Mandated orans posture

[Deacon_Ed]

crule:

We do not do it at our parish - and I spoke with a priest friend of mine in Eastern Pennsylvania who replied that he has attended liturgies in 3 of the 4 eparchies and assured me that it was not the norm.

Since Fr Deacon Ed is from California, maybe it’s an isolated event at a few Van Nuys Eparchy parishes.

I have to admit my attendance at Ruthenian parishes has been limited to California. On the other hand, my attendance at Melkite parishes has spanned the country and, in theory, we are all to be following the same basic liturgical praxis. The Ruthenian Recension is different from that of the Melkite only in a few matters, notably in the number of times the pope is commemorated. I have also attended liturgy with the Romanians and they, too, use the orans position for the Lord’s Prayer (but, then again, Bishop John Michael was trained by the Melkites).

Deacon Ed

 

[Deacon_Ed]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

I haven’t found the folding hands yet. Perhaps you can point me.

From here…usccb.org/liturgy/current/chapter4.shtml#sect4

Perhaps everyone here should understand how the GIRM works. It will only say what you should do, not what you should not. If a posture is never mentioned for the laity, it is not for the laity. And also understand there are many other documents. Quoting the GIRM is one of many.

The actual expression is “hands joined” and you will not find that posture specified for the people, only for the priest. I generally do not use the section of the GIRM that is broken into chapters but, rather, the PDF version of the GIRM which allows me to search the entire document.

However, you are correct that the GIRM generally specifies what is to be done, not what is not to be done. But you have then gone beyond what is correct in your assertion: “If a posture is never mentioned for the laity, it is not for the laity” because, as I said, the posture of praying with “hands joined” is never mentioned for the laity.

You are also applying an American legalistic understanding of law to litugical law. American law is always understood in the “most restrictive sense” while Roman law (both canon and liturgical) is always understood in the least restrictive sense. So, in general, what is not prohibited is permitted.

Deacon Ed

 

[netmilsmom]

Deacon Ed:

The actual expression is “hands joined” and you will not find that posture specified for the people, only for the priest. I generally do not use the section of the GIRM that is broken into chapters but, rather, the PDF version of the GIRM which allows me to search the entire document.

However, you are correct that the GIRM generally specifies what is to be done, not what is not to be done. But you have then gone beyond what is correct in your assertion: “If a posture is never mentioned for the laity, it is not for the laity” because, as I said, the posture of praying with “hands joined” is never mentioned for the laity.

You are also applying an American legalistic understanding of law to litugical law. American law is always understood in the “most restrictive sense” while Roman law (both canon and liturgical) is always understood in the least restrictive sense. So, in general, what is not prohibited is permitted.

Deacon Ed

““Neither may . . . non-ordained members of the faithful use gestures or actions which are proper to the . . . priest celebrant” (ICP, Practical Provisions 6 §2).”

It is going to take me time as my computer crashed and I lost my bookmarks, but at one time I did have a link to a Vatican document that does give instructions to the laity to “fold hands”. It’s going to take me time
However, one would be hard pressed to find one that instructs the laity to do the Orans in mass. Give me one and I will be surprised.
To say that the Church law is least restrictive, is not what I have heard from a Bishop who worked on the GIRM. I would suspect that this is the opinion of those who would like to push the envelope.

So what isn’t allowed? Only those thing specifically stated not to be, correct?
That opens a can of worms.

 

[Deacon_Ed]

"“Neither may . . . non-ordained members of the faithful use gestures or actions which are proper to the . . . priest celebrant” (ICP, Practical Provisions 6 §2)."

It is going to take me time as my computer crashed and I lost my bookmarks, but at one time I did have a link to a Vatican document that does give instructions to the laity to “fold hands”. It’s going to take me time
However, one would be hard pressed to find one that instructs the laity to do the Orans in mass. Give me one and I will be surprised.
To say that the Church law is least restrictive, is not what I have heard from a Bishop who worked on the GIRM. I would suspect that this is the opinion of those who would like to push the envelope.

