Canvas Shoes in Church-Pastor or Bishop?

[Holland]

I don’t know, I think people realized early on that the question about whether you should report it to your priest or bishop was probably not a genuine question, hence the lightness in the banter of conversation in some cases. You know vitriol is a really strong and negative word to use for people’s opinions on whether they like to hold hands at church or not.

 

[jmcrae]

I don’t know, I think people realized early on that the question about whether you should report it to your priest or bishop was probably not a genuine question, hence the lightness in the banter of conversation in some cases. You know vitriol is a really strong and negative word to use for people’s opinions on whether they like to hold hands at church or not.

In the same way that no one can legitimately mandate what brand or style of shoes to wear at Mass, so also, no one can mandate that you have to hold hands at the Our Father.

If someone mistakenly acts as though he had the authority to force you to do this, you are free to ignore him.

 

[Holland]

In the same way that no one can legitimately mandate what brand or style of shoes to wear at Mass, so also, no one can mandate that you have to hold hands at the Our Father.

If someone mistakenly acts as though he had the authority to force you to do this, you are free to ignore him.

You are correct. I couldn’t have said it better if I tried.

 

[thistle]

It has come to my attention that there is nothing in the GIRM allowing the faithful to wear canvas shoes in Church. Yet, I see this happen all the time at my Parish, especially in the summer, but no one does anything about it. Should I report this problem to my Pastor or to the Bishop?

Do you really think Jesus is offended by someone wearing canvas shoes to Mass? He is happy to see the person there to worship him.
Why are you being so petty?

 

[notreallysure]

I don’t know, I think people realized early on that the question about whether you should report it to your priest or bishop was probably not a genuine question, hence the lightness in the banter of conversation in some cases. You know vitriol is a really strong and negative word to use for people’s opinions on whether they like to hold hands at church or not.

But, the question is why was that recognized? Why treated differently? How are the acts so different?
I decided purposely to use vitriol and stick with it as the best description I see of many of the posts on those other non-GIRM topics.

 

[notreallysure]

In the same way that no one can legitimately mandate what brand or style of shoes to wear at Mass, so also, no one can mandate that you have to hold hands at the Our Father.

If someone mistakenly acts as though he had the authority to force you to do this, you are free to ignore him.

And by the same reasoning no one can legitimately mandate what you do with your hands or tell you that you cannot hold hands at the Our Father.
If someone mistakenly acts as though he has the authority to force you to stop holding hands, you are free to ignore him.
Agree?

 

[notreallysure]

Do you really think Jesus is offended by someone wearing canvas shoes to Mass? He is happy to see the person there to worship him.
Why are you being so petty?

No, I don’t. I am not being petty, I am discussing what would be a petty reaction. And, don’t you agree it is likewise “petty” (I want to make it clear that is your word–I already got in “trouble” for my word “vitriol”) when people control other aspects of what folks do at Mass? Like hand holding perhaps?
And (real question here), how far does this go? Is it petty to try to regulate shoes but not pants? Or shirts?

 

[MrS]

IMHO… I think there is a difference between your shoe example… which “creates” absolutly no “interference” in or on another’s prayer efforts at Mass

and

trying to compare it to hand holding or postures, gestures which one may use to “interfere” in another’s prayer efforts.

Neither are mentioned in the GIRM, that is true… so what. The GIRM and Rubrics should be excepted as a TO DO list, not a NOT TO DO list.

So, save your sole for a better day … or write your bishop and give him a laugh.

Your comment:
*And by the same reasoning no one can legitimately mandate what you do with your hands or tell you that you cannot hold hands at the Our Father. *

Actually they can… by making known a TO DO list, the Church declares what it is that should be done, and by whom. Anything outside the “list” should not be considered fair game for the laity or the clerics who continue to misunderstand Active Participation.

.

 

[notreallysure]

IMHO… I think there is a difference between your shoe example… which “creates” absolutly no “interference” in or on another’s prayer efforts at Mass

and

trying to compare it to hand holding or postures, gestures which one may use to “interfere” in another’s prayer efforts.

Neither are mentioned in the GIRM, that is true… so what. The GIRM and Rubrics should be excepted as a TO DO list, not a NOT TO DO list.

So, save your sole for a better day … or write your bishop and give him a laugh.

Your comment:
*And by the same reasoning no one can legitimately mandate what you do with your hands or tell you that you cannot hold hands at the Our Father. *

Actually they can… by making known a TO DO list, the Church declares what it is that should be done, and by whom. Anything outside the “list” should not be considered fair game for the laity or the clerics who continue to misunderstand Active Participation.

