S
slewi
Guest
Funny, but prior to Vatican II we never had problems like these…
- Status
O
OhioBob
Guest
Let me preface this by saying that I personally don’t care for praying in the orans. Our Bishop directed us in our diocese to pray in the orans during the Lords prayer. So I do it. I don’t feel comfortable in that position, but I’ve done it now when at mass in the diocese for over a year. It hasn’t grown on me and probably never will, but I try to be obedient nonetheless.
Now to your post…
stjosephtomasi:
During the embolism the GIRM says something like “the priest prays with hands extended and then together”. So which is it? I’ve been to churches where the priest prays the orans from the words “Our Father” all the way to the end of the doxology. I’ve been to others where he joins his hands together somewhere in between (around the “wait in joyful hope”). As much as you might wish it were so, the GIRM doesn’t even prescribe every jot and tittle for the priest.
I agree with the others who said basically that the laity assumes some type of posture during every moment of the mass. Some of those are prescribed, many are not. I kneel with my hands folded. Sometimes. Sometimes I kneel with my hands in front of my face. Embarassingly, sometimes I kneel with my hind end against the pew (when the knees are particularly sore). So how am I supposed to kneel? The GIRM doesn’t prescribe it and I doubt anyone cares how I do it.
I feel similarly about the orans. If someone wants to pray the Lord’s prayer in the orans, go for it. Just don’t make me do it too (unless you’re my Bishop).
Unless and until something definitive is issued on the subject, it seems to be the most hotly-debated non-issue out there. And in my opinion, it generates far to much animosity among well-meaning Catholics.
Now to your post…
Actually, “everything” is not prescribed. It might be somewhat so for the priest celebrant and occasionally is for the laity, but not everything. And in this particular case, not the posture during the Lord’s prayer.
During the embolism the GIRM says something like “the priest prays with hands extended and then together”. So which is it? I’ve been to churches where the priest prays the orans from the words “Our Father” all the way to the end of the doxology. I’ve been to others where he joins his hands together somewhere in between (around the “wait in joyful hope”). As much as you might wish it were so, the GIRM doesn’t even prescribe every jot and tittle for the priest.
I agree with the others who said basically that the laity assumes some type of posture during every moment of the mass. Some of those are prescribed, many are not. I kneel with my hands folded. Sometimes. Sometimes I kneel with my hands in front of my face. Embarassingly, sometimes I kneel with my hind end against the pew (when the knees are particularly sore). So how am I supposed to kneel? The GIRM doesn’t prescribe it and I doubt anyone cares how I do it.
I feel similarly about the orans. If someone wants to pray the Lord’s prayer in the orans, go for it. Just don’t make me do it too (unless you’re my Bishop).
Unless and until something definitive is issued on the subject, it seems to be the most hotly-debated non-issue out there. And in my opinion, it generates far to much animosity among well-meaning Catholics.
T
teddyruxpin
Guest
It seems the lack of an ‘official document’ has been brought up a bit much, but reading the USCCB page on the matter of posture seems quite clear:
“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.”
If one hasn’t already made up one’s mind that is…
“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.”
If one hasn’t already made up one’s mind that is…
O
OhioBob
Guest
Sure it’s clear - on postures that have been established as common postures and gestures, i.e., Standing, kneeling, sitting, bowing, signing, etc. This citation has no bearing on situations where no common posture has been established.
I stand with my hands together sometimes, sometimes on the pew, sometimes at my sides, eyes closed, eyes open, etc. etc. etc. We are constantly in a “posture”, but only some of those situations are prescribed. And yes, in those cases, that commonality has meaning and should not be changed to suit our personal opinions.
T
teddyruxpin
Guest
Nevermind, it’s clear that you want to make the Mass about you, not about ‘us’. Your legalism in reading that makes it clear you missed the ultimate point of the document-- the Mass isn’t about you. This is the classic Protestant error, about which I am a fair bit knowledgeable…
N
ncjohn
Guest
It seems odd that you quote the USCCB website, then attack someone else as “legalistic” who rightly defends what the USCCB says here: nccbuscc.org/liturgy/q&a/mass/orans.shtml
USCCB Statement:
Is only one person who looks at the website and interprets what it says a “legalist”? It makes it sound like it’s really about *you * and your preferences and that everyone should get in line behind those or they are a “legalist” for finding their closeness to God in some other form.
