|
1 members (Richard R.),
502
guests, and
88
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
Forums26
Topics35,518
Posts417,611
Members6,169
| |
Most Online4,112
Mar 25th, 2025
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 16
Junior Member
|
|
Junior Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 16 |
I think calvanism is mostly responsible for pews. Calvanism stripped the Church to mere white walls. The principle act of worship was the sermon, and it was suppose to be an intellectual excercise. For those of you wondering, Catholicism has always rejected hyper-intellectualism. Part of the justification for useing Latin is because it is such an inpercise language. But I freely admit that we have had to combat a lot of hyper-intellectualism. This is not only our fault, however. It is also because so many heresies have arisen in the west and so many of them have been intellectual heresies.
"Although bishops have a common dignity, they are not all of the same rank. Even amoung the most blessed Apostles, though they were alike in honor, there was a certain distinction of power." -Pope Saint Leo the Great
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,310
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,310 |
But that is another argument FOR pewless Churches...after standing and prostrating for five hours, one does not have the TIME or the inclination to foment intellectual heresies. One heads to the closest CHAIR. And thanks the Lord for it. With much gratitude. :p
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,517
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 3,517 |
Never before have I known anyone to suggest that Latin is an imprecise language. I'm neither a Latin nor a Latinist, but I would nevertheless have said that Latin does not lend itself readily to imprecise thought.
Incognitus
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 69
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 69 |
So many "pro-nopew" posts, but not convincing to me. I work hard on my homilies, so that they are compelling, moving, and uplifting. The rather myopic thought that Liturgy alone is enough, is, well, not enough. The educated person in this day and age want a good worship experience, but they especially want even better homilies. Why? Because people have told me so. So you say, they can listen to them standing up. I say, have you ever taught grammar school? Could you imagine not having everyone sitting in their seats so they can learn? So that every eye is fixed on you and what you want to teach? Giving a homily is the same thing. How many posters have given a talk to a group of people let alone given a homily? If you did, would you appreciate people milling about? Not paying attention, fidgeting, talking amongst themselves? Probably not. Now think about that experience in church if everyone was standing around, trying to see over someone in front of them, realizing that you don't have everyone "rivetted" on you and your inspiring talk? I have. It's not very rewarding no matter how great you thought you were, or how great you thought your speech was. Even Our Lord had everyone sit down for His sermon on the mount, and even, dare I say, had his Apostles sit at the Last Supper. You say people can sit down on the floor? Sit along side the walls of the church? Do they stop to play musical chairs to see who gets the seat? The notion of people standing for the entire time they are in church, like one would for a rock concert is absurd. Carrying that logic to the extreme, I guess we should advocate taking the seats out of the Metropolitan Opera House or Carnagie Hall, or the Multi-plex theater because we could cram more people inside. Believe me, processions no matter how long they are, incensing, using spoonfulls of incense, singing even if its the Mormon Tabernacle Choir, along with any other rubric, will not attract the majority of well educated, well informed executives, CEO's, CFO's,and others to our churches. Good homilies will. And sitting during them, for me, is the preferred way to hear them. Accept it and get over it. People nowadays want to be inspiried by WORDS...they want the Gospel to be made relevant for today, and only a well delivered and thought out homily will do that. Relying on only the Liturgy would be a grave miscalculation on our part. How many of us remember the old time priests rambling on with no beginning and no end to their sermons? I never remembered one of them. People will not continue to come to church for any length of time no matter how wonderful the Liturgy is, if they have to also endure standing for mediocre sermons, shortened in the interest of time for the people to stand. (Yes, I am aware of this addage too: "The mind can only absorb what the rear end can endure!") I guess we should change that to "what the feet can endure." I applaud and respect Protestant Ministers because they HAD to learn to give compelling and energetic homilies because they had nothing else. Are we to think that we have all the "other stuff" so we don't need to inspire anyone with homilies? I would ask those who promote pewless churches to answer these questions: #1 Who joins their churches, and if they do, is it because of having no pews? #2- What are the two most important reason(s) people from other faiths join their church? #3- What inspires them more: Liturgy or the Homily? #3- What is more important: Liturgy or Homily? #4 How attentive are you to the homily standing during it? #5 Would you be more attentive if you were sitting? A pewless church is our ancient tradition? Perhaps. I agree with some who say it was more a matter of economice. It was! It's like someone deriding the automobile, only because they can only afford a bus pass. We need to think about how effective is our worship experience in total, including, what is for most in today's day and age, the homily. That's why people come to my church; to be inspired not only by good Liturgy but to sit and hear an especially a good sermon. Work on filling those pews/chairs so people will join our churches so they can stand for good Liturgy and sit for good homilies. All of them!  Fr. Michael Sopoliga
Fr.Michael
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 69
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 69 |
PS.....Dear Administrator, When does someone become a "senior" member? Although come to think of it, I like being a "junior" something anyhow! 
