Oran's Posture - Priest Only!?

[otjm]

Ah, bother, here we go again.

I think we can all agree on one thing: the GIRM does not say what postures the laity may take with their hands during the Our Father.

It is an interesting bit of logic that says “Well, in Italy the orans posture is allowed… but it has absolutely no place in the liturgy as far as the laity are concerned, period.” Different GIRM’s for different areas, leaves one to wonder why silence boots directly to no mimicking the priest’s directions as an absolute, when in the universal Church, it is most definitely not an absolute.

And if I may, reductio ad absurdem should be beneath the dignity of any poster.

And I will again reiterate something I said in the past. In law school, in discussing philosophy of law, the professor remarked that in Europe there were two general approaches to law: the Germanic, which says “Whatever is not permitted is prohibited”, and the Mediterranean, which says “Whatever is not prohibited is permitted.”

In the mid 1960’s, holding hands during the Our Father spread rapidly, with it’s apparent locus being the Charismatic Renewal. The orans posture appears to be related also to the Charismatic Renewal, although it did not spread as fast as hand holding. And Rome has been aware for decades of both practices, and sine the introduction of the Ordinary Form of the Mass, has seen fit to remain silent on the matter of what the laity is or is not to do with their hands during the Our Father. Given the report that it is allowed in Italy expressly, and that the GIRM for the US has remained silent with Rome’s knowledge, I would think that the Mediterranean approach to the matter would carry far more weight than the Germanic.

I don’t have a dog in the fight. Both - holding hands and the orans - are done by the majority in my parish, and in most parishes in which I have attended Mass over the years. If the individual next to me in the pew wishes to hold hands, I will do so, out of charity. If they use the orans, I for one am not going to correct them. And if they do not hold hands, I don’t extend mine.

We all need to remember that there are matters which are of extreme importance, such as respect for life, and living peacefully with nations which choose to not live peacefully.

On the scale of 1 to 10, this one - and this thread - do not tip the scales.

 

[pnewton]

A lot of people have read this article and no longer do this gesture at our Parish.

Do they do it at your Parish?

Quite a few. It is not a big deal. I like to think of what Cardinal Arinze said when he visited America. He asked why do some try to regiment the people of God. It doesn’t matter what is done with the hands. It is okay.

I found the video. The part about the orans is around 5:30 forward. The part about freedom and regimenting is around 53:00, but the whole video is great.

Q&A with Francis Cardinal Arinze - 2007 Totus Tuus Conference

I do think the best thing to do over such a minor point is to support whatever the priest does about this, even if that is nothing. Then support not addressing it. Personally, I never do this.

 

[mdgspencer]

The opening post definitely says the runics forbid this posture on the part of laypeople. If this is so, I would appreciate it if someone quoted the rubics in the matter. That is, that definitely says this.

According to the understanding I have had so far, the laity are not told what gesture to take during the mass. If a priest or bishop told their people how to hold their hands during mass, they would be exceeding their authority.

I would not use the orans position myself, particularly during the consecration, for example, because it would seem to be imitating the priest then. But so far I have not seen the rubric forbidding the orans position at all.

 

[FrDavid96]

…

If General, actually meant absolute, they would not have added the word General in the first place and every Catholic Church would be following the GIRM without variation,
…

Jim

You’re trying to attach a different meaning to the word “general.” General does not mean absolute, but the GIRM itself is absolute in what it says.

It does not mean what you’re trying to make it mean. It does not mean “changeable” or “variable” or even perhaps “optional.” That is NOT what it means–although you (certainly seem ) to keep insisting on applying that definition.

It means that there are some forms of Mass that are not addressed in the document directly and fully. So we don’t find the rubrics for ordination in the GIRM or the Roman Missal. Instead, we find them in other documents and/or books. The GIRM still tells us how the actual Mass happens. It is indeed “absolute” in the sense that it cannot be changed except by approval of the Holy See, in which case (usually) the GIRM itself is edited to reflect that change.

The problem with the point you’re trying to make is that it is a form of equivocation that is often employed. People claim “it’s just the general instruction therefore I’m free to do whatever I please.” That is exactly what it does not mean.

 

[FrDavid96]

Ah, bother, here we go again.

I think we can all agree on one thing: the GIRM does not say what postures the laity may take with their hands during the Our Father.

It is an interesting bit of logic that says “Well, in Italy the orans posture is allowed… but it has absolutely no place in the liturgy as far as the laity are concerned, period.” Different GIRM’s for different areas, leaves one to wonder why silence boots directly to no mimicking the priest’s directions as an absolute, when in the universal Church, it is most definitely not an absolute.

