Our Father posture

[FrDavid96]

Again, I’m reminded of the words of St John Paul II

…it must be lamented that, especially in the years following the post-conciliar liturgical reform, as a result of a misguided sense of creativity and adaptation there have been a number of abuses which have been a source of suffering for many. A certain reaction against “formalism” has led some, especially in certain regions, to consider the “forms” chosen by the Church’s great liturgical tradition and her Magisterium as non-binding and to introduce unauthorized innovations which are often completely inappropriate.

He wrote that in 2003, yet his words are still being ignored and dismissed in certain circles. Indeed “it must be lamented.”

Source: http://www.vatican.va/holy_father/s...-ii_enc_20030417_ecclesia_eucharistia_en.html

 

[FrDavid96]

[ there is already a dramatic precedent for the Americans misunderstanding the rubrics at the beginning of 21st century.

No such thing ever happened.

…

The truth is that the U.S. bishops had a question. They submitted a question (dubium) to the Congregation for Divine Worship, and the Congregation answered their question.

Here is the truth of what happened:

Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments

5 June 2003

Prot. n. 855/03/L

Dubium: In many places, the faithful are accustomed to kneeling or sitting in personal prayer upon returning to their places after having individually received Holy Communion during Mass. Is it the intention of the Missale Romanum, editio typica tertia, to forbid this practice?

Responsum: Negative, et ad mentem. The mens is that the prescription of the Institutio Generalis Missalis Romani, no. 43, is intended, on one hand, to ensure within broad limits a certain uniformity of posture within the congregation for the various parts of the celebration of the Holy Mass, and on the other, to not regulate posture rigidly in such a way that those who wish to kneel or sit would no longer be free.

Francis Cardinal Arinze
Prefect

 

[babochka]

“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” (ICP Practical Provisions 6 §2).

Yet, in spite of your interpretation of this, the Vatican has seen fit to specifically approve this posture, for the laity, in countries that have sought this approval. Do you think it is possible that you misinterpret this passage, or has the Vatican erred in giving its approval, not properly understanding its own document?

 

[CradleRC58]

Do you have a link to this document/permission/approval you speak of ?

 

[babochka]

Do you have a link to this document/permission/approval you speak of ?

I do not. I have taken the word of @Don_Ruggero as fact, as he is certainly more acquainted with European liturgical issues than any of us. I imagine such documentation is not readily available in English.

 

[CradleRC58]

“The Supreme Pontiff, in Audience of the 13th of August 1997 approved in forma specifica this present Instruction and ordered its promulgation.”

The Supreme Pontiff would have been John Paul II. And as you can see he ordered the promulgation of that instruction.

Until somebody shows me a link to the Vatican website that overturns this, I’ll accept it as gospel.

 

[phil19034]

Of the American Bishops I have had the pleasure to meet, I have had a great esteem for Archbishop Chaput going all the way back to when he was the Bishop of Rapid City-in-South Dakota. He addressed the issue well when he was Archbishop of Denver – an address we subsequently had occasion to speak about because it had been sent to me – and I have kept his words in an electronic file across the years because his treatment was particularly pastoral, as well as exact, in its formulation.

Archbishop Chaput is my Archbishop. I agree with what he says here. I have no issue with people who want to do the Orans position.

However, I do find it curious that some people who are militant about using it do not use it when praying the Our Father during the Liturgy of the Hours or at other times they pray the Our Father.

I also find it curious when some of these same people refuse to do some things we are asked to do during the liturgy, like tapping on their chest during the Confiteor or bowing during the Creed.

As long as no one grabs my hand or gives me the stink eye because I prefer to pray with my hands clasped together (which I do all the time when standing at mass), it doesn’t bother if they want to hold hands or using the orans position.

God Bless

NOTE: however, it does distract me when non-priests in the sanctuary do it (cantor, reader, server or deacon) because it subconsciously diverts my attention towards them.

 

[babochka]

“The Supreme Pontiff, in Audience of the 13th of August 1997 approved in forma specifica this present Instruction and ordered its promulgation.”

The Supreme Pontiff would have been John Paul II. And as you can see he ordered the promulgation of that instruction.

Until somebody shows me a link to the Vatican website that overturns this, I’ll accept it as gospel.

I don’t deny any of this. I don’t contend that it has been overturned. I believe you are misapplying the passage that you quoted. I do not see how this is a matter of quasi-presiding at the Mass.

 

[FrDavid96]

Yet, in spite of your interpretation of this, the Vatican has seen fit to specifically approve this posture, for the laity, in countries that have sought this approval. Do you think it is possible that you misinterpret this passage, or has the Vatican erred in giving its approval, not properly understanding its own document?