Fr.Michael
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,310
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,310 |
People nowadays want to be inspiried by WORDS...they want the Gospel to be made relevant for today, and only a well delivered and thought out homily will do that. Relying on only the Liturgy would be a grave miscalculation on our part. Fr. Michael: Respectfully begging to disagree with you. You seem to have perhaps missed the point as much as "people" have. The point of the Liturgy is to WORSHIP GOD. We offer WORSHIP to Him. We are there to WORSHIP Him. If the CEOs, bankers, and rich others who may add money to a church's coffers are coming to be ENTERTAINED, rather than to WORSHIP God, then they are coming for the wrong reasons, and the sooner this is politely pointed out to them, the better their souls will be for it. IF they ARE coming to WORSHIP, then they should be given every facility for total body worship...prostrations, etc. They will than you for it. At all pewless churches I have been in, there is no unseemly rush for seats at the end of Liturgy. Rather the opposite. Most are comfortable carpeted, and young families sit where they were standing, drawing their tiny ones onto their laps in embrace to keep them still while the sermon is being given. Very small children enjoy this, and there is usually total silence, rather than the restless "pew-climbing" that happens in other parishes. Far from scrambling for seats, I have freaquently had someone touch my arm to let me know space is available should I want it. You are welcome to your thoughts, but stating that removing seats from theatres makes as much sense is patently absurd. In theatres, there is no call to make prostrations during shows. In WORSHIP, there is. So, respecting you as clergy, I think you confuse the two. A clergyman's sermons are important, and address needs of his parish. But the focus is on Liturgy, and WORSHIP. The WORSHIP of GOD. And that calls for whole body worship which is restricted by pews, as members find. Even pewless churches sit down with gratitude for a good sermon, and expect it to be good, but please, that statement of needing educated people to pay proper attention to those carefully crafted sermons which they will not do if they are tired of standing...SMACKS of condescension. I hope you didn't mean to imply that only poor, uneducated people wish to WORSHIP GOD by makeing prostrations, etc.? and that everyone else just wants "inspiration?" Gaudior, who was not at all inspired by that post.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,688
Moderator Member
|
|
Moderator Member
Joined: Nov 2001
Posts: 1,688 |
Fr Michael,
there is truth in what you say about the homily. As a former member of the Assembly of God denomination, I was quite surprised as to how many in this denomination are former Catholics and Orthodox (read liturgical Christians). Although most, if not all, of these newly-embraced Evangelical/Charismatic Christians do miss the Sacred Mysteries and the mysterium of the Liturgy, they chose to leave the Catholic/Orthodox Faith due to the preaching (or the lack thereof). So what you have are former liturgical Christians would would complain about an eight minute homily, but who as Evangelical Christians will sit through a 30-40 (or longer) minute sermon and think nothing of a worship service that lasts at least 2 hours. Something is wrong wouldn't you say.
But I digress off topic...
The rector of the pro-Cathedral of Saint Stephen spent the New Year in Greece. While there he was able to attend both Catholic and Orthodox liturgies. He remarked every temple had chairs or pews. In the Orthodox temple, the chairs were roped off, but he sat in one anyway, others began to follow his lead...
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,964
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 1,964 |
One is a "junior member" until 30 posts are reached. One then becomes a "member". I don't think we have "senior members", although I'm sure there are "Senior Citizens" around here. Originally posted by FrMichaelJS: PS.....Dear Administrator,
When does someone become a "senior" member?
Although come to think of it, I like being a "junior" something anyhow!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 69
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 69 |
Originally posted by Gaudior: People nowadays want to be inspiried by WORDS...they want the Gospel to be made relevant for today, and only a well delivered and thought out homily will do that. Relying on only the Liturgy would be a grave miscalculation on our part.
