www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life The Christian East & West Crossing

Dear Teen Logo,

I meant to say that priests bless the people from left to right because they follow the way the PEOPLE or laity bless themselves - from right to left.

RC laity began to follow their priests in this respect and so began to go from left to right.

As late as the 13th century, Pope Innocent III wrote that the Latin Church likewise crosses itself from right to left, as do the Byzantines (although the West always did it once, whereas we did it three times).

There is an English translation of this writing somewhere and someone once posted it. I have a very old GC prayerbook where there is a Slavonic translation - it is also contained in Ukrainian in the book on "The Sign of the Cross" by Met. Ilarion Ohienko.

Alex

Alex,

Yes, I'm familiar with Pope Innocent's writing on the subject. It's undeniable that the Latin west used to do the same thing as the Byzantine not-as-far-west.

But I've still heard the Latin practice described the way I stated (i.e., Christ rose from Death/Left to Life/Right).

Coming up with metaphors and symbolism after a practice is already widespread is something Christianity is very good at. It's not always the other way around. Sometimes practices are introduced before we interpret their meaning in a specifically Christian way. The Latin practice of making the Sign of the Cross seems to fit into this category.

Logos Teen

All this reasoning justifying which shoulder we touch first is mind boggling. I firmly believe that both are fine and both have their tradition.

During my wedding rehearsal in the GO Church, the secretary/organizer told us to cross ourselves when we approach the Altar. She told us to go from right to left because Christ sits a the Right Hand of the Father.

Looking at the video of our wedding (some 9 years ago, almost to the day) my nerves must have got the better of me and I blessed myself in a circle

Brad - not a pagan

Logos Teen is right and wise beyond his years.

I've heard many nice explanations about how different traditions make the sign of the cross. I agree they are all holy and evangelical practices.

My take is that the detailed explanations are not essential. The sign of the cross is about the cross of Jesus Christ, crucfied for us sinners:

For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever shall believe in Him may not perish but have eternal life. (John 3:16).

God bless you all!

Paul

Dear Paul,

I agree with you!

Unfortunately, the experience of Eastern Catholics has sometimes been that they ONLY valid way of making the Sign of the Cross was the Latin way that was imposed.

This is why our ancestors' prayerbooks have that letter from Pope Innocent III and also why, when we as EC's were taught about our Sign of the Cross, we were often taught about it in a kind "exclusive" way so that we would be inculcated with pride in the tradition so as not to be swayed by the Latin practice (i.e. the "miniority mentality").

However, the reasoning that Teen Logos gives is that of the Oriental Churches.

IF one is after the original practice of a given Particular Church, in this case the Latin, then that practice, truth be told, would be the sign of the Cross with three fingers and to the right (although once only) as in the Byzantine East.

All Churches have been consistent in this, except the Latin Church.

I've noticed some RC's complain about the Novus Ordo and its lack of consistency with the early liturgical practice too!

Alex

I like to cross myself right to left when I am in an Byzantine Church. It makes me feel Eastern!

I noticed my kids would cross from right to left when they were learning the sign of the cross. Of course, I would sternly correct them to use the Latin form.

Paul

Dear Paul,

What consternation traditional RC's would experience if it was explained to them that going from left to right is a kind of "Novus Ordo!"

(O.K., Incognitus, where is your compliment? )

Alex

He is probably out honing his self-ordained role as the modern ByzanTorquemada!

And, along the way, igniting mini insurrections against His(s) All Holiness, Patriarch of Rockall and the Universe!

Amado

I thought I the II was acting as his spokesperson, not inciting riot against him....

Gaudior, amused

You failed to notice THIS putative Patriarch is another one, and quite different from THAT Patriarch, who has definitely a "narrower" jurisidiction, I the II is spokesman to! :p

Amado

Alex,

Not wanting to get bogged down in semantics, I'm still confused by your reasoning.

We all agree that Roman Catholics cross themselves from left to right, yes?

And we all agree that Byzanitne Catholics cross themselves from right to left, correct?

So how do the latter use the reasoning of coming from the left (i.e., rising from the dead) to the right (i.e., rising to life)?

Check out this excerpt from the Catholic Encyclopedia:

Logos Teen

Dear LT, The Original:

If I were Alex, I would give up now!

Your arguments are just more convincing!

Amado

It is hard for me to imagine that when giving a blessing the priest follows the laity. Rather, as I understand the laity receive the blessing from the priest by mirroring the left to right priestly blessing. The left to right blessing of the priest underscores Christ's Resurrection, Ascension, and His seat at the Right Hand of the Father. The laity's movement from right to left illustrates their reception and acceptance of that priestly blessing.

Dear Father Deacon John,

Well, one of us may be wrong!

Alex

Dear Teen Logo and Amado,

The way the Sign of the Cross was interpreted before the "left to right" thing came into being (and developed its own interpretations) is:

As we go down to the belly with our fingers, we celebrate the Son of the Father's "bending the heavens" and becoming Man in the Womb of His Most Holy Mother.

He lived among us, suffered and died and was buried.

He then rose from the dead and ascended to heaven where He sits at the Right Hand of the Father (movement upwards to the right).

He will come again to judge the living and the dead (to the left).

So the Sign of the Cross, as practiced East and West at one time, was a compendium of the Creed itself.

And, as we know from Pope Innocent III, it was the original Sign of the Cross of the West.

Dear Amado,

If I were a Latin, I would find Teen Logo's argument compelling!

Alex