Orans postion

[BonnieBj]

I simply do not understand all this controversy about the orans position. Why was this ruling made and why is it such a problem if others use it? Why is it wrong. I see it as a coming together of the church to pray together. Simply do not understand why it and some of the other tiny, seemingly inoffensive gestures are so offensive. I am used to using the orans position when I pray; I do sit at the very back since I know of the controversy. I find it hard to believe that this would offend God. Quite a number of people at my church use the orans position.

 

[space_ghost]

BonnieBj:

I simply do not understand all this controversy about the orans position. Why was this ruling made and why is it such a problem if others use it? Why is it wrong. I see it as a coming together of the church to pray together. Simply do not understand why it and some of the other tiny, seemingly inoffensive gestures are so offensive. I am used to using the orans position when I pray; I do sit at the very back since I know of the controversy. I find it hard to believe that this would offend God. Quite a number of people at my church use the orans position.

Some people feel threatened by others that do different then them.
Others dislike change… I would suggest that you stay in the back row if your comfortable, but i personally see no problem with that style… not sure the church has any problems either… does anyone out there know of any official teaching against?

Peace

 

[Tantum_ergo]

I think Karl Keating and other apologists have spoken about the “orans” position. I always find it mildly amusing to see rapt worshippers in the pews continue in the “orans” posture even when FATHER is NOT in the posture, thus putting the kibosh on the idea that we in the pews are making a “gesture of unity” as some mistakenly believe.

Bottom line: While the rubrics in the GIRM do not specifically state “No hand holding or orans during the Our Father in Mass”, they also don’t state, “No doing the Macarena, the twist, or deep kneebends” EITHER.

A LOT of this comes from the 70s and 80s when Mass was a “feel good”, “We are church/community/ all one” idea. The whole priestly role was subtly but tellingly DOWNPLAYED. The congregation joined in the Doxology (at least THAT has been thoroughly repudiated in the GIRM), the congregation rose up around the altar and held hands or “orans” themselves silly all the way to communion, EMHCs proliferated until even if the congregation was fewer than 100 people it was felt necessary to have at LEAST 3-4 EMHCs to “help” father; the choir came out of the loft and right down next to the ambo, the sign of peace involves people leaving the pews and glad-handing people half the church away.

A need for “community” that was felt to be lacking in the “stuffy” Latin Mass era? Perhaps. . .but why, in this age of “coffee hours” and “socials” are so many churches finding almost nobody there, while people make the Indy 500 rush to be out of church at COMMUNION, or waltz in during the homily? Hmm?

I am sure you are very sincere and very prayerful, and that you honestly feel that if YOU feel there’s no HARM in orans, then nobody else should either. And quite honestly, there ARE plenty of other things to “fuss about” in our Catholic lives.

But OTOH, there’s that pesky old obedience / charity thing, and it works with you AND against you. If so MANY people find the orans problematic, aren’t you supposed to be just as much one striving for understanding as the ones you fulminate against? Particularly as this “orans” is very much a newcomer to Catholicism and the Mass. That alone should put you on your guard. If it REALLY isn’t such a big deal, it REALLY shouldn’t bother YOU to stop it in the face of a clear majority (by these boards, polls of Catholic sites, and the USCCB itself) who are AGAINST it. Right?

Remember, as a Catholic, you must not only strive to have a well informed conscience, you must also strive to listen to the Magisterium. I know that YOU find it “hard to believe that this little old gesture offends great big God”, but then again, neither one of us IS God. I try very hard not to make the mistake of thinking that I can speak for Him (in fact, I rather loathe the trite “What Would Jesus Do” mentality that is rippling around today). After all, He made me, not the other way around, and “so far as the heavens are above the earth, so are thoughts above thoughts”. That’s just me, it’s not a personal attack on you or anybody else, truly. I just feel that it is so wrong to go around as so many do saying, “Well, God wouldn’t care about this”. It’s SO easy to go from that to, “Well, God SHOULDN’T care about this” and then to “Well, God DOESN’T care about this”. And then look at what we have to deal with, from the whole abortion/ communion issue to the whole idea of existence of God Himself. Once WE start saying how God would, should, or does see, hear, or think about things, we are in deep trouble, because we are in essence JUDGING Him. IMO.

 

[loyola_rambler]

I’m not sure what “ruling” you’re talking about. As far as the USCC goes, the following is posted on their website:

Orans

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.

usccb.org/liturgy/q%26a/mass/orans.htm

 

[JimG]

loyola rambler:

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

Exactly. If it isn’t prescribed, it shouldn’t be done.