At all pewless churches I have been in, there is no unseemly rush for seats at the end of Liturgy. Rather the opposite. Most are comfortable carpeted, and young families sit where they were standing, drawing their tiny ones onto their laps in embrace to keep them still while the sermon is being given. Very small children enjoy this, and there is usually total silence, rather than the restless "pew-climbing" that happens in other parishes. Far from scrambling for seats, I have freaquently had someone touch my arm to let me know space is available should I want it.
You are welcome to your thoughts, but stating that removing seats from theatres makes as much sense is patently absurd. In theatres, there is no call to make prostrations during shows. In WORSHIP, there is. So, respecting you as clergy, I think you confuse the two. A clergyman's sermons are important, and address needs of his parish. But the forcus is on Liturgy, and WORSHIP. The WORSHIP of GOD. And that calls for whole body worship which is restricted by pews, as members find. Even pewless churches sit down with gratitude for a good sermon, and expect it to be good, but please, that statement of needing educated people to pay proper attention to those carefully crafted sermons which they will not do if they are tired of standing...SMACKS of condescension. I hope you didn't mean to imply that only poor, uneducated people wish to WORSHIP GOD by makeing prostrations, etc.? and that everyone else just wants "inspiration?"
Gaudior, who was not at all inspired by that post. My post, whether you were inspired or not, was not a sermon/homily, it was only the culmination of 25 years of being a priest. Do you honestly think that anyone will join our churches just because we don't have pews? What do you say to them when they ask:"So what do you do when the homily is given?" You can have a priest swing from the chandelier kadillo in hand, and call it worship, theatrics, or anything else, as you say to be "entertaining" but you and so many others miss the point of the whole worship experience. As a priest, my job is to cast a wide net, be fishers of all men, and bring as many people to the Lord, and to our church as I can educated and non educated. My point, again, is that we have to give people more than just elaborate rubrics, pomp and ceremony, as beautiful as that may be. They want inspireiration from the WORD of God.....as given by the Priest of Deacon in a well prepared and well given homily. Inspire people's minds and they will also come to love our liturgy. Yes, I know that worship is important, and I take offence at your insinuating that I somehow miss that point, but are there not two parts in worship? At least it is in our Liturgy there is. The Liturgy of the "Word" and the Liturgy of the "Eucharist." If you think that reading an epistle, and a gospel, is good enough, because, after all, we have other things too, so you don't need to be inspired by a homily, you better rethink that premise. The "word" is the reading of the epistle and the Gospel, but inlcuded with that should be an inspiring homily. The homily IS worship! If I do not hear at least 1/2 a dozen people tell me how good my sermon was, no matter how beautifully I celebrated the Liturgy, I consider the Liturgy a failure! Shocked? Don't be. After all, Jesus did not celebrate Liturgy did He? He preached, and His words pierced the souls of many. And they wanted to hear Him more and more. That's evangelization. They said about Our Lord: "We have never heard anyone 'speak' like that before!" That's what we need. As for the obsession with prostrations; the last time I checked, they are done for about 40 days out of 365. What's your point? Bowing can be done in pews; blessing oneself and bowing have also never been hindered by being in a pew. Prostrations, for those who can do them, can be done in the isles. The answer to our church's problem goes a bit deeper than the superficial preoccupation with the externals, like pews, and prostrations, no matter how passionate one is about them. Those things are merely a distraction not an answer to our Church's growth. DO more prostrations, throw out pews, people will flock to our churches? Hardly. Give em a good sermon in the pew, and we just might be on to something. Not getting deadly serious about growing our church, and only dealing with things that don't really aid in our growth, is like rearranging the deck chairs on the Titanic, of course that is if the Titanic had chairs! Like JFK once said, and I paraphrase: "Ask not what your church can do for you, like throwing out its pews; ask what you can do for your church, like filling those pews." Fr.MJS
Fr.Michael
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,310
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,310 |
