Orans position

[CB_Catholic]

According to the way some people here interpret rubrics, that turning toward the aisle is not mentioned means it is prohibited. LOL.

Yeah, I know what you mean. However, I have no plans to change my habit. There is nothing that says you have to stand and look straight ahead, only that you should stand, and bow.
This is not important enough to quibble over.

 

[aspirant]

Yeah, I know what you mean. However, I have no plans to change my habit. There is nothing that says you have to stand and look straight ahead, only that you should stand, and bow.
This is not important enough to quibble over.

I agree!

 

[DavidinStLouis]

During one of the USCCB conferences apparently it was spoken of as an alternative to holding hands - only holding ones elbows at the waist and forward to show a difference from the priest. It was decided not to vote on it. I hold my arms the way described in order to be charitable to people who try to grab my hands to hold them. There are some pretty aggressive hand-holders in this area!

May I ask why you hold your hands in the way described (in the first place)? What inspired you to begin using this position?

 

[Elizabeth779]

My position is this. A lot of people may say, ‘oh, what’s the harm’. Well, what’s the harm with parishioners implementing a number of their own habits, styles of worship, etc.? Then what do we become? What form does the Mass take after that if we let the laity come up with their own forms of prayer during Mass, or gestures, etc.? Could this evolve into something totally different that what we have now? The priests never say a word about these things now - as it is. I walk into Church expecting a quiet, reverent atmosphere and I get Romper Room. Full-on conversations taking place, of course right next to me and then more conversations and people just looking around and joking after they receive the Eucharist. So the problem is, if priests aren’t willing to correct these things, where will this lead? What’s next? Dancing in the aisles, jumping jacks during the Pater Noster? I went to my Diocese this week with my young sons for Chrism Mass. My boys were taught to be quiet, respectful of the Mass, the Church, the Holy Eucharist. And then what? They see and hear everyone having all kinds of very loud converstaions, phones going off, pictures, you name it. And this is the Diocesan See/Church? Ugggh… If we don’t hold to the liturgical norms or rites as established by competent authority, then what will our Mass evolve into?

My thoughts exactly – I can’t stand the “alligator arms” orens position by the laity. I just try to ignore it or offer it up for the souls in purgatory. I also have to try to ignore and offer up everyone using the Sign of Peace as a meet and greet…ughhhhhhhhhhhhhh arghhhhhhhhhhh!!!

 

[ATeNumquam]

I think culture must have something to do with it.
In my parish we have about a 50% Filippino congregation with recent immigration from there over the past few years, and it must be the norm in the Philippines to use the orans position for the Our Father. Ii don’t know if it was approved there or not, but they all do it.
The rest of the congregation doesn’t.

It doesn’t bother me - actually, I like how it looks, but I won’t be adopting it.

 

[otjm]

While the Adoremus link says that during the Our Father one is to place hands together, Adoremus is not reflecting the GIRM (General Instruction of the Roman Missal).

Holding hands during the Our Father goes back to at least 1965 (as I have a picture of a Mass at that time, with everyone holding hands). It was meant at that time as a sign of unity (Our father, not My Father, as in).

Since 1965, Rome has seen fit to produce three versions of the GIRM. And there is no doubt that Rome has known, if not in 1965, not long after that, that people were holding hands during the Our Father.

And in all three issues of the GIRM, Rome has seen fit to not address the issue, a point that is simply ignored by those protesting the issue.

There have been all sorts of arguments against it; but the bottom line is there is no instruction in the GIRM as to what posture, if any, one is to have in regards to hands. The USCCB considered allowing the orans posture, and did not do anything; I seriously doubt that Rome was in complete ignorance of the issue. And if nothing is done, then there is no law regulating the matter.

Archbishop Chaput, when he was in Colorado, issued a letter on the matter. I would hardly consider Archbishop Chaput a liberal. The essence of his letter was that a) there was no law regulating the matter, and therefore b) people were free to either hold hands or not hold hands and c) there was to be charity on both sides as to the matter. That meant, if you did not want to hold hands, you should not be required to; and if you did want to hold hands, no one had the right to criticize you.

In Western law, there are two general philosophies; one is often called Germanic; the other Mediterranean.

The Germanic approach can be summed up by “whatever is not allowed is prohibited” and the Mediterranean as “whatever is not prohibited is allowed”.

Cardinal Arinze’ comment can be seen as the Mediterranean approach.

Rome is generally considered to be in the Mediterranean, lest anyone not know that.

Generally, those who are of a Germanic approach to law have a very hard time with those who are of a Mediterranean approach. A lot of the angst is based on a combination of a Germanic approach and a dislike of anything they are not familiar with. That is not to make them bad, or of lesser religiosity or piety, or to make the Mediterranean model the better model. They are simply two differing philosophies of law.

And none of that is to say that “anything goes”. Please have enough grace to not throw something like doing cartwheels down the isle as an example of where liturgy would go if the Mediterranean model were to be employed. Holding hands does have some meaning in terms of a liturgical expression (whether you like the meaning is a different matter - but there is a liturgical tie-in) just as the orans posture has an ancient meaning as a prayer form.

And before we get back to the issue of the orans posture being a priestly posture, if you are paying any attention at all during Mass you will note that the priest at times will have his hands palms together, fingers pointing up or away. and yet many, if not most people would find this to be an acceptable posture, in spite of the fact that it is a priestly posture. So making that argument doesn’t hold water.

If Rome sees fit to prohibit holding hands during the Our Father, or prohibit the orans posture, then we need to follow the rules. Until then, despite what those on the right who despise it say, or those on the left who promote it say, or those who are simply caught in the middle, it is not regulated; Rome knows about it and doesn’t (obviously) choose to regulate it, and both sides should have charity towards the other. Those who prefer not to should not be forced to hold hands, and those who prefer to hold hands (or the orans posture) should not be criticized.

Or as my (hopefully) sainted grandmother would say, “offer it up”.

 

[aspirant]

If Rome sees fit to prohibit holding hands during the Our Father, or prohibit the orans posture, then we need to follow the rules. Until then, despite what those on the right who despise it say, or those on the left who promote it say, or those who are simply caught in the middle, it is not regulated; Rome knows about it and doesn’t (obviously) choose to regulate it, and both sides should have charity towards the other. Those who prefer not to should not be forced to hold hands, and those who prefer to hold hands (or the orans posture) should not be criticized.

Or as my (hopefully) sainted grandmother would say, “offer it up”.