing sin.

ewtn.com/expert/expertfaqframe.asp?source=/vexperts/conference.htm
Click to expand...
The EWTN article is incomplete and probably incorrect. They quote no GIRM ban whatsoever but give their own rationale. Help me understand when EWTN, as good and helpful as it is, has become the Vatican?

Dan L
 
To me, the Orans posture is a case of antiquarianism. Since the early Church did it that way (and the “bad” medieval Church didn’t) it’s the right way to go. I think the position should be reserved for the ordained Priests alone. It blurs the line between the ordained and unordained. The laity have a special charism that Priests don’t have, and vice versa. The individual and respective charisms form the Priesthood of all the people… they should not overlap each other.
 
40.png
GregoryPalamas:
The EWTN article is incomplete and probably incorrect. They quote no GIRM ban whatsoever but give their own rationale. Help me understand when EWTN, as good and helpful as it is, has become the Vatican?

Dan L
Click to expand...
Says you.

It’s the stongest and most complete argument I have seen on the subject – from either side…

What can you offer other than personal conjecture?
 
40.png
GregoryPalamas:
The EWTN article is incomplete and probably incorrect. They quote no GIRM ban whatsoever but give their own rationale. Help me understand when EWTN, as good and helpful as it is, has become the Vatican?

Dan L
Click to expand...
Dan, these threads always come around to this sentiment - “the GIRM doesn’t come out and say not to do it, so what’s wrong with it?”. Just because the GIRM doesn’t ban something doesn’t mean it is acceptable. The whole point is that the mass is not subject to local innovation, personal adaptation or modification due to community desire. There are plenty of church documents to that effect.
 
Once heard a priest say to someone asking these things, that our ‘disposition’ at Mass should be that “of Mary at the foot of the cross”.

Good advice, since the last I heard the Mass is the “sacrifice of calvary” not a community supper.

Now disposition is more attitude, but also includes posture. The first time I ever observed the orans position at mass was during the start of the charismatics in the 70’s and the handholding soon followed. Makes me feel like I’m at summer camp singing Kumbaya… Not like I’m worshipping Our Lord at the foot of the cross.
 
Pariah Pirana said:
Says you.

It’s the stongest and most complete argument I have seen on the subject – from either side…

What can you offer other than personal conjecture?
Click to expand...

That’s all EWTN offers.

BTW I have nothing against the Church of the Middle Ages. What does trouble me is the penchant for some to make some issue out of nothing. We have a world going to hell, Europe losing its Christian heritage, some here want to bellyache about people who don’t demonstrate their piety in precisely the way they think it should be demonstrated.

Dan L
 
40.png
sconea:
Once heard a priest say to someone asking these things, that our ‘disposition’ at Mass should be that “of Mary at the foot of the cross”.

Good advice, since the last I heard the Mass is the “sacrifice of calvary” not a community supper.

.
Click to expand...
Good advice. I will follow it to the letter. Since Mary prays holding hands up I will too. Thanks for sharing the advice.

Dan L
 
40.png
GregoryPalamas:
Good advice. I will follow it to the letter. Since Mary prays holding hands up I will too. Thanks for sharing the advice.

Dan L
Click to expand...
Dan,
I think the problem is that people are talking apples and oranges.
The Orans is traditional in your liturgy. It is an innovation in ours. You, my dear friend are extremely pious. Your motivation is to praise God.
In our liturgy, the problem with the Orans is that it seems to be the beginning of other innovations.
I agree, at the feet of Mary, doing the Orans is appropriate. I would myself be begging for her prayers and asking her to grant me a glance, just that way.

Sta
 
40.png
GregoryPalamas:
The EWTN article is incomplete and probably incorrect. They quote no GIRM ban whatsoever but give their own rationale. Help me understand when EWTN, as good and helpful as it is, has become the Vatican?

Dan L
Click to expand...
So using your “rationale” I am free to BBQ in the baptistery during the Mass because it is not specifically unauthorized per the GIRM? You gotta be kidding…
 
40.png
rcn:
Ah, so now you once again put yourself in the position of Lord Arbiter Of What Is Proper. And anyone who doesn’t march in lock-step with you is dismissed as a progressive bubblegum-chewer. How’s the view from up there on the Mount?

The servers in my parish have adopted the hand posture discussed here, and several other things that are supposedly “pious”. It comes off looking very very phony - a contest to see who can bow first and deepest, whose hands are pointed the highest. I wouldn’t care if they held their hands at their sides, if only they would stop trying so obviously to draw attention to themselves.

“Piety” is simply not measured this way.
Click to expand...
Amen!

Some people can’t tell the difference between pious and pietistic…

Oh, and by the way, this is introducing a non-liturgical posture into the Mass (I think the word that gets bandied about is “abuse”), as it is not a posture dictated by the GIRM. But then, that wouldn’t matter, since it made them feel pious…

Amazing how the conservatives parrot the liberals without even being aware of it…
 
netmil(name removed by moderator):
Do you have references for any of the above?
My Wiccan Nephew-in-law says the Orans position was taken from them.
Click to expand...
If you Wiccan nephew in law said that incense was taken from them, would you believe hime?
 
40.png
msproule:
True, but to whom was this comment and accompanying Scripture passage addressed? You were unclear in this regard.

Despite not being specified in the title, the context of this thread is prayer during Mass.

Mass is public prayer, is it not?
Click to expand...
Do you really have that hard a time understanding a passage from the Bible? So was prayer in the synogogues.

Christ wasn’t talking about public prayer in general. He was talking about prideful showing of public prayer - those who made a point of showing how “holy” they were.

Read it again.
 
I would like to see the answer to just one question.

Wiccan has been mentioned, palms flat to flat is said to be more humble and pius, etc, etc etc.

Many of you criticise the oran hand posture. If it is so bad, …

WHY DO THE PRIESTS, BISHOPS AND THE HOLY FATHER DO IT???

Really wiccan? pagan?

It is truly Catholic.

That is why they do it.
 
40.png
sconea:
Once heard a priest say to someone asking these things, that our ‘disposition’ at Mass should be that “of Mary at the foot of the cross”.

Good advice, since the last I heard the Mass is the “sacrifice of calvary” not a community supper.

Now disposition is more attitude, but also includes posture. The first time I ever observed the orans position at mass was during the start of the charismatics in the 70’s and the handholding soon followed. Makes me feel like I’m at summer camp singing Kumbaya… Not like I’m worshipping Our Lord at the foot of the cross.
Click to expand...
While it is not a community supper, it most certainly is a sacred meal - or you have been selectively reading what the Church says about the Eucharist.
 
40.png
robertaf:
I would like to see the answer to just one question.

Wiccan has been mentioned, palms flat to flat is said to be more humble and pius, etc, etc etc.

Many of you criticise the oran hand posture. If it is so bad, …

WHY DO THE PRIESTS, BISHOPS AND THE HOLY FATHER DO IT???

Really wiccan? pagan?

It is truly Catholic.

That is why they do it.
Click to expand...
Because they are ordained??? I thought the criticism of the orans position was directed at laymen who do it??? Or did I miss something.

Personally, I don’t care what people do with their hands. Just as long as they don’t use them to attempt to grab mine. :tsktsk: Some Catholics need a good mother to teach them to keep their hands to themselves. Maybe I’ll start carrying a wood ruler to Mass and rapping some knuckles if people get grabby with me. :yup:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top