Maybe I’m missing something, but if your argument is really toward “unity” and the bishop has directed the use of the orans for all, how does that make someone who follows that direction so everyone is doing the same exact thing worthy of criticism?
If the Mass is truly about bringing us together as community to give praise to God, there has to be some lattitude for individuals to do so in a way they feel comfortable and close to God; otherwise we become mindless robots and lose our focus. I just quite frankly can’t imagine God inviting us all over for a “family dinner” and then demanding that each of us pick up the same utensil at the same time and chew the same size piece of food the same number of times all in lockstep. We would all eat the same course at any given time, but whether we ate our peas with a spoon or a fork or whether we ate with our right or left hand wouldn’t be important. In the same way, unity in our prayer and basic postures (sit, stand, kneel) during Mass is important, and as such is prescribed. How we hold our hands at every minute really isn’t and is only important, IMHO, to those who are distracted enough to notice and care. Quite frankly, that goes to a different issue altogether and resonates with “if you have something against your brother, go reconcile yourself first, then come and offer your gifts.”
I agree with Bob that we need to find a way to stop letting this non-issue divide our prayerful, loving Catholic family. We are a big motley crew in this wonderful church of ours and we need to give each other some latitude in charity.
Peace,
S
stjosephtomasi
Guest
John
you speak of charity, but your comments to me were not very charitable.
I did not accuse anyone of disobedience. I simply re-printed instructions from the Vatican and indicated that they were quite clear.
If you’re waiting for Benedict XVI to make a ruling on this, then you’ll likely wait in vain.
One more question: If I wanted to lie prostrate on the floor during the Our Father, would that be OK with you?
you speak of charity, but your comments to me were not very charitable.
I did not accuse anyone of disobedience. I simply re-printed instructions from the Vatican and indicated that they were quite clear.
If you’re waiting for Benedict XVI to make a ruling on this, then you’ll likely wait in vain.
One more question: If I wanted to lie prostrate on the floor during the Our Father, would that be OK with you?
J
jbuck919
Guest
When I was in college in the early 70s I attended daily Mass whenever possible. When I was home visiting my parents, I went back to my parish of upbringing. Of course, I was an enthusiastic novus ordinarian who still had not reconciled himself to the huge aesthetic (if not otherwise) abuses that were entrenched in the newer way of doing things. I actually found daily Mass a comfort because it allowed for fewer abuses since there were fewer things to be abused, such as the music.
Anyway, I was unpleasantly surprised to discover that the old ladies (well, that’s what they were) standing near me only exchanged the sign of peace with the greatest reluctance.
Years later, having grown uncomfortable with an informal exchange of fellowship with (often) strangers in the context of as pivotal point in the liturgy myself, I understand where they were coming from. They were used to a meditative, reverent, and ritualistic celebration to which they were devoted, and suddenly that had been ripped from them by a forced intimacy.
I feel the same way about enforced joinng of hands in prayer, which fortunately I have only had to do in non-Catholic but Christian contexts. The origin of the passing of the peace was preserved in the monastic life, where it is ritualized and highly symbolic. (The young curate at my parish who first demonstrated it to us actually did it right, though he did use a handshake.) It is a hierarchical passing, symbolized by a ritual (not real) embrace. The peace comes from Christ through the priest acting as his agent, and then descends in order through the congregation. It is not something one confers on one’s neighbor with a handshake and a howdy-do. All enforced familiarity in worship, and that includes emphatically hand-holding, is distracting.
BTW I live for the time being in Germany and while they do not omit the invitation to the passing, it is widely ignored or minimized because people have a greater sense of privacy here.
Anyway, I was unpleasantly surprised to discover that the old ladies (well, that’s what they were) standing near me only exchanged the sign of peace with the greatest reluctance.
Years later, having grown uncomfortable with an informal exchange of fellowship with (often) strangers in the context of as pivotal point in the liturgy myself, I understand where they were coming from. They were used to a meditative, reverent, and ritualistic celebration to which they were devoted, and suddenly that had been ripped from them by a forced intimacy.
