Posture during the Lord's Prayer

[phil19034]

I keep my hands together “flat” like the Deacons and Seminarians do.

Right thumb over the left. But I do that that during the entire mass, except when sitting.

 

[otjm]

That’s because the original post was an invitation to argue.

Whether that was the intent of the poster or not, I cannot say; but the topic itself seems to invite expansion, simply by its existence.

 

[KidCatholic1]

I usually prefer praying alone, so I keep my hands closed most of the time.

 

[phil19034]

This thread originally started as a simple question of “What do you do”, and not unlike many other previous threads concerning holding hands during the Our Father (or the orans position), it has devolved into a “rightness or wrongness” discussion - so what the heck, I’ll add a bit more.

Some years ago, after the working edition of the GIRM came out, there was a question going around like wildfire, concerning the posture after one had received Communion and before all others had received.

A dubium was sent by Cardinal George to Rome. Cardinal Arinze responded in part, that Rome did not intend to be rigid about the matter (the way the GIRM was written made it appear that all were to remain standing after receiving until the last had received).

It was tradition that people would kneel while waiting for the rest to receive.

Cardinal Arinze’s answer was that people could stand, sit or kneel after returning to their pew.

**I note this, as in this thread much has been made about unity of posture. ** I am not against unity of posture, and although I rarely ever see anyone return to their pew and stand, if we can survive Rome’s willingness to allow different postures after reception, it would seem that we could survive a difference in posture during the Our Father with some holding hands and some not.

**The absolute unity of posture during the Our Father (hands with palms together). **while being proposed as appropriate/necessary/required/(whatever word feels appropriate), in its approach does not appear to be the approach Rome takes, at least as an absolute.

The GIRM does have directions which provide a unity of posture (sitting, standing, kneeling), but the directions are limited (as in, they don’t include hand placements), and Rome has seen fit not to require unity of posture after reception of Communion, and Rome has also seen fit to not address hand holding or the orans posture.

Over Thanksgiving I attended Mass in another state, in a suburban area about 25 miles out of a major metropolitan area, and it was the first time in a long time that I had seen anyone stand after receiving, and it was initially disconcerting. But it took me less than 30 seconds to redirect my attention to my reception, and to return to prayer. So it is not like I don’t get it that some things can cause one’s focus to wander.

On the other hand, we all have choices; we can continue to be distracted, or we can refocus. It is our choice as to where we focus. And redirecting focus is not all that difficult. Rome has chosen, over something between 40 and 50 years, to ignore holding hands, and for the better part of that length of time, to ignore the orans position. All of the arguments which have been proposed as to the wrongness of those two postures needs to accept that it is an issue among some of the laity, and not an issue with Rome. And as Archbishop Chaput publicly put it, both sides have a duty of charity to the other side in the matter and to allow the other person the choice as to what they do with their hands, as well as what we do.

I don’t think “unity in posture” has anything to do with the discussion regarding prayer during the Our Father. We don’t have to all have our hands in a prayer position similar to the seminarians & Deacons.

The cause for the discussion is the lay use of the Orans position and the reason the priest uses it.

When the priest uses the Orans position, he is collecting our prayers and then funneling them to God. It takes away from the symbolism.

I don’t have an issue with family members wanting to hold hands, but please don’t make strangers feel like they have to hold your hand.

However, the main issue I have with people holding their hands our is the same issue Archbishop Sample has with it… people are adding a posture to the Mass, but not doing the things the GIRM calls for – like bowing during the Creed & nodding the head when the Name of Jesus, The Blessed Trinity, Blessed Mother, and/or the name of the saint(s) of the day are mentioned.

Good article here: epicpew.com/10-things-you-might-be-doing-wrong-at-mass/

 

[ProVobis]

So do you hold your hands in the orans position throughout all the prayers you say during Mass? The Confiteor, the Gloria, the Creed, the Sanctus, the Agnes Dei and all the other prayers you say during the Mass?