So what isn’t allowed? Only those thing specifically stated not to be, correct?
That opens a can of worms.

You seem to be getting a bit snipy in your posts.

No, there are general guidelines for liturgy that set some limits on what is and what is not acceptable.

You seem to still be of the opinion that anything that is presecribed for the clergy and not for the laity means that that posture is forbidden to the laity. This is not the correct way to read documents from Rome. Please, feel free to ask your bishop if this is not the case.

The Adoremus site has a discussion on the use of the orans position and concludes that it is not prohibited, not supported, just not mentioned. You will find opinions on both sides of this and the reason is that it is not prohibited nor is it supported. You are, of course, welcome to decide for yourself what posture you will take, but it seems uncharitable (at best) to tell others they are wrong when the Church herself does not do so.

Deacon Ed

 

[PJR]

Deacon Ed:

It derives from the ancient Jewish posture for petitional prayer. It is also consistent with our understanding the Lord’s Prayer which, unfortunately, we mistranslate. The Aramaic word Abba is normally translated in Scripture as “Father” but, in fact, it’s the familial familiar and should be translated as “Daddy.” The “lifting up of our hands” is a petition to the Father: “pick me up, Daddy!”

In virtually every theological discussion of prayer we talk about “raising our hearts and minds to God” and the orans position reflects that understanding.

For Byzantine Catholics the posture for prayer of repentence is that most commonly associated with Muslims – forhead on the floor and hind-quarters raised up. The Muslims actually got that posture from us! This is the “great metany” (from the Greek metanoia meaning conversion or change of heart) and it is seen most commonly during Great Lent at the Prayer of St. Ephrem the Syrian (a deacon).

Deacon Ed

Deacon Ed, Thanks for this it is a beautiful explanation of these traditions. I guess they are not innovations after all.

I heard Marcus Grodi discussing this topic on the radio. He says that in his diocese in Ohio the Bishop is encouraging the orans posture for the Pater Noster, because it is appropriate historically and symbolically as you have so nicely explained, AND because it is a more desirable alternative to holding hands-which of course has everyone in a tizzy.

As you noted in another post many people have opinions about these postures and it would be so easy for those of us seeking knowledge to confuse opinions-learned or not-with law. I wonder if the Bishops ever get together and vent about all the experts on the these websites and forums who all claim to know as much-if not more- than they do. Or at least if they don’t outright claim to know more, are quick to advise how they should run their dioceses. I’m being charitable, because quite often they are called outright heretics basically.

I won’t get too much off topic here, but I think a discussion of the Catholic apologetics “phenomenon” for lack of a better word, would be an interesting thread. It has fueled many of us to study and grow in our faith surely, and has sparked an interest in Church teaching, but I think it has also produced a kind of magesterial laity. Written opinions of the well known apologists are produced like Biblical proof texts that often trump the Bishops. I’ll quit venting now, I’m sorry.

Thanks again for the interesting information. Paula

 

[Searching13]

Deacon Ed & Paula,

Thanks for some much needed clarification and charity, both in content and attitude.

 

[muledog]

I found this interesting tidbit from the official website (dioceseofbaker.org/Servant%20of%20Sacred%20Liturgy.htm) of the Diocese of Baker (Bishop Vasa, Ordinary):

ORANS POSTURE: The prayer-posture of the priest, who prays with hands extended at various times during the Mass. The practice of lay people using this gesture during the Our Father is not found in the approved liturgical texts. GIRM 42

OUR FATHER, THE LORD’S PRAYER: No gesture is specified for the people during the Our Father (Pater Noster). The Holy See stated that holding hands at Mass: “is a liturgical gesture introduced spontaneously but on a personal initiative; it is not in the rubrics.” While this practice is common, it is not to be imposed on anyone. The celebrant is not to join hands with the other ministers or the congregation and is not to invite the congregation to join hands. No one should ever be forced to engage in this practice. Likewise, the so-called “orans” posture, praying with hands extended, is the priestly gesture during this prayer and is not recommended for the congregation. GIRM 42, CIC 838, SC 22 §1 and Notitiae II (1975) 226

My understanding has always been that the orans posture is a priestly one that is used by the celebrant when praying to God on behalf of the congregation (Collect, Our Father, parts of the Eucharistic Prayer, and other presidential prayers).

