Catholic Replies
Q. In many local parishes, it is common to see people in the pews raising their hands or holding hands during the Our Father. In one parish, the congregation stands as the gifts are brought forward. Are these postures allowed, and where can I find what the proper postures are for each part of the Mass? — J.M., New York.
A. You can find the proper postures during the Mass in the General Instruction of the Roman Missal, which spells out the manner in which Mass is to be celebrated, both for the priests and those assisting him at Mass and for the congregation. For example, paragraphs 42-44 deal with “Gestures and Bodily Posture,” and paragraphs 274 and 275 refer to “Genuflections and Bows.” In paragraph 42, the GIRM says:
“The gestures and bodily posture of both the Priest, the Deacon, and the ministers, and also of the people, must be conducive to making the entire celebration resplendent with beauty and noble simplicity, to making clear the true and full meaning of its different parts, and to fostering the participation of all. Attention must therefore be paid to what is determined by this General Instruction and by the traditional practice of the Roman Rite and to what serves the common spiritual good of the People of God, rather than private inclination or arbitrary choice.”
We have attended Mass in several states, and it has always astonished us how the gestures you mentioned are so widespread when there is no sanction for them in the Church’s liturgical documents. How do gestures that result from “private inclination or arbitrary choice” become so commonplace, while at the same time gestures that are officially approved by the Church, such as making a reverent bow before receiving Holy Communion, are often ignored?
It’s up to pastors to encourage their faithful repeatedly, not just once a year, to follow the Church’s liturgical rules, and to discourage them from practices that are not part of liturgical tradition.
Q. Is Jerusalem mentioned in the Bible as the capital or holy city of all the land that God led the Exodus slaves into? Do modern Jews, as well as Muslims and Christians, each consider it their holy city? I read that Pope Francis expressed opposition to President Trump’s decision to relocate the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem. — D.H.L., Iowa.
A. Jerusalem is mentioned hundreds of times in the Bible. It was considered a holy city because of the Temple located within its boundaries, a Temple that was believed by the Jews to be the dwelling place of God on Earth. Around 1,000 BC, King David made Jerusalem the religious center of Israel and his son, King Solomon, built the first Temple there about 40 years later. That Temple was destroyed by the Babylonians in 587 BC and the Jewish people went into exile. With the help of King Cyrus of Persia, who allowed the Jews to return from exile, the Temple was rebuilt some 50 years later.
Shortly before the time of Jesus, King Herod the Great, who reigned from 37 to 4 BC, began construction of the Temple in which Jesus worshiped. That Temple, and the entire city of Jerusalem, was destroyed by the Romans in AD 70, just as Jesus had predicted 40 years earlier (cf. Luke 21:24).
Three centuries later, Julian the Apostate, a Roman emperor noted for his fierce hatred of Christianity, tried unsuccessfully to rebuild the Temple. According to the pagan writer Ammianus Marcellinus:
“Julian committed the accomplishment of this task to Alypius of Antioch, who before that had been Lieutenant of Britain. Alypius therefore set himself vigorously to the work and was seconded by the governor of the province. Fearful balls of fire, breaking out near the foundations, continued their attacks till the workmen, after repeated scorchings, could approach no more and, thus, the fierce elements obstinately repelling them, he gave over his attempt.”
The status of Jerusalem as a holy city began again early in the fourth century, when St. Helena, mother of the Roman Emperor Constantine, who had made Christianity legal in 313, recovered the true cross at the spot where Jesus had been crucified, paid to build churches in the city, and made it a place of pilgrimage for those wishing to visit the holy sites.
In AD 691, a gold-domed Islamic shrine, known as the Dome of the Rock, was constructed on the site of the former Temple, where Muslims believe that Mohammed ascended into Heaven.
The Islamic persecution of Christians visiting the Holy Land led to the First Crusade, which liberated Jerusalem in 1099, but the Muslims recaptured the city in 1187. It remained under their control until World War I, when the British took over. They controlled the city until 1948, when Israel became a state. The Temple Mount, which contains the Holy Sepulchre, the Wailing Wall (the only surviving portion of the Temple destroyed in AD 70), and the Dome of the Rock, is considered to be a holy place by Christians, Jews, and Muslims.
Israel declared Jerusalem to be its capital in 1980, but many nations do not recognize that city as the capital. Pope Francis objected to moving the U.S. Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem on the grounds that it would cause more conflict in the region between the Israelis and Palestinians, who want independence and recognition as a state.
While advocating a “two-state” solution for the Holy Land, the Catholic Church has called for special status for Jerusalem, particularly the Old City. “Jerusalem is a unique city,” said Pope Francis, “sacred to Jews, Christians, and Muslims who venerate the holy places of their respective religions, and has a special vocation to peace.”
The image of Jerusalem as a holy city continues in the Book of Revelation where the Apostle John has a vision of Jerusalem coming down out of Heaven in all its glory and splendor. It gleams like a rare jewel, has a high wall with 12 gates bearing the names of the 12 Tribes of Israel and 12 foundations bearing the names of the 12 Apostles. The city is modeled after the Holy of Holies in the Temple in Jerusalem. It is not a literal city, but rather a symbol of a whole new world where God will dwell with His people.
Q. There is good evidence that the Church was infiltrated by Communists in the 1940s, which Alice von Hildebrand has stated to be so. If this is true, and a Communist becomes a priest with the intention of destroying the Church from within, is he truly ordained? This is concerning because of the possibility that one would receive only bread and not Jesus at Mass, that Confessions would be invalid, and even the possibility of some of them becoming bishops and “ordaining” other men. — Name Withheld, California.
A. It is not implausible to think that the Communists, implacable enemies of the Catholic Church, might have infiltrated the ranks of the clergy. Assuming that this did happen, would such men be real priests? The first requisite for valid Ordination is that the candidate be a baptized male (cf. canon 1024). Other requisites are that candidates be at least 25 years of age (canon 1031), have “assumed publicly before God and the Church the obligation of celibacy” (canon 1037), and “have an integral faith, are motivated by a right intention, possess the required knowledge, and enjoy a good reputation, good morals, and proven virtues, and other physical and psychological qualities which are appropriate to the order to be received” (canon 1029).
The key requisite, as far as we are concerned here, is having the right intention. This means, says a commentary on canon law, that “an individual must choose to live his life imitating the example of the Lord as teacher, priest, and shepherd. The candidate must choose to be a co-worker with the bishop in fulfilling the mission the Lord has entrusted to His Church. Experience has shown that an error in this area can lead to unfortunate results for the life of the individual and not infrequently for the ministry of the Church.”
Since a Communist seeking to infiltrate the Church and undermine her mission does not have the right intention, his Ordination would not be valid and any sacraments he attempted to administer would not be valid.