.

How does holding my wife’s and daughter’s hands while we pray the Our Father interfere in anyone else’s “prayer efforts”?

Where is this “TO DO” list? And, where on the list does it say NOT to hold hands because that sounds a lot like a NOT TO DO list to me.

 

[MrS]

How does holding my wife’s and daughter’s hands while we pray the Our Father interfere in anyone else’s “prayer efforts”?

Where is this “TO DO” list? And, where on the list does it say NOT to hold hands because that sounds a lot like a NOT TO DO list to me.

You really aren’t very sure, are you.

The GIRM is written as a guidline - almost like instructions to build a model plane.

While the instructions may say when to put the wings on, common sense tells us where they go.

While the instructions may say where to attach the wheels, common sense tells us what they do.

While the instructions may say what color is recommended for authenticity, it does not need to say “don’t use pink”… You could still use pink, but then your model tends to lose some of the intent of the maker.

You can hold the hand of anyone you want … who may agree with your opinion of what instructions DO NOT say. That is your choice. And it seems that is the choice of many who prefer to say “I can do it, cuz the instructions don’t say I can’t”

Common sense won’t prevail… IMHO most of those who follow their own drumbeat (including both clerics and laity) have long ago closed that door.

.

 

[MusicMan]

There’s another difference between the question of holding hands during the Our Father and wearing canvas shoes at Mass.

The posture for the laity during the Our Father, although not expressly legislated by the GIRM or RS, has been intensely debated by the USCCB and with Rome. No posture has been formally announced, but from these discussions, we can tell that the mind of the Church is that we are not to be holding hands during the Our Father. There was even discussion of mandating a modified “orans position” for the laity for the simple purpose of eliminating the holding of hands.

Footwear has not been discussed to this magnitude.

 

[notreallysure]

You really aren’t very sure, are you.

The GIRM is written as a guidline - almost like instructions to build a model plane.

While the instructions may say when to put the wings on, common sense tells us where they go.

While the instructions may say where to attach the wheels, common sense tells us what they do.

While the instructions may say what color is recommended for authenticity, it does not need to say “don’t use pink”… You could still use pink, but then your model tends to lose some of the intent of the maker.

You can hold the hand of anyone you want … who may agree with your opinion of what instructions DO NOT say. That is your choice. And it seems that is the choice of many who prefer to say “I can do it, cuz the instructions don’t say I can’t”

Common sense won’t prevail… IMHO most of those who follow their own drumbeat (including both clerics and laity) have long ago closed that door.

.

I am sure of one thing. I have no idea whatsoever of what you are saying in this post.
But, I’ll try.

The GIRM is writen as guidline–No, I think it is more rulebook.

Model airplane, wings and wheels??

When colors are noted in the rubrics to be used-like red is to be used here–of course it means no pink or green or blue; those aren’t red. What’s the point?

That’s right, I can hold the hand of anyone I want because there is no rule not to do so.

Did I get it? I have a huge headache from trying!:banghead:

 

[notreallysure]

There’s another difference between the question of holding hands during the Our Father and wearing canvas shoes at Mass.

The posture for the laity during the Our Father, although not expressly legislated by the GIRM or RS, has been intensely debated by the USCCB and with Rome. No posture has been formally announced, but from these discussions, we can tell that the mind of the Church is that we are not to be holding hands during the Our Father. There was even discussion of mandating a modified “orans position” for the laity for the simple purpose of eliminating the holding of hands.

Footwear has not been discussed to this magnitude.

First, I don’t see how it is that the frequency of discussion makes a logical difference.

Second, without a formal announcement I think it very dangerous to try to “tell … the mind of the Church.”

Third, if you have references for these discussions, I would be interested in them as the only things I am aware of relate to whether the Clergy can “push” handholding, not whether handholding is a proper posture for the lay person to assume themselves.

 

[notreallysure]

Ahh, the spirited discussion that should have happened long ago begins.

 

[MusicMan]

First, I don’t see how it is that the frequency of discussion makes a logical difference.

You won’t get a discussion on footwear loaded with vitriol. It’s never been an issue before. Holding hands during the Lord’s Prayer is a highly debated issue.

Second, without a formal announcement I think it very dangerous to try to “tell … the mind of the Church.”