And if I may, reductio ad absurdem should be beneath the dignity of any poster.

And I will again reiterate something I said in the past. In law school, in discussing philosophy of law, the professor remarked that in Europe there were two general approaches to law: the Germanic, which says “Whatever is not permitted is prohibited”, and the Mediterranean, which says “Whatever is not prohibited is permitted.”

In the mid 1960’s, holding hands during the Our Father spread rapidly, with it’s apparent locus being the Charismatic Renewal. The orans posture appears to be related also to the Charismatic Renewal, although it did not spread as fast as hand holding. And Rome has been aware for decades of both practices, and sine the introduction of the Ordinary Form of the Mass, has seen fit to remain silent on the matter of what the laity is or is not to do with their hands during the Our Father. Given the report that it is allowed in Italy expressly, and that the GIRM for the US has remained silent with Rome’s knowledge, I would think that the Mediterranean approach to the matter would carry far more weight than the Germanic.

I don’t have a dog in the fight. Both - holding hands and the orans - are done by the majority in my parish, and in most parishes in which I have attended Mass over the years. If the individual next to me in the pew wishes to hold hands, I will do so, out of charity. If they use the orans, I for one am not going to correct them. And if they do not hold hands, I don’t extend mine.

We all need to remember that there are matters which are of extreme importance, such as respect for life, and living peacefully with nations which choose to not live peacefully.

On the scale of 1 to 10, this one - and this thread - do not tip the scales.

The Mediterranean or Germanic approach to law has nothing to do with Catholic liturgical norms. Nothing.

The GIRM describes what is done. That’s how Catholic liturgical norms work. The Church says “do this” and “say that.” The norms describe exactly what is done. Period. Yes, period, no nonsense about German compared to Italian interpretations. Do exactly what is in the text. Do not add, do not omit, do not change.

 

[JamalChristophr]

Will we get, and if so, how much, extra time in Purgatory for doing the Orans posture?

 

[FrDavid96]

The opening post definitely says the runics forbid this posture on the part of laypeople. If this is so, I would appreciate it if someone quoted the rubics in the matter. That is, that definitely says this.

According to the understanding I have had so far, the laity are not told what gesture to take during the mass. If a priest or bishop told their people how to hold their hands during mass, they would be exceeding their authority.

I would not use the orans position myself, particularly during the consecration, for example, because it would seem to be imitating the priest then. But so far I have not seen the rubric forbidding the orans position at all.

The rubrics do not, indeed cannot, address every possible imaginable scenario.

There is no rubric that specifically says “dressing a trained monkey in a red tuxedo and having him dance on the altar while the deacon reads the Gospel is not permitted.” We know it is not permitted because it is not described in the GIRM or the Missal or anywhere else.

We don’t need a rubric that says “the congregation do not throw ping pong balls at each other during the responsorial psalm” otherwise it’s permitted.

We don’t need a rubric that says “the deacon does not pass out bubble-gum and everyone blows a bubble during the Sanctus” otherwise it’s permitted.

The Church does not have to add a note to every single paragraph of the Mass that says “do not add anything else here.” That would be absurd. Instead the issue is addressed more broadly. The Church says that no one may add, remove, or change anything on his own authority, not even a sacerdos (which means bishop or priest).

No one may add.

No one may omit.

No one may change.

That’s the teaching of Vatican II (SC 22) This has been reiterated time and time again in the last 50 years by the Church.

Those 3 ideas cover pretty much everything.

If it’s in the norms, do it, and do it exactly as written.

If it’s not in the norms, don’t do it.

 

[misstherese]

I used to do the open hand gesture until I learned I wasn’t supposed to…

I moved and started going to a church in the city. In the beginning of mass, they do a “greet those near you” which I hadn’t experienced before at my rural church (because everyone knew everyone.) Everyone seemed very friendly. However, during the Our Father, I had my hand grabbed uncomfortably by a stranger. I had never encountered that before and I never went back to that church. It just didn’t feel right.

 

[babochka]

Maybe they were Eastern Catholics. We bow when the Trinity is mentioned. Most people bow slightly, but some more profoundly than others.This video gives a good example.

 

[babochka]

The GIRM describes what is done. That’s how Catholic liturgical norms work. The Church says “do this” and “say that.” The norms describe exactly what is done. Period. Yes, period, no nonsense about German compared to Italian interpretations. Do exactly what is in the text. Do not add, do not omit, do not change.

