Not standing for Alleluia, etc. - why?

[OraLabora]

It is the Abbey of Regina Laudis in Bethlehem, CT

That explains it. They chant the Mass and Divine Office according to their website.

The “Benedictine” way is to sit through the alleluia up until the repetition of the last Alleluia:

Alleluia (schola, everyone except schola sits), alleluia (repeated, everyone except schola sits), psalm or scripture verse sung on same mode as alleluia (everyone except schola sits), last alleluia as the deacon processes with the book of gospels to the ambo: everyone rises.

I really think many of the questions that crop up on these forums come from lack of knowledge. In particular, monastic usages can differ from what one is used to in parishes.

For example most monasteries never had “communion rails” as we know them in parishes, but a cloister fence or grille, with a gate in the middle through which communion is distributed. Before that many monasteries, and indeed churches, had rood screens instead of communion rails, which made the sanctuary all but invisible to the laity; this existed up until the Council of Trent where it was decreed that the laity should be more “involved” in the Mass and be able to see what is going on. Thus was born the “communion rail” which was in fact similar to a cloister barrier, and was mainly to separate the nave from the sanctuary. But even before rood screens, there was a form of communion rail. So what we often think is an abandoning of tradition is just an ebb and flow of some traditions waning and waxing and waning again. The Church is a living Church and the liturgy is a living liturgy, not fossilized to a specific point in time.

I second the question about “subdeacons” in an OF Mass. There are no subdeacons at an OF Mass.

 

[Eliza10]

Just out of curiosity, how did the subdeacons get involved in an OF Mass?

I don’t know. I will ask my husband. (who knows the names of everything and he is the one who told me that the white-robed “assistants” were Deacon and subdeacons). They are always there, though. I think I see them leaving in a truck right after Mass. At Mass, the subdeacons stand before the people (while the priest and the Deacon go to the nuns at the grille) and one gives Holy communion by tincture and the other holds then paten.

We have been going there often for the past year. This was the first time that we did not stand. So it is not the nuns policy. It is not the habit at this monastery.

I honestly think the priest was dishonest with me. I cannot ignore the facts and the feeling I had about his response. I would love to be disproven. I realize that things can seem completely one way and turn out later to be another. I realize I cannot really know. However, that does not mean I have to discount my God-given intuition and facts.

 

[pianistclare]

That explains it. They chant the Mass and Divine Office according to their website.

The “Benedictine” way is to sit through the alleluia up until the repetition of the last Alleluia:

Alleluia (schola, everyone except schola sits), alleluia (repeated, everyone except schola sits), psalm or scripture verse sung on same mode as alleluia (everyone except schola sits), last alleluia as the deacon processes with the book of gospels to the ambo: everyone rises.

I really think many of the questions that crop up on these forums come from lack of knowledge. In particular, monastic usages can differ from what one is used to in parishes.

For example most monasteries never had “communion rails” as we know them in parishes, but a cloister fence or grille, with a gate in the middle through which communion is distributed. Before that many monasteries, and indeed churches, had rood screens instead of communion rails, which made the sanctuary all but invisible to the laity; this existed up until the Council of Trent where it was decreed that the laity should be more “involved” in the Mass and be able to see what is going on. Thus was born the “communion rail” which was in fact similar to a cloister barrier, and was mainly to separate the nave from the sanctuary. But even before rood screens, there was a form of communion rail. So what we often think is an abandoning of tradition is just an ebb and flow of some traditions waning and waxing and waning again. The Church is a living Church and the liturgy is a living liturgy, not fossilized to a specific point in time.

I second the question about “subdeacons” in an OF Mass. There are no subdeacons at an OF Mass.

 

[ProVobis]

The “Benedictine” way is to sit through the alleluia up until the repetition of the last Alleluia:

Alleluia (schola, everyone except schola sits), alleluia (repeated, everyone except schola sits), psalm or scripture verse sung on same mode as alleluia (everyone except schola sits), last alleluia as the deacon processes with the book of gospels to the ambo: everyone rises.