Father Michael, Did Christ say "Do this in remembrance of Me" after the Sermon on the Mount? I don't think so. The Central act of the Liturgy is the Eucharist. The Epistle, and the Gospel ARE of vital importance. Sermons are important. GOOD sermons are more important. A priest who after 25 years as a priest seems fixated on the idea that his parishioners alone among all the pewless parishioners in the world are not bright enough to just sit on the carpeted (again, note word, carpeted) floor during the sermon like they do in every other pewless church is what ~I~ am having trouble with. :rolleyes: You accuse those of us who worship in pewless churches of thinking that absence of pews alone draws people to that church. Of course that is sheer absurdity...In permanence. I will say though, that you are likely to lose your argument as far as travelling goes. In my own case, if I am travelling, and must choose to attend one of several churches near where I am staying, I review their websites for information. Frequently, they are not as well developed as your own. Often, it is but a photo of the church interior and exterior, and times of worship. I typically base my choice on whether they are doing a full cycle of services, and if all are, on the interior of the church...pewless, or not, as that is often the only clue as to how traditional a parish will be. On a PERMANENT basis, more would be needed, of course, but for a weekend's travel, yes, people DO make decisions based on that, as it conveys something, in the absence of NO OTHER INFORMATION. Meaning no disrespect, but still not understanding why you take the issue of pews as meaning that no one will appreciate your carefully crafted sermons. One does NOT follow the other, and from what you wrote, a little LESS emphasis on being congratulated might be in order. Bear in mind it is more than possible to touch people with your words so deeply that they take them home and think about them, and share them with others...Two members on this board can attest to my having done just that two Sundays ago, and is was from my position on the floor in a pewless church that this was heard...And I had other things to talk about after Liturgy, so I never mentioned it to the Priest, though I spoke to him. Be assured that I do respect your position as clergy...but maintain that the way you have chosen to express your thoughts on this thread requires a bit of reflection on your part. We are not getting "caught up in externals" to wish to worship properly, and not be restricted. It is merely (for purposes of this board) an academic exercise bringing forth points in favor and in opposition. It merely sounds petty on part of clergy to hear a priest say "my sermons won't be paid attention to if people stand". As if the matter wasn't with the LITURGY being paid attention to...Father, PEOPLE WILL SIT! Always have, always will. And quietly. And if the sermons are as good as people say your sermons are, they will listen.  End of Gaudior's sermon
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 335
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 335 |
Originally posted by FrMichaelJS:
The answer to our church's problem goes a bit deeper than the superficial preoccupation with the externals, like pews, and prostrations, no matter how passionate one is about them.
Pretty darn insightful words from a junior member. --Tim
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,310
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jan 2004
Posts: 1,310 |
Perhaps that "paraphrase from JFK" also needs addressing: Ask what you can do for your Church.... Fr. Michael, since you gave it, I will put you on the spot first, as clergy, then ask others. BEAR IN MIND THAT I AM NOT SPEAKING OF SUPERFICIALITIES: Why do people convert to Byzantine Catholicism, or to Eastern Orthodoxy? Is it because we have succeeded so WELL in making the East identical to the West? Or because our unique style of worship answers a need in their souls? Now... Someone who is seeking may go into a Church ByzCath or Orthodox...for a first visit...and be mightily disappointed. I've visited one Orthodox Church that looked so Protestant even its parishioners apologize for it...and they built it to specification....because it was built when everyone was trying to be all things to all people...Result...Barely ANY iconography, etc. Cinderblock style. Protestant stained glass windows, and a little bell that dings to tell you when to sit and stand. They do no Vespers, or weekday services, and moan about lack of converts. Then we have another Church I visited...built likewise same horrid time frame. New priest said "Unacceptable"...The building we can do nothing about...raise money for iconography on walls. He also instituted lectures, retreats, hosted events, and held Vespers, and other weekday services, making it clear to his parishioners that things had changed. Result? His small parish grew, and as I visited that parish for an event they cosponsored with another, people raved over how wonderful it was...Father really TAUGHT them.... NOT BY BEING LIKE EVERYONE ELSE. The East has something very unique. Often, people who wander quietly in may not see that...except through first glance. Our icons, our incense... Sometimes, they've done a great deal of reading first though, and get there, and are disappointed by the reality. What are we doing in our parishes? Do we want drive through liturgies? Or presevation of our WORSHIP. Do we want to be as the majority of America, seeking "entertainment" from church, or are we aware we go to WORSHIP? Some thoughts....As a TRULY LIVING CHURCH attracts others. And fills the church.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 712
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Nov 2003
Posts: 712 |
I asked many of our newer Ukrainian immigrant parishoners (10 years or less) what their feelings were about pews with kneelers in our churches. I made a point of speaking to immigrants from various regions of Ukraine to ensure that the opinions were gathered from both Greek Catholics and Ukrainian Orthodox (ie: Lviv, Mukachiv, Kyiv, Odesa, etc....).