JimG

 

[loyola_rambler]

JimG:

Exactly. If it isn’t prescribed, it shouldn’t be done.

JimG

If NO position is prescribed, then what are we supposed to do? We’re not supposed to stand? Are we supposed to kneel? Are we supposed to turn our backs to the altar? All are non-prescribed positions. If nothing’s stated, then the GIRM says that it goes back to the pastor to create a unitive position that is consistent throughout the congregation. If the priest implements Orans, then it’s filling the definition of the GIRM.

 

[Hesychios]

The orans position is the most venerable, ancient posture of prayer for Christians. It once was the way to pray in the first centuries.

I cannot believe that there could be an objection to it for any standing prayer.

The orans position is illustrated in icons, mosaics and paintings all over Christendom.

Our Lady is pictured in form of prayer in many eastern churches right behind the altar, and the same posture is painted on the walls of the catacombs.

I am surprised that in this day and age, when we are so focused on our traditions, that this should be a contentious issue.

 

[mercygate]

In my experience with discussion of this subject, when people use the word “orans” position they do not mean the posture recorded in mosaics, sculptures, frescoes and icons of the ancient church: iconsexplained.com/iec/00343.htm
They tend to mean the position seen more commonly today of holding the hands at waist or chest level with palms upward. I assumed this to be a novelty originating in the charismatic movement, since I first saw it some 30+ years ago among those who had attended a Charismatic Renewal event.

 

[Maurelian]

BonnieBj:

I simply do not understand all this controversy about the orans position. Why was this ruling made and why is it such a problem if others use it?

The main argument I hear against it is orans is a priestly gesture, and by imitating him, the congregation is bringing the priest down closer to their level.

As far as I know, there hasn’t been a ruling made, has there? This is the closest I’ve found:

"In 1995, the Bishops Committee on the Liturgy (BCL), then chaired by Bishop Donald Trautman of Erie, proposed certain amendments to the proposed revision. Among these, the BCL recommended specifying the orans posture for the people during the Our Father. The rationale was that the orans gesture was used in the “early Church”, and that this posture should replace hand-holding during the Our Father, a practice that was becoming increasingly common.

Several bishops objected to adopting the orans for the people (by custom a priestly gesture), and strongly opposed making this a rule. But eventually the bishops compromised, at this 1995 session, and voted to make the orans a permissible option for the congregation during the Our Father.

It is important to note that the bishops’ debate and vote on the orans posture for the people involved the ICEL Sacramentary, not the new Roman Missal." Adoremus Bulletin article; November 2003 - for full text see: adoremus.org/1103OransPosture.html

 

[Hesychios]

mercygate:

In my experience with discussion of this subject, when people use the word “orans” position they do not mean the posture recorded in mosaics, sculptures, frescoes and icons of the ancient church: iconsexplained.com/iec/00343.htm
They tend to mean the position seen more commonly today of holding the hands at waist or chest level with palms upward. I assumed this to be a novelty originating in the charismatic movement, since I first saw it some 30+ years ago among those who had attended a Charismatic Renewal event.

If I am reading this correctly, if they raise their arms a little higher or turn the palms outward it would be ok?

 

[naprous]

I’m not trying to sound flippant here, but I suspect most people who use the “modified” orans position (hands not very far up), are simply embarrassed, and don’t want to attract attention. I know that’s how I feel!

The orans position is the oldest prayer position, not at all reserved for priests, and seen all over the Roman catacombs, among other places. The kneeling with one’s hands together is something that developed in the middle ages, out of the feudal ceremony of homage. The vassal knelt with his hands together, and the lord brought his hands down around the vassal’s. Then the two also kissed on the mouth. Thus a vassal was called “a man of mouth and hands” (homme de bouche et mains) – the ceremony was meant to convey the lord’s superiority, but also the mutual responsibility and love that the two were meant to have for each other.

But the orans is much older, and actually has a religious background, whereas the ceremony of homage began as a secular gesture, not a religious one.

Naprous

 

[Servant1]

JimG:

Exactly. If it isn’t prescribed, it shouldn’t be done.

JimG

PREscribed is not the same as PROscribed. PROscribed would mean an inhibition. Lack of PREscription is simply a lack of a requirement. Saying to do something affirmatively requires a prescription is the same as the evangelicals and fundamentalist protestants saying if it doesn’t say TO do something in the Bible, then we CAN’T do it. A slippery slope, IMHO.