To be fair, the Latin IGMR does have omnes surgunt (all stand) before the Alleluia. However, that doesn’t mean bishops (and monasteries, I suppose) can’t tweak it a little. They are, after all, general, not particular, instructions.

The Church is a living Church and the liturgy is a living liturgy, not fossilized to a specific point in time.

So long as there is no “rupture of continuity” which recent Popes have spoken against.

 

[OraLabora]

I don’t know. I will ask my husband. (who knows the names of everything and he is the one who told me that the white-robed “assistants” were Deacon and subdeacons). They are always there, though. I think I see them leaving in a truck right after Mass. At Mass, the subdeacons stand before the people (while the priest and the Deacon go to the nuns at the grille) and one gives Holy communion by tincture and the other holds then paten.

We have been going there often for the past year. This was the first time that we did not stand. So it is not the nuns policy. It is not the habit at this monastery.

I honestly think the priest was dishonest with me. I cannot ignore the facts and the feeling I had about his response. I would love to be disproven. I realize that things can seem completely one way and turn out later to be another. I realize I cannot really know. However, that does not mean I have to discount my God-given intuition and facts.

It sounds as if the white-robed assistants were in fact acolytes. If there was a deacon, he would be vested in the dalmatic or at least the deacon’s stole.

My main point though is that this is the liturgy of an abbey. It is their own, and we as laity have no authority to question their practices. Abbeys are of pontifical right; we therefore can’t complain to the “ordinary” (the bishop) as the “ordinary” is in this case the abbess and not the local bishop. She rules on what happens in the liturgy, and she is the only one in authority to comment to the (presumably substitute) priest in this case. If she elects to let it go and offer it up, it is within her authority to do so. If one complains to the abbess, the likely result will be a smile and a diversionary comment like “why don’t you stay for tea and biscuits?”, or simply “that’s interesting thank you for coming to our Mass today”. It would be like being invited into the Queen’s parlour and then complaining about the decor.

If the abbess does elect to act on what she sees at liturgical errors, you can be sure it will remain a private matter between herself and the priest and you’ll get no feedback. I

In short it is their liturgy and the liturgy is primarily held for their benefit. The laity are welcome to attend, and participate, but must keep in mind that the usages of the place will always prevail over the laity’s sensibilities but we must mind one’s own business.

 

[pianistclare]

It sounds as if the white-robed assistants were in fact acolytes. If there was a deacon, he would be vested in the dalmatic or at least the deacon’s stole.

My main point though is that this is the liturgy of an abbey. It is their own, and we as laity have no authority to question their practices. Abbeys are of pontifical right; we therefore can’t complain to the “ordinary” (the bishop) as the “ordinary” is in this case the abbess and not the local bishop. She rules on what happens in the liturgy, and she is the only one in authority to comment to the (presumably substitute) priest in this case. If she elects to let it go and offer it up, it is within her authority to do so. If one complains to the abbess, the likely result will be a smile and a diversionary comment like “why don’t you stay for tea and biscuits?”, or simply “that’s interesting thank you for coming to our Mass today”. It would be like being invited into the Queen’s parlour and then complaining about the decor.

If the abbess does elect to act on what she sees at liturgical errors, you can be sure it will remain a private matter between herself and the priest and you’ll get no feedback. I

In short it is their liturgy and the liturgy is primarily held for their benefit. The laity are welcome to attend, and participate, but must keep in mind that the usages of the place will always prevail over the laity’s sensibilities but we must mind one’s own business.

 

[ProVobis]

I don’t know. I will ask my husband. (who knows the names of everything and he is the one who told me that the white-robed “assistants” were Deacon and subdeacons). They are always there, though. I think I see them leaving in a truck right after Mass.

Okay, that explains it.

 

[Thomas_Casey]

Please do not use the forum to second guess or speak about others behind their backs. If one has a question, one can ask it, without having to offer one’s opinions about the person in question.

Also, keep in mind that major superiors of religious orders of men are ordinaries with the authority to make certain adaptations to the liturgy according to the tradition of the community and it is our obligation to respect those traditions. And no, pontifical religious orders and abbeys owe no explanations of their traditions to anyone outside their community.