Third, if you have references for these discussions, I would be interested in them as the only things I am aware of relate to whether the Clergy can “push” handholding, not whether handholding is a proper posture for the lay person to assume themselves.

There are multiple sides to the hand holding issue. There’s the clergy pushing, the people in the pews pushing it, and the people in the pews who just hold the hands of their family. If you were standing next to me at Mass and tried to force me to hold your hand during the Lord’s Prayer, I would have a problem with that. It would be a lot different if you were standing next to me and just held the hands of your family.

Nevertheless, there are reams of threads on this topic on CAF. If you want references, feel free to start with any of them.

 

[MrS]

I am sure of one thing. I have no idea whatsoever of what you are saying in this post. didn’t think you would
But, I’ll try.

The GIRM is writen as guidline–No, I think it is more rulebook.

Model airplane, wings and wheels?? it is called an analogy
I guess I should have first said… this is an analogy. Sorry, I thought you might see that. But if you can’t understand the GIRM, well… I see the problem.

When colors are noted in the rubrics to be used-like red is to be used here–of course it means no pink or green or blue; those aren’t red. What’s the point? Maybe the point is that you need to see the Rubrics or the Girm in light of TO DO - and anything else should be assumed NOT TO DO.

That’s right, I can hold the hand of anyone I want because there is no rule not to do so. Nice attitude…try to hold some hands… you might get slapped

Did I get it? I have a huge headache from trying!:banghead:

 

[notreallysure]

I am sure of one thing. I have no idea whatsoever of what you are saying in this post. didn’t think you would

If you didn’t think I would then common courtesy and logic would dictate that you respond in a useful, not a useless, way.

Model airplane, wings and wheels?? it is called an analogy
I guess I should have first said… this is an analogy. Sorry, I thought you might see that. But if you can’t understand the GIRM, well… I see the problem.

I know what an analogy is and also know a bad analogy when I read one. I do understand the GIRM. Your “analogy” doesn’t help and doesn’t address the issues I raised at all.

When colors are noted in the rubrics to be used-like red is to be used here–of course it means no pink or green or blue; those aren’t red. What’s the point? Maybe the point is that you need to see the Rubrics or the Girm in light of TO DO - and anything else should be assumed NOT TO DO.

By the way, it is the GIRM not the Girm. But now you have hit on a good and key point. However, the idea that the GIRM can be seen as a TO DO with everything not there as a NOT TO DO does not work as shown in one simple example in this very thread. GIRM doesn’t say wear shoes, but it surely doesn’t mean that we are NOT TO DO this. GIRM is not very explicit on many things, IMO it is just not workable to say everything not there is in the NOT TO DO category.

That’s right, I can hold the hand of anyone I want because there is no rule not to do so. Nice attitude…try to hold some hands… you might get slapped

I was, of course, as seen by the context, not talking about rude activity here where I try to hold the hands of someone that does not—although a slap is a completely wrong response to even that rude activity. I am saying that no one should be criticizing the consensual holding of hands by, for example, a family worshipping together.

 

[notreallysure]

You won’t get a discussion on footwear loaded with vitriol. It’s never been an issue before. Holding hands during the Lord’s Prayer is a highly debated issue.

The question is why is that so and what does it say logically about the GIRM and how to read it.

There are multiple sides to the hand holding issue. There’s the clergy pushing, the people in the pews pushing it, and the people in the pews who just hold the hands of their family. If you were standing next to me at Mass and tried to force me to hold your hand during the Lord’s Prayer, I would have a problem with that. It would be a lot different if you were standing next to me and just held the hands of your family.

Nevertheless, there are reams of threads on this topic on CAF. If you want references, feel free to start with any of them.

I think that you misunderstood my request, I know of all of those things, the question is are you aware of any Church discussions that are publically documented that address the issue of a lay person themselves deciding to hold hands, aside from issues of the clergy pushing this or the neighbors refusing. I have not seen such.

 

[Holland]

I think that you misunderstood my request, I know of all of those things, the question is are you aware of any Church discussions that are publically documented that address the issue of a lay person themselves deciding to hold hands, aside from issues of the clergy pushing this or the neighbors refusing. I have not seen such.

This is interesting stuff…So a documented public discussion is relevant and important to you because???

 

[RosalieM]

In my parish, the monsignor always wears black sandals with black socks. An older priest always wears conservative black shoes that tie with shoestrings. The younger priest was wearing casual black leather shoes and recently, off-white leather shoes, then went back to black nondescript shoes. Why does this matter and why do we notice?