I feel the same way about enforced joinng of hands in prayer, which fortunately I have only had to do in non-Catholic but Christian contexts. The origin of the passing of the peace was preserved in the monastic life, where it is ritualized and highly symbolic. (The young curate at my parish who first demonstrated it to us actually did it right, though he did use a handshake.) It is a hierarchical passing, symbolized by a ritual (not real) embrace. The peace comes from Christ through the priest acting as his agent, and then descends in order through the congregation. It is not something one confers on one’s neighbor with a handshake and a howdy-do. All enforced familiarity in worship, and that includes emphatically hand-holding, is distracting.
BTW I live for the time being in Germany and while they do not omit the invitation to the passing, it is widely ignored or minimized because people have a greater sense of privacy here.
O
OhioBob
Guest
Easy there, teddy. I never said the Mass was about me, and if you had read this or the countless other threads that have been posted on this topic in the past you would know that such a thought is the furthest thing from my mind. So spare me the attitude. The Mass isn’t about you either.
Never having been a Protestant, I wouldn’t know.
O
OhioBob
Guest
During a Mass, no, considering that the GIRM is prescriptive in that regard (GIRM 43) requiring the congregation to stand during the Lord’s Prayer.
Now if you just wanted to pray the Lord’s prayer prostrate outside of Mass, that would be peachy. We could vacuum around you.
O
OhioBob
Guest
I agree with you completely regarding congregational hand-holding. My points were related ONLY to the use of the orans during the Lord’s Prayer.
N
ncjohn
Guest
Actually Bill, you did accuse us of disobedience, both directly and implicitly. Directly here
and indirectly here and in your first post
I apologize if I seemed uncharitable, which I might have been a little bit. I have to chalk it up to great frustration at continually being referred to as disobedient and having irrelevant and misinterpreted passages cited.
As to your “lying prostrate” example, as well as many of the others that have been posed in these threads, I will again recommend that you go back and read some of these exchanges. Trying to equate some illogical and impractical new practice, which would quickly be repudiated, with an established practice that has been around for decades without the Church repudiating it, just doesn’t hold up. There are avenues for addressing what one perceives as abuses and if juggling or picking one’s nose was attempted as a congregation (yeah, that’s gonna happen!) one would simply address it to the appropriate authorities who would handle it appropriately. That is specifically why the practices under discussion can’t be considered disobedient or not permitted. They have been around for decades and have been questioned repeatedly and the Church has declined to find a problem. By the way, as I’m sure you’re aware, what you do spontaneously as an individual is not covered by any of this. If you were to lie prostrate, your priest would likely take you aside discreetly to address it, but there is no mechanism to “prevent” someone from doing something unusual. Now if you want to try to coerces someone else into following your lead, that would be a different scenario.
As you note yourself, if one is going to wait for the Pope to address it, we will wait a long time. Why would that be? Is he not aware of the issue? Is he “afraid” to address problems? Does he not have the authority? The answer to all of these of course is “no”. What that says, at least to me, is that there is not concensus that this is a problem and there is not a need to address it.
Again, I apologize if I have been uncharitable as it is my constant goal to offend no one. It would be good though if we spent a little less time “straining gnats” and a little more time promoting actual charity among our brethren.
Peace,
O
otm
Guest
To begin with, the laity do not have hosts in their hands, so there is nothing to hold up. And no, I am not confused. I am simply saying that the referenced material was to the priest of bishop, not the laity. As is noted after your post, there is only a bit of information given to the laity as to their postures, essentially as to sitting, standing, kneeling, or bowing. I may have missed something the last time I read the GIRM, but I don’t recall any directions at all as to where one’s hands are to be or in what position at any point of the Mass.
If you were to accept your arguement, then you would have to extend it to any directions given to the priest of bishop - which includes hands folded - as “proper” to them. At which point you have just put yourself in a box that would not allow you to put your hands palms together, as that is not “proper” to the priest or bishop. I suspect that you don’t want to go there, but you are the one referencing the definition of “proper” as being any direction of the priest or bishop’s posture in the GIRM, and especially as it relates to his hands.