Not to worry. I’ve seen people extend the same posture to the priest when reciting, “And with your spirit” among other things.

 

[otjm]

I don’t think “unity in posture” has anything to do with the discussion regarding prayer during the Our Father. We don’t have to all have our hands in a prayer position similar to the seminarians & Deacons.

Post #24 brings it up.

The cause for the discussion is the lay use of the Orans position and the reason the priest uses it.

Both the orans and the hand holding are the cause of the discussion.

When the priest uses the Orans position, he is collecting our prayers and then funneling them to God. It takes away from the symbolism.

The discussion of the orans position, being one the priest uses, generally heads in the direction that we are not to mimic the priest’s posture; what then is one to make of the direction the priest appears to have of holding his hands palms together, finger pointing out? If one is not to mimic the orans; then by analogy, one is not to mimic the palms together, fingers out - or is there a reason that is not also to be proscribed?

II don’t have an issue with family members wanting to hold hands, but please don’t make strangers feel like they have to hold your hand.

Which is a bit of a paraphrase of what Archbishop Chaput said, and with which I agree. It should not be forced as that is a clear lack of charity.

IHowever, the main issue I have with people holding their hands our is the same issue Archbishop Sample has with it… people are adding a posture to the Mass, but not doing the things the GIRM calls for – like bowing during the Creed & nodding the head when the Name of Jesus, The Blessed Trinity, Blessed Mother, and/or the name of the saint(s) of the day are mentioned.

I can’t speak for other parishes, but ours certainly bows at the Creed and has been doing so since it was part of the instructions.

Not to make too find a point of it, but Archbishop Sample was 5 years old when people were holding hands during the Our Father. And the repeated mantra that people are adding to the Mass is not sustained in liturgical law, as a) there is no rule for how people are to hold their hands during Mass, let alone the Our Father; and b) where there was a clear and long history or people kneeling after receiving Communion, and when the GIRM appeared to specify that people stand after receiving (which is why the dubium was submitted), Rome (Cardinal Arinze) said that it was not the intent that people’s postures be regulated that strictly. Why then, if Rome does not wish to regulate that strictly, where there is a specific posture stated, does everyone want to regulate where there is absolutely no posture stated? It is because they don’t like it. Not because there is a liturgical law lurking in the background about additions to the Mass.

Rome has had 45, if not 50 years to deal with this matter, and they have on numerous occasions, ruled by silence. Not only has there been 3 versions of the GIRM plus amendments to it, but there has also been at least one major admonishment concerning abuses during the Mass, and in not a single one of the documents has the matter even been mentioned.

I have no doubt that the Archbishop does not like the gesture; and I have no doubt there are other bishops who do not like it. And I have no doubt that there are bishops who do like it.

And I am not so naïve as to think that one or more of the bishops who don’t like it have not made their feelings known to Rome; Rome’s action? Silence.

I also have no question you don’t like it, and that is perfectly fine. As I said, I don’t have a dog in this fight. If Rome says tomorrow “Don’t hold hands during the Our Father”, I will be among the first to follow their rule.

Archbishop Chaput knows more about liturgical law, than the combination of all those who protest against this issue. As he indicated in his open letter, he was sick and tired of the matter; there was and is no liturgical law prohibiting holding hands during the Our Father (including the alluded to “adding to the Mass” prohibition). and he is not what I would call a liberal.

 

[Phemie]

where there was a clear and long history or people kneeling after receiving Communion, and when the GIRM appeared to specify that people stand after receiving (which is why the dubium was submitted),

Interesting in itself since the GIRM at that point had not changed the posture that had been in place since 1975. Nobody had ever questioned the 1975 GIRM on posture, they’d simply ignored it. It was as though, suddenly, someone had decided to read the article on posture and said, 27 years after the fact, “Wait! They want us to do WHAT?!?”

