In the Western Church, the most common posture of prayer (whether private or at Mass) is to kneel (or even to sit!). However, the correct posture of liturgical prayer is to stand (stare - like ''stabat Mater dolorosa, iuxta Crucem lacrimosa...'' the sorrowful Mother stood, near the Cross weeping...although my mother's beautiful alabaster Calvary Crucifix, brought from Corfu in 1993, depicts the Blessed Virgin, who curiously unlike her companions St John the Beloved and St Mary Magdalen, is depicted without halo, kneeling); and both the Scriptures and the early Ecumenical Councils of the Church assume this to be the universal praxis - see for example St Mark 11:25: ''And when you shall stand to pray, forgive, if you have aught against any man'' etc; the Council of Nicaea 325 even forbids kneeling of any kind on Sundays - the day of the Lord's Resurrection (standing being, as it were, in imitation and memory of the Resurrection). The Scriptures and decisions of the General Councils being binding on all Christians, I wonder that they are so little heeded in this respect in the West.
This is not to say that I am against kneeling in liturgical prayer, especially in Eucharistic Adoration, for I am afterall a Western Christian. I have cited above a passage from the Gospels which assumes that standing is proper, but one could also easily cite other passages where kneeling is more proper, ''procidentes adoraverunt eum'' (in the Gospel for the Feast of the Epiphany of the Lord, St Matthew 2:11) for instance, or ''Peter, kneeling down, prayed...'' (Acts 9:40) The custom of kneeling arose in the West especially in respect of a development in understanding about the Eucharist. Kneeling in liturgical prayer is also especially pertinent on penitential and mourning days (such as the Vigils of Feasts, Fasting days and Requiems - the choir on these days kneel for the Collects and the Canon), which I suppose derives from the ancient Jewish praxis of kneeling when the supplicant was desirous of some grace urgently (such as Solomon ''kneeling down in the presence of all the multitude of Israel, and lifting up his hands towards Heaven'' (2 Chronicles 6:13)).
But standing, not kneeling, is assumed even by the Western liturgical books to be the correct posture adopted by the priest as Celebrant of Mass and Vespers, his Ministers and the circumstantes (I translate this as ''those standing near or by'' - the Master of Ceremonies and his Servers in other words). When, at Mass, the Celebrant and Ministers are directed to the Sedilia by the Master of Ceremonies during such times as the chanting of the Gloria and Credo, the reason they sit is, I presume, because they have no liturgical function (I believe I read that in Fortescue's The Mass, but I can't presently find the reference). The Celebrant cannot begin the Collect(s) while the choir are still singing! I suppose sitting in this respect makes things look neater and more convenient but I would rather that nobody sat at all during a liturgical function (you will notice that the Clementine Instruction for the Forty Hours Prayer admonishes that there ought to be no sitting if at all possible - and no preaching!). If I had my way, every pew in a church would be done away with, and churches would, where seemly and appropriate, adopt the Eastern practice of having those arm rests along the walls like choir stalls (they have a peculiar name but I cannot remember it, even if I knew it once). This post has been interesting to think about, but badly written, and I am rather reminded of Gandalf's admonition to Wormtongue: ''The wise speak only of what they know Gríma son of Gálmód.'' (The Lord of the Rings, Book III, Chapter VI, The King of the Golden Hall).
Any comments would be welcome...
Another most interesting Post, Singulare Ingenium. Most grateful. Reference taking away pews, chairs, etc, you will be interested to know that once a year (don't know when. Help needed from your readership, please), ALL the benches, pews, chairs, etc, in York Minster are taken away, presumably to permit cleaning of the floor and tiles ? Thus, the Minster remains empty of such items all day. This reveals, of course, the pristine state of the Minster, exactly as it was on Day One of its existence. It reveals the sheer beauty without any hindrance or clutter of artificial furniture. Congregations, therefore, have to remain standing during services, presumably exactly like the original congregations hundreds of years ago. The unencumbered vastness of the Minster is a magnificent spectacle and one that makes me concur with your desire for "pew-nicking", although for different reasons.
ReplyDeleteZephyrinus, many thanks for your comment. I agree that pews just clutter the place up - and tragically in many churches cover up the most beautiful floors. It must be a sight most extraordinary for an Orthodox to see us Westerners packed neatly into pews. There are no rubrics for a congregation anyway, so lighting votive candles, praying the Rosary, or simply uniting oneself spiritually to the august Sacrifice seems to me to be more apt than just sitting there.