Shouldn’t the GIRM then specify how the laity should position their hands during the Our Father? If the people are told what to do with their hands, it would make it less likely that spontaneous gestures would arise.

On the occasions that I’ve seen this (which really have not been many) it has always seemed awkward and unecessarily showy to me, but it never really occurred to me that they were attempting to mimic the guesture of the priest. It always seemed like more of a charismatic thing to me.

 

[pnewton]

Shouldn’t the GIRM then specify how the laity should position their hands during the Our Father? If the people are told what to do with their hands, it would make it less likely that spontaneous gestures would arise.

What gets me is that spontaneous gestures exist. I see a lot of people folding their hands, like going up to communion, even though that is not in the GIRM. I linked Cardinal Arinze above where he said holding your hands like this or that, showing two oran-like positions and he said it is alright.

 

[babochka]

babochka:

Shouldn’t the GIRM then specify how the laity should position their hands during the Our Father? If the people are told what to do with their hands, it would make it less likely that spontaneous gestures would arise.

What gets me is that spontaneous gestures exist. I see a lot of people folding their hands, like going up to communion, even though that is not in the GIRM. I linked Cardinal Arinze above where he said holding your hands like this or that, showing two oran-like positions and he said it is alright.

I was just getting ready to reply to that message. I haven’t watched the video yet, but I agree with the sentiment as you expressed it. I don’t understand the desire to so closely regulate what the people do and how they express themselves in prayer, even in corporate prayer. We’re much looser about this sort of thing in the East. The variety of what goes on in the nave of some Eastern Churches, particularly those of Middle Eastern cultures, would drive some people absolutely batty.

 

[Linhares]

Hi,

Just wanted to clarify coz I feel what you mentioned is not all true…

For the “Sign of peace”, we use both handshake & joint hands and bowing to a person (as you mentioned but there’s no thumbs on the forehead). This has nothing to do with the Namaste gesture. The Namaste concept is totally different. Catholic don’t use it, it’s more a Hindu thing.

People getting down on all fours is only in the Blessed Sacrament. Personally I have never seen anyone doing it in front of Mother Mary or any of the other saints statues.

All women wearing sarees is just ridiculous. None of the ladies in my family wear sarees to church, nor do any of my female friends. Nor do most of the women. It’s all western outfits that they wear. Sarees are more for celebrating Diwali, Independence Day, Traditional Day at work or for a Hindu wedding. And even if a woman does wear a saree why would it matter? It’s not wrong or inappropriate.

None of the churches look anything like a temple does. Nor are the decorated or colorful in the same way. There are not alot of statues.

Now the last part is true. I would not say a lot but yes there are people who do stand out. But it’s coz of 2 reasons. A few of them have no interest coming s and just come for mass coz they are forced to (mostly youth). The other is that there’s literally no place inside the church. Will give you an example of my Parish. There are 5107 families alone or around 25000 members (at last count). And even then we are not the largest/biggest parish in Mumbai! We have multiple masses on Sundays just coz of this reason. We have morning mass at 7, 8.15, 9.40 & 11. Evening mass at 5.30. Saturday evening mass at 6 & 7.15. Not to forget daily mass at 7 AM n 7 PM. During all masses the church is completely filled.

Would like to know which church you went to while you were here?

 

[FrDavid96]

babochka:

Shouldn’t the GIRM then specify how the laity should position their hands during the Our Father? If the people are told what to do with their hands, it would make it less likely that spontaneous gestures would arise.

What gets me is that spontaneous gestures exist. I see a lot of people folding their hands, like going up to communion, even though that is not in the GIRM. I linked Cardinal Arinze above where he said holding your hands like this or that, showing two oran-like positions and he said it is alright.

It is irrelevant what individuals do (with regard to this topic).

However, we are so far beyond that in real-life experience.

This (either hand-holding or orans) phenomenon has taken on a life of its own. It has become a corporate gesture of the congregation; whether people will admit it or not.

This is not about “does it matter if Junior holds mom’s hand at some point in Mass?” It has devolved to the point where it has actually become a part of that part of the Mass. When the entire congregation is doing the same thing at the same time, it is no longer a matter of individuals.

Having hands folded is indeed a private gesture. It doesn’t get in the way of anyone else. It does not distract anyone else the way hand-waving does. It does not compel others to participate the way corporate hand-holding does.

The Church does not seek to regulate the posture of individuals at Mass rigidly.

We aren’t talking about individual gestures anymore. Those days are long past. It is a corporate gesture and it has become part of the Mass, albeit an illicit part.