Again, it doesn’t tell you to fold your hands. As to eating ice cream, most of us would agree that act has no religious connotations; most of us would agree that hnads held palms together, and in the orans position generally are a sign of prayer (whether for laity or not). Eating ice cream is a red herring, just as most of the other suggestions of actions or postures that have no connection to prayer are red herrings.
However, you are equating unity with uniformity. I am not convinced that the two words are completely synonomous. Further, if the majority are, for example, holding hands, and a few are not, who is it that is being devisive?
Frankly, I have little or nothing invested in either holding hands or the orans posture; I can take it or leave it. I have not encountered anyone who has tried to force the issue of holding hands (although I will accept that others have), and that is a clear violation of charity. But the amount of heat and even anger that some have to others holding hands (or the orans posture), and the arguements they make, are a never ending source of amazement and amusement to me.
O
otm
Guest
No, actually, there is almost nothing prescribed as to what the laity is to do with their hands.
A little bit of history: I have a picture of a group of Catholics at a Mass in somewhere between September 1964 and June of 1966 holding hands during the Our Father. I seriously doubt this was an isolated incident, although I would agree that the practice was not as wide spread and prevalent as it is now.
Subsequent to that the practice spread; people wrote their bishops, people wrote to Rome, and the uproar has been ongoing ever since by those who dislike the practice.
Subsequent to that the GIRM has been issued twice (that is, two revisions since the practice started) and it would take more gullibility than I can muster to believe that Rome has not been thoroughly and completely apprised of the practice.
Twice Rome has not addressed the issue in the GIRM, nor through any other documents which have addressed various rubrics or abuses of the rubrics. That is about a span of 40 years, or two generations.
To say that everything is prescribed in the Liturgy is to fly in the face of that historical evidence. As a matter of fact, the silence has been deafening.
To which, for the majority of what you say, you and I do not disagree. I am all for reverence. You may find that the orans posture, or holding hands during the Our Father is not a sign of reverence, and on that we would disagree.
I have no use for “fly by the seat of the pants” rubrics. I do not care to have any abuse of the rubrics, but perhaps I can see that there are levels of “abuse” where others can’t. Some of it I would find intollerable (e.g. a woman reading the Gospel, or giving the homily, or playing fast and cute with the Eucharistic Prayer), and others of a lesser nature I would ignore.
I guess the best way to say it is that I can put up with some issues a whole lot easier than others, such as women going through mock ordination ceremonies, or priests breaking heir vows of chastity, or worse, doing it with minors, or Hindus whacking Christians because they converted, or abortion, or adultery… holding hands in the orans posture just doesn’t make the radar screen. I have been called anal retentive, but that one just doesn’t get me cranked up.
I have a number of relatives who have left the Church. Believe me, I would praise God long and loud if I could see them in Mass in the orans posture during the Our Father; they aren’t there at all.
It is all a matter of perspective.
N
needmorelight
Guest
Amazing. Are you implying that I’m being disobedient to the church? Have you not read what I posted before? Our bishops, when asked directly, DID NOT prohibit holding hands during the Our Father. Since they didn’t mention anything about the orans, common sense tells me that they also DO NOT prohibit the orans posture. Even the Holy See granted the Italian bishop’s request to allow the laity to adopt this posture during the Our Father!
What do I do? Sometimes I hold out my hands, sometimes I don’t. Since the Philippine bishops **did not explicitly state ** that such postures are forbidden how are we being disobedient? I do not want to distract myself from praying the Our Father with all my mind and heart by thinking whether I or my fellow parishioners have the “right” posture of prayer.
If your American bishops told you not to hold hands or use the orans then by all means obey them. I, however, will continue to trust that our bishops will give sound advice on this matter as they see fit.
Peace.
S
stjosephtomasi
Guest
To: Need More Light
I am NOT saying you are being disobedient.
But I would ask you to read the text below and then indicate whether obedience means listening to your bishops in the case:
Even a bishop does not have the authority to change the postures of the people. The gestures and posture of the faithful require a decision by the Conference of Bishops and the approval of the Apostolic See (General Instruction on the Roman Missal #390).
**
How much clearer can the Vatican be on the issue of posture?
**
I am NOT saying you are being disobedient.