ReplyDeleteBy the way, my blogger name is Patricius, not Singulare Ingenium. ''Singulare Ingenium'' refers not to me but to J.R.R Tolkien, who had the real singular intellect. My own intellect is no more remarkable than Joe Bloggs (no pun intended) down the road!
Some years ago the Brompton Oratory hosted a flower show (there was a big row at the time) and most of the pews and chairs were removed for the event. It made a huge difference. The building seemed to 'open up' and actually become a liturgical space.
ReplyDeletePews are of course quite a late addition to church furnishings. Our medieval cathedrals had stone ledges around the nave for people who were tired or ill to sit at - hence the term 'going to the wall'. The right to sit really only belonged to the bishop at his cathedra. That privilige got extended with time to other higher clergy. Do ask Mr. Gordon Dimon to give you the details of one of his favourite SRC decisions on this - basically some canons objected to their bennies sitting (at the times you describe in your post) at all when celebrating. The canons argued they had the right to sit if they celebrated but denied that right to the bennies - the SRC sided with the canons. I do think we should have fewer pews - but accept that culturally, at least, that would be very difficult. Pews do seem to work better when they are laid out in collegiate style rather than transversely.
Kneeling has two elements: penitential and adoration. The penitential aspect shows through in the ancient liturgies of Lent etc where we have 'kneeling days' - extended kneeling prescribed at the Office and Mass. At other times very little kneeling is prescribed. On the continent most Catholics used certainly to stand for most of the Canon. A prescriptive direction to kneel for the entire Canon is very much a feature of the Pauline revision.
With the Byzantines kneeling is forbidden by the rubrics during Paschaltide and on Sundays, indeed it is technically an excommunicable offence to do so. Strictly a penitent does not kneel even for absolution on a Sunday or during the Liturgy.
In the West the penitential/adoration aspects seem to have fused somewhat. The older authors prescribe a lot more standing. Gavantus (an early seventeenth century liturgist involved in the Urban VIII revisions) actually requires the Psalms of the Office to be sung whilst standing - imagine that for the old Sunday Mattins of eighteen psalms!
Culturally kneeling is now perceived as more devout, particularly in the traditionalist world, so discouraging it needs to be handled with some sensitivity. The great and sadly late Fr. Ronald Silk used to produce a Mass guide with the directions 'STAND' in capitals throughout, noticeably after the Words of Institution - it might explain why he was not appreciated by a wider following!
... jolts out of lurk mode....
ReplyDeleteZephyrinus mentioned York Minster. The removal of chairs is imminent, next week I believe and the Nave remains chairless [there are no pews now] for about a month. Congregations don't stand, though. They get moved to the quire where all services are held - ad orientem at the high Altar! If I were an Anglican, I'd prefer the arrangement to be permanent. ;-)
If only we could use the High Altar for a TLM, that would be quite spectacular!
Back to lurk-mode. :-)
Rubricarius, many thanks for your comment. I expect that a pewless London Oratory was something visually stunning. I suppose aesthetically, the pews of that magnificent church wouldn't be so bad if they were of a more decent quality. But the way I see it, they just conceal a beautiful floor and hinder one's freedom to move about during the Liturgy - as I have said, to light votive candles, to say prayers in a side-chapel or whatever.
ReplyDeleteI think there should be some ''middle-way.'' Kneeling has become an immemorial custom, and to me is especially apt at certain points in the Western Liturgy, such as for the Collects and Canon on penitential days, but I think that for Sundays and Feasts kneeling should be kept to a minimum.
As for kneeling for the duration of Low Mass...well just do away with Low Mass.
Mike4b, thanks for your comment. I have never been to York Minster, but I would like to - I have made it a point to visit all our ancestral cathedral churches at least once...
Mike4b, I think it would be most interesting if you were able to take a couple of photos of the pew-less Minster in the near future and send to Patricius for possible inclusion in this Post. Hopefully, this can be done. Good to hear from you.
ReplyDeleteI think I'm right in believing that pews were originally a Protestant innovation to facilitate the hearing of long sermons.
ReplyDeleteI think there is plenty of room to move about in church (especially in a church such as the Oratory) with pews. They do certainly have a place in the church, especially when liturgical celebrations are not happening and people wonder in and sit down to absorb the atmosphere that should be found in the "temple of God".
ReplyDeleteHvaing said that there are some pews which are certainly a nuisance, not to mention aesthetically bankrupt.