The priest initially used the orans posture at the Our Father when praying on behalf of the congregation. Remember, prior to Vatican II, the priest alone prayed the Our Father. The congregation only responsed with “but deliver us from evil.”

But when this changed after 1960, the rubric for the priestly gesture remained. Theoretically, the orans rubric should’ve been removed, but it wasn’t.

I believe that when the laity mimic the gestures traditionally used by the priest alone, they blur the lines between the two.

The following quotes from the current General Instruction of the Roman Missal might come in handy.
GIRM:

Among the parts assigned to the priest, the foremost is the Eucharistic Prayer, which is the high point of the entire celebration. Next are the orations: that is to say, the collect, the prayer over the offerings, and the prayer after Communion. These prayers are addressed to God in the name of the entire holy people and all present, by the priest who presides over the assembly in the person of Christ.43 It is with good reason, therefore, that they are called the “presidential prayers.”
GIRM:

The gestures and posture of the priest, the deacon, and the ministers, as well as those of the people, ought to contribute to making the entire celebration resplendent with beauty and noble simplicity, so that the true and full meaning of the different parts of the celebration is evident and that the participation of all is fostered.52 Therefore, attention should be paid to what is determined by this General Instruction and the traditional practice of the Roman Rite and to what serves the common spiritual good of the People of God, rather than private inclination or arbitrary choice.

According to the 1997 document Ecclesiae de Mysterio, which was signed by 7 different dicasteries of the Holy See,
EM:

To promote the proper identity (of various roles) in this area, those abuses which are contrary to the provisions of canon 907 are to be eradicated. In eucharistic celebrations deacons and non-ordained members of the faithful may not pronounce prayers — e.g. especially the eucharistic prayer, with its concluding doxology — or any other parts of the liturgy reserved to the celebrant priest. Neither may deacons or non-ordained members of the faithful use gestures or actions which are proper to the same priest celebrant.

It is a grave abuse for any member of the non-ordained faithful to “quasi preside” at the Mass while leaving only that minimal participation to the priest which is necessary to secure validity.
The proper position for the celebrant during the Lord’s Prayer is “with hands extended. (GIRM, no. 152)”

You’ll notice that the same position for the Deacon is not the given at this point in the GIRM. You can, therefore, conclude that the orans posture is not an option for the Deacon at this point.

If the orans posture is implicitly not an option for the Deacon, then why do we assume that it is a legitimate option for the congregation?

 

[Searching13]

Hi,

First of all, I think it is very sad that some people choose to place their own interpretation of the GIRM over that of someone like Deacon ED, and even the USCCB

muledog:

The proper position for the celebrant during the Lord’s Prayer is “with hands extended. (GIRM, no. 152)”

You’ll notice that the same position for the Deacon is not the given at this point in the GIRM. You can, therefore, conclude that the orans posture is not an option for the Deacon at this point.

If the orans posture is implicitly not an option for the Deacon, then why do we assume that it is a legitimate option for the congregation?

If it isn’t stated, it isn’t stated—period. Anything you say is your opinion.

Here is GIRM 42 plus the whole section on posture
*
Movements and Posture

1. The gestures and posture of the priest, the deacon, and the ministers, as well as those of the people, ought to contribute to making the entire celebration resplendent with beauty and noble simplicity, so that the true and full meaning of the different parts of the celebration is evident and that the participation of all is fostered.52 Therefore, attention should be paid to what is determined by this General Instruction and the traditional practice of the Roman Rite and to what serves the common spiritual good of the People of God, rather than private inclination or arbitrary choice.