 

[ProVobis]

The discussion of the orans position, being one the priest uses, generally heads in the direction that we are not to mimic the priest’s posture; what then is one to make of the direction the priest appears to have of holding his hands palms together, finger pointing out? If one is not to mimic the orans; then by analogy, one is not to mimic the palms together, fingers out - or is there a reason that is not also to be proscribed?

Depends on how far you want to go with the argument. I remember a time in one of the parishes where people started reciting “Through Him and with Him…” along with the priest and the priest said nothing about it, even smiled as though to encourage such response. When the word got around to the bishop, he was not impressed and put an immediate stop to it. I can’t think of any other reason except not to mimic the priest. Are recitations different than gestures or posture in this regard?

But to your point, I would consider fingers or hands together being of a more natural state than extension of the arms or hand holding. If you wish to consider that posture as mimicking the priest, then you have to re-examine every little thing we do at Mass in the same light. I don’t think we want to go there.

 

[otjm]

Depends on how far you want to go with the argument. I remember a time in one of the parishes where people started reciting “Through Him and with Him…” along with the priest and the priest said nothing about it, even smiled as though to encourage such response. When the word got around to the bishop, he was not impressed and put an immediate stop to it. I can’t think of any other reason except not to mimic the priest. Are recitations different than gestures or posture in this regard?

Recitations are specifically set out as to what the laity says. Bodily postures are set out for the laity in a very limited range - specifically standing, sitting, or kneeling (and with the exception of “after reception of Communion” as noted.

But to your point, I would consider fingers or hands together being of a more natural state than extension of the arms or hand holding. If you wish to consider that posture as mimicking the priest, then you have to re-examine every little thing we do at Mass in the same light. I don’t think we want to go there.

Hand holding is a fairly universal sign of unity between two or more people. There are some cultural differences; for example, in Vietnam, it is far more likely that 2 heterosexual males would hold hands while walking, than one would see in the US. In the US, one seeing that would likely presume the two were not heterosexual. It is a cultural matter, in some instances, as to who holds hands with whom, but it is a universal practice to hold hands.

I am not the one who came up with the comment or idea about the orans position mimicking the priest’s posture of orans (and I am not saying that one is not mimicking it). What I am asking is this: If taking the orans position during the Our Father is mimicking the priest’s posture (and there is no GIRM statement that we are to do so), then why does the same rule not apply to holding one’s hands, palms together also not considered to be mimicking the priest’s posture (which he is required to do by the rubrics - which are silent as to the laity)? The priest has many more places where he is either directed to hold his hand palm together, or does so without specific directions. The GIRM is silent as to the laity.

 

[ProVobis]

If taking the orans position during the Our Father is mimicking the priest’s posture (and there is no GIRM statement that we are to do so), then why does the same rule not apply to holding one’s hands, palms together also not considered to be mimicking the priest’s posture

The natural position in any situation is to allow the hands to hang down. Yes, it does take a conscious effort to join the hands together, more so the higher you hold them. But that has been the accepted etiquette behavior in Catholic Churches most of the time, whether one is sitting in the pew or walking around the Church. How can you call that mimicking the priest when he’s not even there?

 

[otjm]

The natural position in any situation is to allow the hands to hang down. Yes, it does take a conscious effort to join the hands together, more so the higher you hold them. But that has been the accepted etiquette behavior in Catholic Churches most of the time, whether one is sitting in the pew or walking around the Church. How can you call that mimicking the priest when he’s not even there?

You are avoiding the question.

 

[ProVobis]

You are avoiding the question.

It was your only question and I saw it as a loaded one. Thanks for the discussion.

 

[corsair]

To answer the OP’s post “what do you do?”; I go to the TLM where we don’t do any of that.
We kneel at a low Mass and stand at a High Mass, while the priest recites the Pater Noster.

God Bless

 

[corsair]

To answer the OP’s post “what do you do?”; I go to the TLM where we don’t do any of that.
We kneel at a low Mass and stand at a High Mass, while the priest recites the Pater Noster.