 

[Hesychios]

Hello Naprous!

I was thinking along the same lines as post #11.

This modified hand position is not a problem, it’s a style. Many of us are much too reserved today to take the traditional posture in public, mostly because of the people around us.

I sometimes pray at home in an orans stance. How many people would be willing to pray like that at home in front of the spouse? When I am praying from a book (like a missalette or my Breviary) I will usually hold my hands together with the book, but when I pray old prayers I know, or when I pray spontaneously, I will often use the orans stance.

It is the traditional praying posture for Catholics and if it somehow were to become common again in practice, it would not be an innovation. We get all worked up about reading the Fathers of the church, why shouldn’t we pray in the manner they themselves recommend?

 

[JimG]

The orans posture is not proscribed, apparently. Neither is hand-holding at the Our Father. After reading the Adoremus Bulletin article linked by Maurelian, it appears that the orans was recommended by some bishops as a substitute for hand-holding, (i.e.–do the orans, not the hand-holding) But this recommendation was never put into the rubrics.

Some have posted recommendations for the orans posture based on antiquity. I’m not sure that antiquity is the norm for all our liturgical actions. In our parish, some do it, some don’t. When it first started happening, I was surprised, as it just seemed to appear out of the blue. Some still hold hands. Some don’t. The net result is that everyone is doing their own thing.

JimG

 

[Hesychios]

JimG:

it appears that the orans was recommended by some bishops as a substitute for hand-holding, (i.e.–do the orans, not the hand-holding) But this recommendation was never put into the rubrics.
Hi JimG
Well I must admit, that’s certainly why I started doing it! (not due to someone’s recommendation though)

Let me tell you, my Dad (of blessed memory, gone now over 20 years) had a terrible time with, of all things, shaking hands at the sign of peace! It was too much for him. I think all of the hand-holding had started before he fell asleep, I am pretty sure he was aware of it, but he hated that handshaking. Anyway I struggled with the hand-holding for years, and every once in a while I would visit a parish that had it in full force. “No way out” I would think to myself, and I would remember to cross that parish off of my list. Some parishes even had the people cross the aisles and link up, this went on for a long time around Chicago.

I finally got used to it, but I never did like to grab some kid’s hand, especially if the parent’s didn’t seem to go for it. Then some parents are very protective and make sure the children are between them, away from strangers, then you have to grab someones wife’s hand. Sometimes it would be some single adult individual and you’d think “what if they pull their hand away?” I’d be mortified. And two adult males who don’t know each other holding hands is just too weird! Why should a person have to go through all of that angst to worship God?

These Roman Catholic parishes are huge, I have never sat next to the same person two times in a row. Inevitably, I would be encircled by people I don’t know, and some of them can be awful cold.

So I started to just lift up my hands on my own and if anyone wanted to grab one they could, no one did.

Some have posted recommendations for the orans posture based on antiquity. I’m not sure that antiquity is the norm for all our liturgical actions. In our parish, some do it, some don’t. When it first started happening, I was surprised, as it just seemed to appear out of the blue. Some still hold hands. Some don’t. The net result is that everyone is doing their own thing.

JimG

I’ll agree that antiquity isn’t the norm for a practice, but it certainly trumps a lot of other reasons.

If we observe the posture of most people praying there is an extraordinary variety of ways to use one’s hands. Some link all of their fingers in a sort of double-clenched fist, some put palms together like we were taught for our first Communions years ago, Some people just hang on to the pew (and lean) and some have their hands in their pockets! So it isn’t just the orans posture we can talk about here, it’s anything whatever!

At least the orans posture is a true praying posture, no one will stand like that out of laziness or disinterest.

I like it.

 

[JimG]

The orans as a defense against hand-holding works for me!

Actually I can recall the very first Mass I attended at which the sign of peace was done by shaking hands. No one was quite sure what was going on. I turned to my then-fiancee and said “Shalom.”

JimG

 

[BonnieBj]

In response to Tantum Ergo. We do know what God thinks about things because they are revealed in the Bible. We know about God the Father because Jesus said we see the Father through the Son. We are to worship God in spirit and in truth. If the orans position is paert of that kind of worship for someone, then who are we to condemn it. And giving the sign of peace to others doesn’t need to be limited to those immediately on either side of us, although it should not go on so long that it disrupts the Mass (doing things decently and in good order). And holding hands, to me, signifies the carrying out of (the unity of the holy Catholic Church and also a sign of membership in the Church as fellow family members). As long as it is not prescribed it isn’t proscribed; silence implies consent.