A common posture, to be observed by all participants, is a sign of the unity of the members of the Christian community gathered for the Sacred Liturgy: it both expresses and fosters the intention and spiritual attitude of the participants.

1. The faithful should stand from the beginning of the Entrance chant, or while the priest approaches the altar, until the end of the Collect; for the Alleluia chant before the Gospel; while the Gospel itself is proclaimed; during the Profession of Faith and the Prayer of the Faithful; from the invitation, Orate, fraters (Pray, brethren), before the prayer over the offerings until the end of Mass, except at the places indicated below.

They should, however, sit while the readings before the Gospel and the responsorial Psalm are proclaimed and for the homily and while the Preparation of the Gifts at the Offertory is taking place; and, as circumstances allow, they may sit or kneel while the period of sacred silence after Communion is observed.

In the dioceses of the United States of America, they should kneel beginning after the singing or recitation of the Sanctus until after the Amen of the Eucharistic Prayer, except when prevented on occasion by reasons of health, lack of space, the large number of people present, or some other good reason. Those who do not kneel ought to make a profound bow when the priest genuflects after the consecration. The faithful kneel after the Agnus Dei unless the Diocesan Bishop determines otherwise.53

With a view to a uniformity in gestures and postures during one and the same celebration, the faithful should follow the directions which the deacon, lay minister, or priest gives according to whatever is indicated in the Missal.

1. Among gestures included are also actions and processions: of the priest going with the deacon and ministers to the altar; of the deacon carrying the Evangeliary or Book of the Gospels to the ambo before the proclamation of the Gospel; of the faithful presenting the gifts and coming forward to receive Communion. It is appropriate that actions and processions of this sort be carried out with decorum while the chants proper to them occur, in keeping with the norms prescribed for each.

continued*

 

[Searching13]

This is the direction in a particular diocese
**

ORANS POSTURE: The prayer-posture of the priest, who prays with hands extended at various times during the Mass. The practice of lay people using this gesture during the Our Father

is not found in the approved liturgical texts*GIRM 42 ***** .**
But really Girm 42 doesn’t state anything about this.

This is an instruction in a particular diocese, but even so, it does not say it is forbidden. —

The USCCB has also responded in the same manner when asked about it.

Many Catholics are in the habit of holding their hands in the “Orans”

posture during the Lord’s prayer along with the celebrant. Some do this on their own as a private devotional posture while some congregations make it a general practice for their communities.

Is this practice permissible under the current rubrics, either as a private practice not something adopted by a particular parish as a communal gesture?

No position is prescribed in the present Sacramentary for an assembly gesture during the Lord’s Prayer.

Email us at bcl@usccb.org
Committee on the Liturgy | 3211 4th Street, N.E., Washington DC 20017-1194 | (202) 541-3000 © USCCB. All rights reserved.

1. It is up to the Conferences of Bishops to decide on the adaptations indicated in this General Instruction and in the Order of Mass and, once their decisions have been accorded the recognitio

of the Apostolic See, to introduce them into the Missal itself. These adaptations include

• The gestures and posture of the faithful (cf. no. 43 above);
• The gestures of veneration toward the altar and the Book of the Gospels (cf. no. 273 above);
• The texts of the chants at the entrance, at the presentation of the gifts, and at Communion (cf. nos. 48, 74, 87 above);
• The readings from Sacred Scripture to be used in special circumstances (cf. no. 362 above);
• The form of the gesture of peace (cf. no. 82 above);
• The manner of receiving Holy Communion (cf. nos. 160, 283 above);
• The materials for the altar and sacred furnishings, especially the sacred vessels, and also the materials, form, and color of the liturgical vestments (cf. nos. 301, 326, 329, 339, 342-346 above).