Assuming that it’s true, that the Vatican gave approval for one or more countries for the laity to assume the gesture of the celebrant at the Our Father…

Logic alone dictates the following:

1 Such permission was necessary. The Holy See is not in the business of giving permission for something that does not need permission in the first place. If it were true that this decision can be made on the local level, then the Holy See would have responded to the request by stating the obvious, that such permission is not necessary. The fact that the permission was given proves that, as far as the Holy See is concerned, approval is needed.

2 Adaptations are only approved for certain countries/regions. The fact that the Holy See granted recognition to a request for one country in no way, shape, or form, can that permission be applied to other countries. It might (just perhaps) signal a willingness on the part of the Holy See to entertain similar requests from other countries, however, that’s mere speculation. Permission granted for one country does not imply permission for a different country.

 

[babochka]

Good points, @FrDavid96. I’ll have to think about them.

How do you respond to the comments of Archbishop Chaput?

 

[BartholomewB]

Do we fold our hands, or hold them outstretched, or hold hands with those around us? Some people have surprisingly strong feelings about this issue.

It certainly surprises me.

 

[FrDavid96]

Good points, @FrDavid96. I’ll have to think about them.

How do you respond to the comments of Archbishop Chaput?

I want to say this carefully.

People can disagree with each other.

I can respectfully disagree with someone’s conclusion without in any way having less regard for his person or his office.

I likewise disagree with the European Cardinals who advocate Communion for the divorced-remarried. That doesn’t mean I have any less respect for them personally or for their office.

So, yes, I disagree with the conclusion. I think that much should be obvious by now.

 

[CradleRC58]

I found this explanation which is basically in line with how it was explained to me by a priest.

"The liturgical use of this position by the priest is spelled out in the rubrics (the laws governing how the Mass is said). It indicates his praying on BEHALF of us, acting as alter Christus as pastor of the flock, head of the body. It used to be minutely defined in the rubrics, which now say only, “extends his hands” or “with hands extended.” Priests understand what is meant (from observation and training), and although there is some variability between priests basically the same gesture is obtained from all of them by these words.

In the rubrics the Orans gesture is asked principally of the Main Celebrant, but on those occasions where either a priestly action is done (Eucharistic Prayer) or prayer in common (Our Father) all the concelebrants do it."
https://www.ewtn.com/expert/answers/orans_posture.htm

The priest, per the rubrics of the priest himself, assumes the orans posture to offer our prayers (in this case the Our Father).

Please know that this pertains to the rubrics of the priest during the liturgy. That document from the Vatican specifically pertains to the postures and rubrics of the priest during the Mass.

Have you ever noticed at parishes where the rosary is prayed before Mass that those in the pews praying the Rosary don’t assume the orans posture when they recite the Our Father ?

That illustrates my point when I used the term aping the priest. People are doing this during the Mass. At that point is is a novelty introduced by the laity not the Church.

 

[babochka]

@Don_Ruggero, could you explain how this clarification was made? Did the bishops of those countries seek clarification or permission? I’m which countries has this occurred?

 

[phil19034]

Have you ever noticed at parishes where the rosary is prayed before Mass that those in the pews praying the Rosary don’t assume the orans posture when they recite the Our Father ?

Yeap. Only a very, very few use the Orans posture when praying the Our Father outside of Mass.

If they always prayed the Our Father that way, I would accept their arguments regarding why they do it during mass. But when they don’t, it makes it hard to accept the argument.

Again, I really don’t care as long as they don’t try to make me do it. But I do think it’s funny to see a ton of people doing it during Mass, but those same people not doing it during the Rosary or Liturgy of the Hours.

 

[JohnLilburne]

Don_Ruggero quoted Archbishop Chaput: “The priest stands with his arms outstretched as the prayer begins. The assembly should also stand. There are no options for gestures listed in the General Instruction for this part of the Mass. For many persons, folding their hands during the “Our Father” is the best way to express their prayer. For others, they may hold their hands outstretched. Still others hold hands.
None of these gestures is mandated or forbidden by the Church. …”.

Bishop Roger Joys of Covington (in Kentucky, United States) wrote in a 2011 decree, in 4c: (The full document is at http://www.praytellblog.com/wp-cont...storal-Letter-with-Decree-Bulletin-Insert.pdf ).
“Special note should also be made concerning the gesture for the Our Father. Only the priest is given the instruction to “extend” his hands. Neither the deacon nor the lay faithful are instructed to do this. No gesture is prescribed for the lay faithful in the Roman Missal; nor the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, therefore the extending or holding of hands by the faithful should not be performed.”

