What is oral prayer?

When the moralists and canoeists had to define what oral prayer is, they did not forgive themselves for solving the problems up to detail. They asked whether it must move the lips, or only tongue, whether the words must be heard, whether the prayer should be called oral. The breviary is prescribed in the form of “oral prayers.” On the contrary, those who address the questions too philosophically come easily to the conclusion that all prayer is oral. For man cannot think and not create at least a kind of inner words.
Therefore, it is better to remain with the word’s meaning, the known
ordinary speech. Oral prayer is the recitation of texts, composed in advance, aloud, or even silently. We have learned to memorize our Father, Hail, Hail Mary, etc. These words are without repeating them without change when we pray. We take in our hands a prayer book and read from it.

Objections to oral prayer.
Does the mechanical repetition of foreign words make sense?
After all, prayer is supposed to be personal, from the heart! There are several pastoral provisions in favor of oral prayers, such as the condemned article of Berthold of Rohrbach in 1356 that “the prayer of the ear is neither useful nor necessary, that It is not at all profitable for salvation, and that it is enough to pray with the mind, without sound or movement of the lips.” In the same way, she has condemned
the opinion of the Quietest that “the citation of books, preaching, oral prayers, the invocation of saints, and the like, are a hindrance to contemplation, to the prayer of the affections.” The Quietest referred to the text of the Gospel, which says that true prayer is in Spirit and truth (Jn 4:23).
Even in the Fathers’ writings, one could find many texts in their favor. They often urge us not to be content with just oral recitation. “Words before God can recite many men,” writes St. Augustine, “but only some know how to pray.” “Our heart cries to God by sound not by the flesh, but with elevated thoughts, with the harmony of the virtues. Faith cries aloud. Finally, then, we cry out in filial Abba, Father! (Gal 4:6) The Spirit of God Himself cries out in us.” (St. Augustine). St. Thomas Aquinas also collected the main objections that can be raised against oral prayer. It could be said that it is useless (for God knows the heart), that it is harmful because it attracts the mind to sensual things and that it is forbidden in the Gospel, where it says: Pray to thy Father in secret (Mt 6:6). In response, St. Paul emphasizes that the prayer of the Father is in the blessing of the Father (6).

In his answer to his Father, St. Thomas, above all, emphasizes the value of communal prayer. This should, however, would not be possible without oral expression. But even in private prayer, the utterance of words is an appropriate means of focusing the mind and lifting it to God. It is also for of the neighbor. Quickly to join with another who is devoutly and beautifully aloud praying. However, every help has a relative value. With v. Thomas, therefore, it seems to be harming the over-careful utterance of prayers just as much as artificial and flowery style. Thus we see that even St. Thomas doubts that oral prayer is the most perfect. It is, however, preparation for interior prayer.

Oral prayer
Psychological and dogmatic reasons for oral prayer excellent thoughts on verbal prayer can be read in the Russian spiritual writer Theophan Zatvornik. The Church values it because it is necessary for interior prayer; it is like a ladder by which one climbs higher. We cannot command the beginner: “Pray in your own words !” That would be something. This is similar to ordering someone who has not yet studied a language to speak, for example, French. He must first repeat memorized sentences; only then will he learn to speak fluently. Inner prayer is the fruit. The plant, however, must rather have leaves and flowers. “All the great teachers of prayer …have first laid down a kind of rule. They began by setting certain prayers, and only then when the time was right, did they begin to pray freely.” There is, of course, the danger of formalism, of mindless renunciation of other people’s words. This is not avoided by discarding form. “Do not throw away the forms,” writes Theophanes, “but revive them, give them spirit! ” But another reason, dogmatic, is also given. He who prays connects his words with the words of Christ praying to the Father. The Savior’s words are then powerful, being a force at work in the world, creating and transforming the face of the earth. In the complete sense of the word, this is true of the terms of the sacramental prayers (“I absolve you… ” “This is my body…”). However, they derive their power from the sacraments and other prayers, especially priestly prayers. As Gogol writes in his Meditations on the Divine Liturgy, these are a double-edged sword that intervenes in the struggle of life.

According to John of Kronstadt, then, “the holy words… are living water, flowing water; the word flows like water, the water then refreshes and revitalizes the body. The holy word also quickens, fills the world and the soul with joy, gentleness, pity for sins.” The problem of the power of the word in connection with prayer was of interest to Eastern theologians of this century, e.g., S. Bulgakov. The term is like an acoustic image of thought. Holy images then, in a mysterious way … weirdly, they present what they represent. Western authors also speak in favor of oral prayer.