Also

1. The Diocesan Bishop

, who is to be regarded as the high priest of his flock, and from whom the life in Christ of the faithful under his care in a certain sense derives and upon whom it depends,148 must promote, regulate, and be vigilant over the liturgical life in his diocese. It is to him that in this Instruction is entrusted the regulating of the discipline of concelebration (cf. above, nos. 202, 374) and the establishing of norms regarding the function of serving the priest at the altar (cf. above, no. 107), the distribution of Holy Communion under both kinds (cf. above, no. 283), and the construction and ordering of churches (cf. above, no. 291). With him lies responsibility above all for fostering the spirit of the Sacred Liturgy in the priests, deacons, and faithful.

The Bishop, and even the celebrant have much authority over minor areas, such as posture. The lack of respect for the USCCB in many of these threads is very disheartening.

Alos the lack of respect shown for Deacon Ed is very sad indeed.
*

 

[Deacon_Ed]

muledog:

The proper position for the celebrant during the Lord’s Prayer is “with hands extended. (GIRM, no. 152)”

You’ll notice that the same position for the Deacon is not the given at this point in the GIRM. You can, therefore, conclude that the orans posture is not an option for the Deacon at this point.

If the orans posture is implicitly not an option for the Deacon, then why do we assume that it is a legitimate option for the congregation?

Mike,

You are making the mistake of arguing from silence. Since the GIRM does not specify posture for the deacon or the laity it follows that no specific posture is approved. It does not follow, however, that some specific postures are forbidden.

Deacon Ed

 

[netmilsmom]

Deacon Ed:

You seem to be getting a bit snipy in your posts.

Where?

You seem to still be of the opinion that anything that is presecribed for the clergy and not for the laity means that that posture is forbidden to the laity. This is not the correct way to read documents from Rome. Please, feel free to ask your bishop if this is not the case.

I have discussed this with him at my daughter’s first communion party in June. He stated that the Orans is for the Priest in the liturgy. It was left out of the GIRM because it is made clear in many other documents put out by the Vatican. It appeared to be redundant. Those who try to see this as a posture for the laity are, in his opinion, either trying to blend the priestly role with the laity, are confused or uninformed. That is what he said, please don’t ask me to explain it. Understand that he is a Bishop Emeritus and did work on the GIRM, so I listen to what he says.

The Adoremus site has a discussion on the use of the orans position and concludes that it is not prohibited, not supported, just not mentioned. You will find opinions on both sides of this and the reason is that it is not prohibited nor is it supported. You are, of course, welcome to decide for yourself what posture you will take, but it seems uncharitable (at best) to tell others they are wrong when the Church herself does not do so.

Deacon Ed

I would say, inform others and tell them to check with their own Bishop.
You have a right to your opinon on what is uncharitable. I feel that passing the word of a Bishop that worked on the GIRM and informing people that this is an innovation is far from uncharitable.
We are in America and both of us are allowed our opinion.

 

[tadly]

Deacon Ed:

You seem to be getting a bit snipy in your posts.

No, there are general guidelines for liturgy that set some limits on what is and what is not acceptable.

You seem to still be of the opinion that anything that is presecribed for the clergy and not for the laity means that that posture is forbidden to the laity. This is not the correct way to read documents from Rome. Please, feel free to ask your bishop if this is not the case.

The Adoremus site has a discussion on the use of the orans position and concludes that it is not prohibited, not supported, just not mentioned. You will find opinions on both sides of this and the reason is that it is not prohibited nor is it supported. You are, of course, welcome to decide for yourself what posture you will take, but it seems uncharitable (at best) to tell others they are wrong when the Church herself does not do so.

Deacon Ed

 

[tadly]

Searching13:

Alos the lack of respect shown for Deacon Ed is very sad indeed.

I don’t understand this. I read through this thread, no one was being disrespected. Someone was even accused of being snippy.
Unless what the people want is for no one to give another opinion, it has been very respectful.