But I would ask you to read the text below and then indicate whether obedience means listening to your bishops in the case:
Even a bishop does not have the authority to change the postures of the people. The gestures and posture of the faithful require a decision by the Conference of Bishops and the approval of the Apostolic See (General Instruction on the Roman Missal #390).
**
How much clearer can the Vatican be on the issue of posture?
**
N
ncjohn
Guest
They could be clear enough to issue something that says what the posture should be if they want something specific.
The bishops are not changing anything as there is nothing to change since there is nothing specified. Allowing, or not prohibiting something that is being done and which the Church has not said to not do is not changing anything. Additionally, as I’ve posted a couple times on this thread alone, the Conference of Bishops has explicitly stated that there is no prescribed posture during the Our Father. How much simpler could that be???
If you can come up with an authoritative document that says “do not hold hands” there would be something to discuss. Everything you’ve presented so far is just your interpretation of documents that disagrees with the evidence of about 40 years of practice and the simple fact that Redemptionis Sacramentum, specifically written to deal with liturgical abuses, specifically does NOT address this issue.
In light of that and 40 years of the Church not objecting to the issue, it will take something authoritative to change it.
Peace,
N
needmorelight
Guest
Care to explain to me then what you meant by the last sentences on your recent post to me? You’re saying I’m not disobedient but then you ask me if I should follow my bishops?
Of course you’re saying I’m being disobedient, maybe not to my bishops, but to the Vatican.Let me ask you how clearer the Vatican could be on the issue of the orans considering that they allowed the laity in Italy to use this posture. You can quote passages of documents 'til you’re blue in the face but it’s pretty clear that not one specifically addresses the issue of holding hands or the orans during the Our Father, as DeaconEd, ncjohn, and otm have been pointing out. I thought ncjohn and I have made it clear that both the bishops conference in the US and in the Philippines NEITHER prohibited NOR prescribed a prayer posture during the Our Father.
Since I don’t claim to know what the Vatican really thinks about this, I would rather trust the judgment of our bishops, who have deliberated this matter among themselves, than you. Like I said, I prefer not to distract myself in the Mass by worrying over whether I or my fellow parishioners have the “proper” prayer posture.
I’m done with this thread. I think ncjohn and otm expressed my thoughts about this issue a lot better than I ever will.
P
pnewton
Guest
ncjohn said:
Yeah, that was kind of a “duh” statement. I could be more clear with one sentence, so I am sure the Vatican has people equally capable. The mere length of this thread shows that clarity is lacking.
T
Teelynn
Guest
I can understand keeping central parts of the Mass in tact and liturgically correct, however, if this is done out of unity and glory and honor for the Lord, holding up our hearts to Him together, I don’t see that it can be anything but pure worship for the Lord.
I probably should not be putting in my 2 cents as I do not have the theological expertise as most who have replied in this post, but as simple as this sounds, is Jesus really that offended if we hold hands up in praise for Him during the Our Father in the context of the Mass? Personally, I don’t think so.
As far as “we might as well be hanging from chandeliers” or some of the other ridiculous analogies I have read from some of the posts, holding hands in praise and unity for the Lord is in no way disrespectful or out of line…nor do I think it is liturgically out of line.
I am wondering what Holy Mass looked like in the days of it’s beginning? Am wondering if the Lord God was offended then because the clergy and/or laity might have been not liturgically in tune with what He wanted or expected?
Just my 2 cents that you all could probably have done without.
Blessings,
Teelynn
I probably should not be putting in my 2 cents as I do not have the theological expertise as most who have replied in this post, but as simple as this sounds, is Jesus really that offended if we hold hands up in praise for Him during the Our Father in the context of the Mass? Personally, I don’t think so.
As far as “we might as well be hanging from chandeliers” or some of the other ridiculous analogies I have read from some of the posts, holding hands in praise and unity for the Lord is in no way disrespectful or out of line…nor do I think it is liturgically out of line.
I am wondering what Holy Mass looked like in the days of it’s beginning? Am wondering if the Lord God was offended then because the clergy and/or laity might have been not liturgically in tune with what He wanted or expected?
Just my 2 cents that you all could probably have done without.
Blessings,
Teelynn
- Status