Liturgy: 'And Also With You'
And More on Crucifixes and Bows
ROME, JUNE 16, 2004 (Zenit) - Answered by Father Edward McNamara, professor of liturgy at the Regina Apostolorum Pontifical University.
Q: When the presider at Mass greets the assembly with the words "The Lord be with you" he extends his arms to all in a gesture of pouring out this wish and blessing. The assembly replies "And also with you" (which apparently is currently under review to reflect the exact Latin translation "And with your Spirit"). Is it liturgically incorrect or not permissible for the assembly, in their reciprocation, to extend their hands and arms similarly as they reply to the presider's greeting, as a gesture of returning the blessing? -- M.C., Durban, South Africa
A: While your proposal is likely done with the best of intentions I do not believe that this change would be beneficial.
The use of this gesture by the congregation would probably actually reduce the specific presidential character of this greeting and gesture, which is traditionally somewhat more than just an act of social courtesy.
Certainly the greeting is very ancient. In the biblical Book of Ruth (2:4) Booz greets his reapers with "The Lord be with you." To which they replied, "The Lord bless you." Instead of this phrase the liturgy uses the "And with your spirit" which in its original Judeo-Christian context means the same as "And also with you."
However, from ancient times the expression "And with your spirit" received an added, more spiritual, meaning.
St. John Chrysostom (344-407) refers to the spirit of the greeting as the indwelling Spirit and as an allusion to the fact that the bishop performs the sacrifice by the power of the Holy Spirit.
For this reason the greeting "The Lord be with you" was from early on restricted to bishops, priests and deacons.
It is probably the spiritual theological interpretation of this dialogue, through which the faithful, in a way, are constituted as a liturgical assembly with and through the "spirit" of the priest that has moved the Holy See to insist on a more literal translation in future missals. This might initially cause some adjustment difficulties in countries (such as the English-speaking world and Brazilian Portuguese) which adopted non-literal translations.
The gesture which accompanies the dialogue of stretching out and closing the hands deepens more the utterance of a desire to be united with the assembly and to draw them together into the prayer which is about to begin.
In fact, during Mass, this gesture is reserved to the priest during the specific presidential moments in which he invites the assembly to pray or, in other words, to act as a liturgical assembly.
Thus if the whole assembly were to repeat this gesture it would in all likelihood weaken the expression of this theological and ecclesial rapport.
When the formula "The Lord be with you" is used in non-presidential moments, such as before the reading of the Gospel (which even when read by the celebrant is not considered a presidential act), the rubrics specify that the priest or deacon keeps his hands joined.
From another standpoint, introducing this gesture unilaterally would be an example of arbitrarily establishing a new liturgical movement which may not be done at the local level but is primarily reserved to the Holy See or proposed by the bishops' conference and ratified by the Holy See.
Even when new gestures are introduced by these bodies, they must be historically, theologically and pastorally justified and so are usually the fruit of painstaking study and reflection.
* * *
Follow-up: Crucifixes and Bows
As always our attentive readers see gaps in my replies. I will try to clear up any doubts. Regarding the June 1 column, a reader asked if the bows toward the altar when crossing the sanctuary applied to servers as well as priests, or should they bow toward the crucifix.
These bows should be made by all to the altar whenever crossing in front of it, except in those cases when one is moving in procession.
The reason that the altar has preference over the crucifix is because the symbolic value of the altar as representative of Christ is theologically far stronger than that of the crucifix.
This symbolism was felt far more strongly in ancient times, before it became customary to venerate the tabernacle and place the crucifix upon or near the altar. But the altar conserves its central role as symbol of Christ himself, present in the midst of the assembly as victim and as food from heaven.
St. Ambrose of Milan says "For what is the altar of Christ if not the image of the Body of Christ" and elsewhere "the Altar represents the Body (of Christ) and the Body of Christ is on the altar" (see ...
Rate This Article
Leave a Comment
More Featured Today
- Monaco & The Vatican: Monaco's Grace Kelly Exhibit to Rome--A Review of Monegasque-Holy See Diplomatic History
- My Dad
- A Royal Betrayal: Catholic Monaco Liberalizes Abortion
- John Paul II as an Apostle of Mercy
- Embrace every moment as sacred time
- A Recession Antidote
- The Why of Jesus' Death: A Pauline Perspective
- Father Lombardi's Address on Catholic Media
- Pope's Words to Pontifical Latin American College
- Prelate: Genetics Needs a Conscience