If someone tells you things that don’t agree with what you are saying, that is not disrespect.
It’s like the people are just being victims instead of giving facts. Is that what its about here?

 

[Digitonomy]

muledog:

Remember, prior to Vatican II, the priest alone prayed the Our Father. The congregation only responsed with “but deliver us from evil.”

I hadn’t realized this; thanks for pointing it out. This probably explains much of the confusion. If the congregation wasn’t really participating in the prayer, but simply standing reverently while the priest recited it, then I suppose there wasn’t really a traditional posture for the congregation praying the Lord’s Prayer, since they didn’t do so. Is that fair to say?

Given that vacuum, it may have been prudent to prescribe a posture for the laity, but it’s understandable as they certainly had bigger kinks to work out.

 

[muledog]

Alos the lack of respect shown for Deacon Ed is very sad indeed.

I’m not sure why you feel that I am being disrespectful with Deacon Ed just because I may disagree with him on this issue. Nothing I’ve said in this thread could be construed as such. I much admire and respect Deacon Ed for his contributions to this forum, and to the Church in general.

This is an instruction in a particular diocese, but even so, it does not say it is forbidden.

Once again, you have misquoted me. I stated that the orans posture “is implicitly not an option.” You would have to agree on me that, whether or not a particular bishop approves of it, it is not listed in any instruction, ordo, or rubric as being an option.
Please take the time to read my post as a whole and in its entirety. You may use these facts to come to your own conclusions.

1. The use of the orans posture by the celebrant alone has come down to us through organic changes in the ordo missae, and has been the traditional usage (notwithstanding certain laity) for hundreds and hudreds of years.
2. To reach back into the past and randomly pick out ancient customs to put back into the Mass is a form of antiquarianism, which was condemned by Pope Pius XII and the Second Vatican Council.
3. The General Instruction of the Roman Missal, while giving precise postures and gestures for the celebrant and deacon, fail to list the orans posture as the proper one for the deacon during the Lord’s Prayer.
4. The orans posture is indicated for presidential prayers of the celebrant, in which he prays for the intentions of the entire Church/congregation. The Church frowns upon any blurring of the distinction between the clerical state and the laity in the liturgy.
5. The orans posture for the congregation appears to come to us through its use in American evangelical protestant churches, who have used this posture in worship and in prayer for decades before it was introducted into the Catholic liturgy.

The Bishop, and even the celebrant have much authority over minor areas, such as posture.

True. But even then, any specific changes in the rubrics that aren’t listed as directly under the jurisdiction of the local bishop must receive the required recognitio by the Holy See.

]
First of all, I think it is very sad that some people choose to place their own interpretation of the GIRM over that of someone like Deacon ED, and even the USCCB

What does that mean? We’re not supposed to have an opinion just because you may not like it? I guess Bp. Varga is being disrespectful because he disagrees with you, Deacon Ed, and the USCCB (of which he is a member).

Searching13:

If it isn’t stated, it isn’t stated—period. Anything you say is your opinion.

Everything I comment on in this forum is my opinion, even when I quote official Church documents. I figured this goes without saying, but apparently I need to explain it to you.
Deacon Ed:

You are making the mistake of arguing from silence. Since the GIRM does not specify posture for the deacon or the laity it follows that no specific posture is approved. It does not follow, however, that some specific postures are forbidden.

Maybe I should’ve clarified myself and used the term “proper” instead of “option”, since many people seem to think I stated that this posture is “forbidden”, when in fact I never used that term.

I guess it would be okay, then, for the celebrant to wear face paint, red nose and clown shoes during Mass, since they are not specifically forbidden by the rubrics.

Maybe I’ll prostrate myself on the floor during the Lord’s Prayer during Mass next time I go. You know, since it’s not specified in the rubrics and all that.