God Bless

 

[phil19034]

Post #24 brings it up.

Both the orans and the hand holding are the cause of the discussion.

The discussion of the orans position, being one the priest uses, generally heads in the direction that we are not to mimic the priest’s posture; what then is one to make of the direction the priest appears to have of holding his hands palms together, finger pointing out? If one is not to mimic the orans; then by analogy, one is not to mimic the palms together, fingers out - or is there a reason that is not also to be proscribed?

Which is a bit of a paraphrase of what Archbishop Chaput said, and with which I agree. It should not be forced as that is a clear lack of charity.

I can’t speak for other parishes, but ours certainly bows at the Creed and has been doing so since it was part of the instructions.

Not to make too find a point of it, but Archbishop Sample was 5 years old when people were holding hands during the Our Father. And the repeated mantra that people are adding to the Mass is not sustained in liturgical law, as a) there is no rule for how people are to hold their hands during Mass, let alone the Our Father; and b) where there was a clear and long history or people kneeling after receiving Communion, and when the GIRM appeared to specify that people stand after receiving (which is why the dubium was submitted), Rome (Cardinal Arinze) said that it was not the intent that people’s postures be regulated that strictly. Why then, if Rome does not wish to regulate that strictly, where there is a specific posture stated, does everyone want to regulate where there is absolutely no posture stated? It is because they don’t like it. Not because there is a liturgical law lurking in the background about additions to the Mass.

Rome has had 45, if not 50 years to deal with this matter, and they have on numerous occasions, ruled by silence. Not only has there been 3 versions of the GIRM plus amendments to it, but there has also been at least one major admonishment concerning abuses during the Mass, and in not a single one of the documents has the matter even been mentioned.

I have no doubt that the Archbishop does not like the gesture; and I have no doubt there are other bishops who do not like it. And I have no doubt that there are bishops who do like it.

And I am not so naïve as to think that one or more of the bishops who don’t like it have not made their feelings known to Rome; Rome’s action? Silence.

I also have no question you don’t like it, and that is perfectly fine. As I said, I don’t have a dog in this fight. If Rome says tomorrow “Don’t hold hands during the Our Father”, I will be among the first to follow their rule.

Archbishop Chaput knows more about liturgical law, than the combination of all those who protest against this issue. As he indicated in his open letter, he was sick and tired of the matter; there was and is no liturgical law prohibiting holding hands during the Our Father (including the alluded to “adding to the Mass” prohibition). and he is not what I would call a liberal.

I love Archbishop Chaput, he’s my Archbishop. I understand why the Bishops are not making a big deal out of this… I believe they are more likely to eliminate the Orans position for the priest during the Our Father than to correct the laity.

I wouldn’t say that Archbishop Sample wasn’t alive when people started doing that during Mass. In the parish I was born in (I’m 38 years old) they didn’t start doing that until the mid 90s.

But you are missing my point. I don’t care how the laity holds their hands, but during Mass the position is meant for the priest to collect all of our prayers and funnel them to God. If most people are using the Orans position, then there is little reason for the priest to do it.

Either stop the laity from using it or stop the priest for using it during the Our Father.

Finally, I wonder if this is mostly a North American thing or a worldwide practice?

 

[otjm]

I love Archbishop Chaput, he’s my Archbishop. I understand why the Bishops are not making a big deal out of this… I believe they are more likely to eliminate the Orans position for the priest during the Our Father than to correct the laity.

I wouldn’t say that Archbishop Sample wasn’t alive when people started doing that during Mass. In the parish I was born in (I’m 38 years old) they didn’t start doing that until the mid 90s.

But you are missing my point. I don’t care how the laity holds their hands, but during Mass the position is meant for the priest to collect all of our prayers and funnel them to God. If most people are using the Orans position, then there is little reason for the priest to do it.