Here are some extracts of documents that highlight that it is what the liturgical books say that is the higher authority.

From the Oath of Fidelity on Assuming an Office to be Exercised in the Name of the Church:

“…. I shall follow and foster the common discipline of the whole Church and I shall observe all ecclesiastical laws, especially those which are contained in the Code of Canon Law. … So help me God, and God’s holy Gospels, on which I place my hand.”

From the Code of Canon Law (New Revised English Translation 1997, ISBN 000599375X): Canon 846 §1 “The liturgical books are to be faithfully followed in the celebration of the sacraments. …”.

From the General Instruction of the Roman Missal (GIRM):

“237. Then the principle celebrant, with hands joined, says the introduction to the Lord’s Prayer. Next, with hands extended, he says the Lord’s Prayer itself with the other concelebrants, who also pray with hands extended, and together with the people.”

From the Ceremonial of Bishops, Stational Mass of the Diocesan Bishop:

“159 After the doxology of the eucharistic prayer, the bishop, with hands joined, introduces the Lord’s Prayer, which all then sing or say; the bishop and the concelebrants hold their hands outstretched.”

From the GIRM:
“124. … When the Entrance Chant is concluded, with everybody standing, the Priest and faithful sign themselves with the Sign of the Cross.”

 

[babochka]

Don_Ruggero quoted Archbishop Chaput: “The priest stands with his arms outstretched as the prayer begins. The assembly should also stand. There are no options for gestures listed in the General Instruction for this part of the Mass. For many persons, folding their hands during the “Our Father” is the best way to express their prayer. For others, they may hold their hands outstretched. Still others hold hands.
None of these gestures is mandated or forbidden by the Church. …”.

Bishop Roger Joys of Covington (in Kentucky, United States) wrote in a 2011 decree, in 4c: (The full document is at http://www.praytellblog.com/wp-cont...storal-Letter-with-Decree-Bulletin-Insert.pdf ).

Those faithful who fall under Archbishop Chaput should follow his guidance on the matter and do what they wish with their hands while praying the Our Father during Mass. Those who are in the diocese of Bishop Joys should follow his directive.

In your opinion, and only our opinions apply here, as the Church does not appear to have specifically addressed this issue in a manner that can be applied universally, what hand position should the faithful assume, and why? Should they stand with hands by their sides, hands clasped together, arms crossed over their chests (another ancient prayer position), hands held in the “praying hands” position? Basically, anything EXCEPT hands outstretched? Since the Church has given no guidance, what is appropriate?

 

[Frankenfurter]

I hope others can relate. I find it comforting to know what to do. This frees me to be in a state of prayer without having to think about what I should be doing or what other people are doing that I should do. I hope you understand what I mean.

For me, it seems unnatural to hold hands. The Lord’s prayer is not about doing a community prayer or having some kind of social gathering. For me it is about being able to say the words that I know that Jesus himself spoke and suggested that we say. There is much to contemplate in it.

I would prefer to be left alone in my prayer and I am glad that my church gives me that guidance so I don’t have to be distracted by what other people think we should be doing.

Please don’t try to hold my hand when I am praying using my Lord’s words. It’s not about ‘us’. I wish to focus on him instead.

 

[FrDavid96]

Basically, anything EXCEPT hands outstretched? Since the Church has given no guidance, what is appropriate?

Because the Church has said that this is a gesture reserved to the celebrant.

Think about it: since we know (beyond doubt) that the deacon is NOT to use this gesture, it makes perfect sense that the congregation is likewise not to use it.

The fact that it is a presidential gesture is what matters here. In western liturgical tradition, this gesture has always been reserved to the celebrant. That sets it apart from another gesture that might simply be “nothing is prescribed.”

Maybe if I put this into an Eastern perspective. Imagine if some group of people were to decide that “everyone” should be using a hand-cross at Divine Liturgy. There’s no actual prohibition against the congregation all bringing and using hand crosses; that doesn’t make it legitimate. There is no rubric that says “the congregation is prohibited from using hand crosses at Divine Liturgy” but that doesn’t make it right because (as you know) the hand cross is reserved to the celebrant (and sometimes concelebrant).

 

[Don_Ruggero]

You keep repeating the same lie. And that’s exactly what it is: a falsehood, a lie, an act of deception.

Your outright dishonesty here proves your lack of credibility.

No such thing happened.

I want what you originally wrote to be actually be visible in this thread – unaltered