 

[muledog]

Digitonomy:

I hadn’t realized this; thanks for pointing it out. This probably explains much of the confusion. If the congregation wasn’t really participating in the prayer, but simply standing reverently while the priest recited it, then I suppose there wasn’t really a traditional posture for the congregation praying the Lord’s Prayer, since they didn’t do so. Is that fair to say?
Dear Digitonomy,

Given that vacuum, it may have been prudent to prescribe a posture for the laity, but it’s understandable as they certainly had bigger kinks to work out.

Instead of adding the posture for the laity, I would rather remove it from the celebrant, since that would seem to make more sense, liturgically speaking.

The priest is no longer praying for the congregation at that point, but with them.

Simply having the celebrant and congregation clasp both hands together in the traditional prayer posture would make the most sense (to me).

 

[netmilsmom]

muledog:

Maybe I’ll prostrate myself on the floor during the Lord’s Prayer during Mass next time I go. You know, since it’s not specified in the rubrics and all that.

"Laying prostrate, using a prayer rug, nor shokeling are mentioned in the GIRM. Yet none of this is done, why the special treatment of the Orans position? "

I asked this on another thread and no one gave me an answer.

 

[Digitonomy]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

…nor shokeling are mentioned in the GIRM.

What is shokeling?

 

[Searching13]

muledog:

Originally Posted by Searching13

The Bishop, and even the celebrant have much authority over minor areas, such as posture.

True. But even then, any specific changes in the rubrics that aren’t listed as directly under the jurisdiction of the local bishop must receive the required recognitio by the Holy See.

If it is to be required.

Everything I comment on in this forum is my opinion, even when I quote official Church documents. I figured this goes without saying, but apparently I need to explain it to you.

&

Maybe I should’ve clarified myself and used the term “proper” instead of “option”, since many people seem to think I stated that this posture is “forbidden”, when in fact I never used that term

I need to explain that I am disagreeing with your opinion, and your interpretation of Church documents, not the documents themselves. I am saying that the orans position is not forbidden to the laity. You are disagreeing, but have not shown me this is so.
If this prayer posture (which is used by the celebrant)is forbidden, then so are the sign of the cross, joined hands, etc (which are also used by the celebrant)This was clearly shown.

Originally Posted by Searching13

]First of all, I think it is very sad that some people choose to place their own interpretation of the GIRM over that of someone like Deacon ED, and even the USCCB

muledog:

What does that mean? We’re not supposed to have an opinion just because you may not like it? I guess Bp. Varga is being disrespectful because he disagrees with you, Deacon Ed, and the USCCB (of which he is a member).

What about the Bishops who have encouraged it for their Diocese? Certainly you may have an opinion, but you have not shown that it is forbidden. I am not telling you what to do, I am merely stating that it is not forbidden, which is what the USCCB has also said

This is a sore spot in many conservative forums. My whole point is that it is not forbidden,

I guess it would be okay, then, for the celebrant to wear face paint, red nose and clown shoes during Mass, since they are not specifically forbidden by the rubrics.

This was addressed in another thread -We are discussing the posture of the congregation, not the action of the Priest. Also we must use good judgement and common sense. I am attempting to have a serious discussion. You don’t think your sarcasm is disrespectful? You have also insinuated that I cannot understand you, because I disagree. I understand you perfectly well.
forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?p=894280&highlight=confusion#post894280

I think incorrect interpretation of this paragraph -GIRM #24- is the source of much confusion

Nevertheless, the priest

must remember that he is the servant of the Sacred Liturgy and that he himself is not permitted, on his own initiative, to add, to remove, or to change anything in the celebration of Mass.34

 

[Searching13]

For anyone reading, but not posting,

Please check with your Pastor, if you have any questions, and if you are not satisfied with his explanation, call or write the ordinary (Bishop) of the diocese.

What we have seen is the Bishops who encourage it are not saying it is approved or instructed, and those who discourage it are not saying it is forbidden. I personally will go with the custom of the Parish where I attend Mass.