Here is a synopsis of what they think:
(1) kneelers = do not like them and feel we should not use them.
(2) Pews = are acceptable and do not bother them at all, but they feel that we should either stand OR sit most of the time. What they do not like is the alternating between standing and sitting. They also feel it's perfectly acceptable for some people to sit and some to stand.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,904
Orthodox Catholic Toddler Member
|
|
Orthodox Catholic Toddler Member
Joined: Dec 2002
Posts: 1,904 |
Glory to Jesus Christ!
Instead of making the package fit the product, we have made the product fit the package. What�s the product? A congregation of worshipping believers! The package is the pew, that�s what the congregation is wrapped in.
It�s really not about the pews after all, it�s entirely about our posture of prayer.
We focus on (and often bemoan) the material fact that pews (and chairs) are in place but we should be focusing on the proper attitude and bodily posture of the believer at worship. To the degree that pews (or anything else) interfere with that they are a problem. Should these devices aid in our worship they can only be regarded as a benefit.
What we really need is to focus on our liturgical posture, it would be great to see that emphasized by our clergy. If spreading the pews out will help perhaps that would be a good start. Many Eastern churches do not fill up during a typical liturgy, it might make sense to open the spaces between the rows front to back so that the faithful can do their prostrations without clobbering their heads. Another helpful change might be to use backless benches instead. These are often seen along walls but we never think it proper to lean against the walls, we sit upright. There is no reason why a backless pew wouldn�t be a helpful option.
We can be a bit more creative in our choices than we have been in the past, I am sure that the standard style pew we have installed over the past 100 years is not intrinsically evil, it�s just not tailored to our needs.
In Christ,
Michael
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,177
Member
|
|
Member
Joined: Jul 2002
Posts: 1,177 |
I have decided to post part of an article which I think is relevant to this discussion. I was originally given this article in the format of a small, photocopied booklet. Though the article is replete with endnotes, these were not included at the end of my copy. If anyone has a copy of the endnotes (perhaps someone at the Sheptytysky Institute?) or if anyone would like the entire article ( sans endnotes, for now) please send me a PM. REVELATION AND LITURGY:
THE EPIPHANIC FUNCTIONS OF THE HUMAN BODY IN BYZANTINE WORSHIP
By Dr. Andriy Chirovsky
Introduction
Romano Guardini once noted that sacred art has as its basic function neither the formation of the viewer�s character nor the imparting of knowledge, but only the preparation for Epiphany. The same may be said of the Divine Liturgy. It is this notion that seems to be a stumbling block for many a Westerner�s understanding of the liturgical tradition of the Byzantine Rite. The totality of texts and gestures, sights, sounds and smells is all brought together and made articulate in the divine praise, which is at once doxological and revelatory.
It is especially difficult for someone from one of the rather a-liturgical Protestant traditions to understand how the gestures and sense phenomena in the Liturgy can be revelatory. The highly scriptural quality of Byzantine worship is more readily accepted as a stream of revelation, but any direct epiphany, especially if it is not explicitly tied to the words of the Scripture, seems out of the question. Even Catholics of the Latin Rite, although they proceed from a right liturgical milieu, do not find it easy to understand the Byzantine idea of theophany within the Liturgy. Somewhat indicative of this problem is the scholastic emphasis on the �essentia� of the Mass. In the modern secularised state, this difficulty with the Eastern concept of symbolic wording, iconography and gesture as not merely didactic but also revelatory is only heightened. Alexander Schmemann says that �the secularist is constitutionally unable to see in symbols anything but �audio-visual aids� for communication ideas.�
Perhaps it would be in order at this point to outline what I mean when I say that a liturgical function can be revelatory as opposed to didactic. That which carries a direct, less verbal, and therefore more implicit revelation with the liturgical tradition, I term simply revelatory or epiphanic.
I do not purport to say that the Roman Liturgy is only didactic while the Eastern rites are solely revelatory. It is a well known fact that cathecesis in the Orthodox Church is never separated from the Liturgy because it is so greatly didactic. However, in addition to the didactic qualities of the Byzantine services, there is the epiphanic element, which I believe is much more evident in this particular tradition than in any other.
