www.byzcath.org Forums Faith & Christian Life Faith & Theology Arms Folded Across The Chest Question

Wasen't even sure how to phrase the subject, but this afternoon when I went to Confession at a Roman Catholic Church, I was looking at the beautiful stained glass windows and happen to notice, that the Apostle St John in the Last Supper, and one of the Magi in the Nativity, were both holding there arms in the position that Eastern Christians use when going up to receive Holy Communion. And so it got me wondering, What is the history and significance of holding ones arms in this position ?

Hope my question wasen't too vague.

Lawrence:

Many devout Latin Christians used to use this same posture during the days prior to the V2 reforms that gave everyone the idea that anything done prior to 1965 ought to be abandoned. At least that is my own observation and experience of those years.

BOB

Lawrence: Great question!
Back in the late 60's in Seminary, We folded arms across our chest as a sign of reverence. Probably back in the "Old Days," the monks in the old country folded their arms and put their hands into their sleeves to keep warm.
In modern "body language" terminology, I am told that folding your hands across your chest means you are not listening to what is being said -- or that you disagree with what is being said.
I like to think that it is symbolic of the reverence and respect we offer to God in His House, guarding our hearts for His praise and glory only, and closing out any other distractions ... setting aside all earthly cares.

Andy Kovaly

Offering ourselves in humilty as handmaidens or servents of the Lord. Also, some say it is St. Andrew's Cross (X)

Is this not also how we are laid to rest, with our hands folded across our chest? Think of the layers of symbols. We approach communion and death in the same posture: Eternal life and eternal memory, both received in submission and humility.

Beautiful comment.

As a child attending Roman Catholic schools (pre-Vatican II), I was told to sleep with arms crossed over my chest and to invoke angelic protection because that is how they are symbolized adoring the Holy Trinity.

There is a distinct difference between folding one's arms and crossing one's arms over the heart. The second is devout, the first is often understood to mean either rejection or aggression.

Fr. Serge

Dear Father,

Please explain the difference between folding one's arms and crossing one's arms over one's heart?

And it is right hand crossed over left, true?

Respectfully in Christ,
Elizabeth

If you simply cross (or fold) your arms, you will end up with each hand resting inside the elbow of the other arm, the two forearms, both parallel and adjacent to each other, and the forearms below the level of the chest (depending, obviously, on the measurements of one's frame).

If you cross your arms over the heart - and do it properly - the hands are open and straight, each forearm goes up from the elbow, across the other forearm, so that each forearm rests at the tip of the opposite shoulder, and the two forearms sign the Cross (of Saint Andrew).

This is how we should approach Holy Communion, for example. And yes, we would normally cross the right forearm over the left forearm.

Fr. Serge

Isn't it true that crossing your arms over your chest in the Latin Church means that you are not approaching to receive the Eucharist but only want a blessing from the priest - which makes me wonder what would happen if it was not a priest distributing Communion, but a "Eucharistic Minister" or layperson.

A friend of mine calls that "shooting blanks." Another reason to do away with the phalanx of Eucharistic ministers. Does a parish really need a 10-to-1 ratio of congregation to extraordinary ministers? Methinks not.

Didn't even realize that there was a specific gesture to indicate that one wanted a blessing and not Holy Communion - the very idea seems a tad bizarre.

We got along just fine without "Eucharistic Ministers" for almost 2,000 years; I'm disinclined to believe that we urgently need them now. If the priest is disabled or seriously aged, the proper thing to do is provide him with a Deacon, or at least an ordained Subdeacon. The situation is different, naturally, when the Church is living in the midst of serious persecution - but as Pope John Paul II pointed out, what is deeply edifying when done in the midst of persecution may be seriously improper when done without such a drastic necessity.

Fr. Serge

---

Some extraordinary Eucharistic ministers bless the communicants who approach them. I have seen this.

I have as well...

It is a natural conclusion that they have reached (they have the power to bless people in a liturgical setting) since the word "extraordinary" has been largely dropped and they function more as "ordinary" ministers of the Holy Eucharist.

I agree with Fr. Serge - the Latins need more deacons and to reinstitute the subdiaconate, thus eliminating the "need" for EM's.

Fr. Deacon Daniel

I have to say that I have NEVER seen a lay person [ EEMHC] in the UK attempting to give a blessing.

We were all taught that this was something reserved for the priest and if someone approached us we were NOT to do it and quietly send them to the priest.

This does seem to be an americanisation