 

[babochka]

It is irrelevant what individuals do (with regard to this topic).

However, we are so far beyond that in real-life experience.

This (either hand-holding or orans) phenomenon has taken on a life of its own. It has become a corporate gesture of the congregation; whether people will admit it or not.

This is not about “does it matter if Junior holds mom’s hand at some point in Mass?” It has devolved to the point where it has actually become a part of that part of the Mass. When the entire congregation is doing the same thing at the same time, it is no longer a matter of individuals.

Having hands folded is indeed a private gesture. It doesn’t get in the way of anyone else. It does not distract anyone else the way hand-waving does. It does not compel others to participate the way corporate hand-holding does.

The Church does not seek to regulate the posture of individuals at Mass rigidly.

We aren’t talking about individual gestures anymore. Those days are long past. It is a corporate gesture and it has become part of the Mass, albeit an illicit part.

When you put it this way, I can see what you are saying, but is it really so common? I really have only seen this a few times where the entire congregation takes part. And yes, I have felt the pressure to take part, even though it is awkward and uncomfortable to me. The few times I’ve seen it congregation-wide have been in a large Archdiocese in the southern part of my west-coast state. We’re more conservative up here in the north. I rarely go to a Latin-rite church on Sundays, but I attend daily Mass somewhat regularly at several different parishes and I only see a handful of people doing it.

 

[Linhares]

Why does this topic even matter? When there are bigger issues that need our attention!!!

e.g: members leaving the catholic church, the growing popularity of satanism, abortions.

 

[pnewton]

We aren’t talking about individual gestures anymore. Those days are long past. It is a corporate gesture and it has become part of the Mass, albeit an illicit part.

I am wondering, with the caveat that I don’t like really like the orans thing, but when does a gesture, if it truly is becoming corporate without ever be proscribed, promoted or suggested, constitute organic development, a movement by the Holy Spirit?

 

[Tis_Bearself]

I see a lot of people folding their hands, like going up to communion, even though that is not in the GIRM.

You are taught when you make your First Communion that you are supposed to fold your hands when you go up to Communion. It’s considered a reverent thing to do.
The kids appear to still be being taught to do this as when I see a First Communion class they are all doing it.

 

[FrDavid96]

I am wondering, with the caveat that I don’t like really like the orans thing, but when does a gesture, if it truly is becoming corporate without ever be proscribed, promoted or suggested, constitute organic development, a movement by the Holy Spirit?

I doubt it. I am always highly suspect when people say that the Holy Spirit tells them to invent their own form of the Mass–whether it’s something of greater or lesser significance.

It’s not about worshipping God. It’s about focusing attention on oneself. It’s the “look at me” attitude. That’s why it keeps changing. First it was hand-holding. Once it was no longer a novelty, it morphed into doing “the wave.” What will come next? Who knows. Maybe people will start making letters like cheerleaders or like when people sing the YMCA song.

It doesn’t focus anyone toward God. It does exactly the opposite. The gesture clearly says “look at me.”
These gestures have no basis or foundation in Catholic liturgical practice either. Genuine liturgical development is organic–it grows out of existing forms. It evolves from existing forms. This isn’t evolution, it’s genetic manipulation. It’s taking clippings from Pentecostalism and trying to graft them onto the Catholic Mass (at least the hand-holding and waving things we see).

Genuine liturgical development does not clash or conflict with what came before or what exists now; instead it harmonizes with it. The whole “everybody does the orans” doesn’t have any solid foundation–it’s always been a presidential gesture. It really comes out of the idea that people aren’t participating at Mass unless they’re doing the parts of the Mass which are properly the priest’s part.

I think we’ve communicated enough on CAF that you know by now I don’t accept the Charismatic thing as genuine. I don’t. Really. I think it’s fooled a lot of people, including people not otherwise easily fooled. I don’t believe for one minute that it’s inspired by the Holy Spirit. I certainly believe it’s done far more harm to the Church than good. That’s my opinion and I’m entitled to hold it.

What good has it accomplished by making the orans position a corporate gesture (in places where it’s taken hold)? It’s a serious question. Are people who do this somehow more in-tune with the Mass? What have been the fruits of this? Does it bring the community together (as proponents sometimes claim) or has it caused division? A quick look at this thread answers that. Does division and a spirit of divisiveness come from the Holy Spirit?

 

[Cor_ad_Cor]

How reliable a source on such matters is Church Militant?

I wouldn’t rely on them for anything more than bird cage liner.