The entire Liturgy is an epiphany and, in fact, a theophany. �We who mystically represent the Cherubim� stand before the throne of the living God. It is Heaven itself that is opened for us at the Liturgy. St. John Chrysostom makes this point clear: �What do I care of Heaven, when I am in Heaven?�
The one point which I should like to examine within the totality of liturgical epiphany is the role that gesture, posture, sense perception � in short, the gamut of bodily functions � plays in the reception of revelation. Perhaps I venture into this problem because some protestant friends of mine not only could not see any revelation involved in liturgising, but also objected to the inclusion of expressly human, bodily factors into divine worship. My purpose in this essay, therefore, will be to show that these purely bodily actions can bring �an intuitive grasp of reality through something � usually simple and striking, which is precisely what the dictionary terms as �epiphany�.�
Since the focal point of this study is the notion of epiphanic phenomena within the Liturgy, it would be well-advised to examine the three bodily functions of posture, gesture and sense perception from the point of view of the lay person, as the clergy have been specifically educated in liturgical theology and know to a greater degree what to expect from symbolic actions. The faithful, because they lack, in most cases, this formal training, are more truly open to what a symbol in essence is: an object or event which conveys more meaning than it itself contains. That added meaning is the epiphanic element that all symbols include. It is this factor that we will be searching for in an examination of the human body within the Liturgy.
Posture
The absence of pews in a Byzantine church allows for freer movement of the faithful. One will notice that in an Eastern church people very often do not conform to one set of rubrics regulating posture during the divine services. There are in fact very few such stipulations, but those that do exists are very helpful for an examination of the correlation between bodily position and spiritual disposition within the Liturgy.
The most basic liturgical posture in the Eastern churches is standing. There is a solemnity about standing; it is a special action. Yet it is a position that retains the high dignity of man redeemed. There is a basic change in attitude when one kneels or prostrates himslef. This is why the Church forbids these postures on Sundays and throughout the six weeks of Eastertide. For those are times of resurrectional joy which is most readily achieved in an upright position. Nikolai Gogol sees in the standing aright a the Liturgy an uplifting in spirit.
Yet standing, it must be repeated, is at the same time a reverential action. While it is permissible to sit through the reading of the Epistle, all stand for the proclamation of the Gospel. This rising calls for a contraction of the muscles, as well as accommodation by the circulatory and respiratory systems. This effect is doubled by magnificent visual stimuli. Though he be deaf, the individual can grasp the radical otherness of the Word being read. This often leads him to bow his head in reverence to it.
Kneeling is a position of pain. In an Eastern church, one does not kneel on an elevated, foam-padded kneeler, leaning against the pew in front. One kneels on the floor, experiencing its hardness and coldness. �What pain or joy or movement of the body is there which is not shared by the soul and body?� asks St. Gregory Palamas. It is an extreme position, useful in extreme situations � repentance, ardent supplication � to bring to mind the full meaning of need: need for reconciliation, need for assistance. The kneeling posture is one of great insecurity: the individual bends upon himself and returns to a near-f�tal position.
But beyond the dimension of meaningful pain, there is the movement involved in assuming this posture. Just as raising for the Gospel is an uplifting experience, the act of kneeling down is one that carries with it a downward, humiliating feeling. This is why the penitnetial, Lenten Liturgy of the Presanctified Gifts has the priest and faithful rise and kneel time after time. Each kneeling down carries with it a special meaning.
The downward motion, closing in on oneself, the painful position are all brought to a climatic point in the full prostration. This is a position of alienation more than anything else and, for precisely that reason, is most evident in the Lenten services of the Eastern Church. The prostrates himself, who can no longer stand aright and gaze into the eyes of Jesus. The prostrate posture is usually assumed by one who already feels remorse, but it also serves to heighten that feeling. Alexander Schmemann finds that the body and soul interact here and states that �prostration, the �psycho-somatic� sign of repentance and humility, of adoration and obedience, are thus the Lenten rite par excellence.�
The use of various positions and their effects on the person praying are known not only in the East. Contemporary Roman liturgists are also increasingly examining the possibilities in this realm and often manifest their indebtedness to the Orthodox Churches in this respect.
...
|
|
|
|
|