Either stop the laity from using it or stop the priest for using it during the Our Father.

Finally, I wonder if this is mostly a North American thing or a worldwide practice?

My reference to Archbishop Sample was that I have a picture taken in 1965 of people holding hands during the Our Father; He was born in 1960. A BS in 1982 (engineering, I believe); MS in metallurgical engineering in 1984; 1986 (looks like a BA in Philosophy, College of St. Thomas), then Josephinum and ordained in 1990; Angelicum with a licentiate in Canon Law, 1996.

He has served in the Marriage Tribunal as judge, adjutant judicial vicar, defender of the bond, and promoter of justice. Appointed bishop of Marquette in December 2005 and consecrated January 2006. Appointed Archbishop of Portland, 2013.

 

[phil19034]

The discussion of the orans position, being one the priest uses, generally heads in the direction that we are not to mimic the priest’s posture; what then is one to make of the direction the priest appears to have of holding his hands palms together, finger pointing out? If one is not to mimic the orans; then by analogy, one is not to mimic the palms together, fingers out - or is there a reason that is not also to be proscribed?

Otjm -
In regards to this above comment from you to me… The traditional position of having your palms placed together with fingers straight out is not a mimic of the presiding priest. It’s a mimic of the Deacon, seminarians, installed acolytes, and priests sitting in choir. The seminarians and installed acolytes are both lay (even if they are bound for ordination).

Even the Altar Boys in the EF hold their hands that way and nuns used to teach that position to children in Catholic School.

Rome is NOT likely to tell the laity that they cannot pray that way because there is evidence that some Christians prayed that way back in the first few hundred years after Christ. It’s a ligitimate praying posture. That is not the issue.

The question really is why is the priest doing it? Again, if the priest is doing it to collect our prayers, then it’s it throws of the symbolism of him collecting our prayers.

So again, because it is a valid praying posture, I think it’s more likely that one day the priests will stop doing it vs Rome telling the laity to stop.

God Bless

 

[otjm]

Otjm -
In regards to this above comment from you to me… The traditional position of having your palms placed together with fingers straight out is not a mimic of the presiding priest. It’s a mimic of the Deacon, seminarians, installed acolytes, and priests sitting in choir. The seminarians and installed acolytes are both lay (even if they are bound for ordination).

The priest most definitely is taking that position in a number of places during the Mass. He was doing it before there were permanent deacons, and most parishes do not see a transitional deacon or an installed acolyte, and the of parishes have only one priest, so extras are not sitting in the choir.

Even the Altar Boys in the EF hold their hands that way and nuns used to teach that position to children in Catholic School.

And the priests prior to V2 took the same position. I know what kids were taught prior to V2 because I started Catholic grade school in the early 1950’s.

The question remains.

Rome is NOT likely to tell the laity that they cannot pray that way because there is evidence that some Christians prayed that way back in the first few hundred years after Christ. It’s a ligitimate praying posture. That is not the issue.

The question really is why is the priest doing it? Again, if the priest is doing it to collect our prayers, then it’s it throws of the symbolism of him collecting our prayers.

So again, because it is a valid praying posture, I think it’s more likely that one day the priests will stop doing it vs Rome telling the laity to stop.

God BlessI doubt that Rome is going to change the posture of the priest. And after 50 years, while Rome certainly has the authority to rule out holding hands during the Our Father, it seems more and more unlikely they will address it - but then, again, they might.

As to the orans posture, it is a very romantic picture someone painted of the priest gathering all the prayers; but it goes back to somewhere around the time of King David if one is to accept that he wrote the Psalms (or that they were written near his time); see Psalm 141.

As I said before, I don’t have a dog in this fight; but I do find that some of the arguments which are given against one or both gestures by the laity, by logical extension, open to critique.

 

[brad90956]

When I attend mass with my mother, we hold hands. If I am alone, I clasp my hands together.

 

[Revival]

Hands held together.