And I’m sorry you feel WWJD is trite. For many of us it is a way to help us remember that for many people we are the only Jesus they will see, and also a deterrant to sin. Also to remind us that we need to act like Christians when it is sometimes not easy to do so. Or to take control of our behavior before we do something that is a sin and need to confess.

I don’t want to argue about these things; we are each entitled to our stands. And it is all too easy to become opinionated and judgmental.

 

[DaveBj]

Servant1:

PREscribed is not the same as PROscribed. PROscribed would mean an inhibition. Lack of PREscription is simply a lack of a requirement. Saying to do something affirmatively requires a prescription is the same as the evangelicals and fundamentalist protestants saying if it doesn’t say TO do something in the Bible, then we CAN’T do it. A slippery slope, IMHO.

Servant1, you took the words right out of my computer Claiming that only what is proscribed is forbidden, on one hand, and claiming that anything that is not prescribed is forbidden is forbidden, on the other hand, are opposite ends of a spectrum. If it is specified somewhere (like in the GIRM, or Redempionis Sacramentum) that what is not prescribed is forbidden, then I can dig it, but if not, then not. If a position is not prescribed, then common sense must prevail. Doing the macarena is one thing; holding one’s hands up at chest level during the Our Father is quite another.

When I first started reading these forums, I was aghast at what some of the posters were describing as horrible liturgical abuses. Some of what they talked about (clown masses, obvious violations of rubrics) are abuses and need to be stopped. However, as I’ve discussed these things with my wife (who started this thread), I’ve sort of come to the conclusion that there are a few people out there who need to get their eyes off other people and turning them inward.

As I make my journey into the Catholic Church, and as I develop as a Catholic, there are many battles that I will be faced with. I have to pick my battles carefully; I can’t fight about everything. People praying in the orans position or holding hands during the Our Father, neither of which are forbidden, are just not worth my expending emotional energy over. Sorry.

DaveBj

 

[Fortiterinre]

Actually, liturgy is the one area where what is not prescribed generally is pretty much proscribed. Fr. Dennis Smolarski, SJ, author of “How NOT To Say Mass” and no friend to traditonalists, says this bluntly in the above mentioned book. Liturgy is a rite, a ritual–one specified action following another in a sequence. When you break the sequence of specified actions, you have broken part of the liturgy. The GIRM does not proscribe me from applauding during the epiklesis and snapping my fingers during the consecration, but it would certainly be wrong for me to do so. People use the orans position with the best of intentions and may find it spiritually powerful, but it is still breaking part of the liturgy. Alongside hand-holding and hugging it may be the most attractive substitute, but not as good as following the rubrics.

 

[DaveBj]

Fortiterinre:

Actually, liturgy is the one area where what is not prescribed generally is pretty much proscribed.

Then Rome needs to come out and say so, in an authoritative document, and all confusion will be removed.

Fr. Dennis Smolarski, SJ, author of “How NOT To Say Mass” and no friend to traditonalists, says this bluntly in the above mentioned book. Liturgy is a rite, a ritual–one specified action following another in a sequence. When you break the sequence of specified actions, you have broken part of the liturgy. The GIRM does not proscribe me from applauding during the epiklesis and snapping my fingers during the consecration, but it would certainly be wrong for me to do so. People use the orans position with the best of intentions and may find it spiritually powerful, but it is still breaking part of the liturgy. Alongside hand-holding and hugging it may be the most attractive substitute, but not as good as following the rubrics.

There is a difference between prescribing what the celebrant says and does during the liturgy (which, if it were changed, would be breaking part of the liturgy) and the lack of prescription of what the laity are doing. The rubrics prescribe what the priest is to do and how he is to do it, but they do not proscribe the activities mentioned, nor do they prescribe specifically what the laity are to do during these times. Again, if the laity are expected to “obey the rules,” then there must be specific rules for them to obey. In the absence of rules, don’t complain if people want to express worship in their own ways.

Don’t get me wrong. I keep my hands firmly folded during the Our Father. I haven’t yet been approached by a stranger wanting to hold my hand (I think the hand-holding at our parish is just among people who know each other), but I plan to ignore it if it happens. Also, I am an inveterate rule-follower. But in this case there are no rules, and I repeat myself by saying that it looks like a some people who post here are more concerned with other people’s outward postures of worship than with their own inward postures of worship.

DaveBj