Do you hold hands during the Our Father?

[tmn379]

My parish is completely gung-ho about holding hands during the Our Father. However, my wife and I make a habit of making sure that we are holding our two youngest children in both hands when the Our Father begins…

By the way, we also sing the Our Father accompanied by the “folk group.”

 

[beckyann2597]

I hold hands with DH and kids, not anyone else. I just fail to hold a hand if its offered no big deal. But we go to a church that really doesn’t do it so it very rarely presents itself as a problem.

 

[puzzleannie]

yes, I hold my hands in my pockets if I see that I am in one of those “who cares about their personal space” churches

 

[GoldenArrow]

Here’s a good article against the Gesture, written by Fr. Saunders, dean of the Notre Dame Graduate School of Christendom College and pastor of Queen of Apostles Parish, both in Alexandria.

catholicculture.org/docs/doc_view.cfm?recnum=1175

Here’s another good article about the Mass and Liturgical Abuses etc… (Site given “Excellent” review rating by Catholic Culture.org)

ourladyswarriors.org/ Article titled, “Is Your Mass Valid? Liturgical Abuse.”

Exerpt:
"Holding hands during the Our Father has become commonplace, but it is an illicit addition to the Liturgy. Clarifications and Interpretations of the GIRM “Notitiae” Vol. XI (1975) p. 226] explains:

“. . .holding hands is a sign of intimacy and not reconciliation, and as such disrupts the flow of the Sacramental signs in the Mass which leads to the Sacramental sign of intimacy with Christ and our neighbor, Holy Communion.” "

 

[Penny_s_Gram]

yes I believe cntact with the person next to me in such
a beautiful prayer adds something to my feelings at that time

 

[mosher]

Penny's Gram:

yes I believe cntact with the person next to me in such
a beautiful prayer adds something to my feelings at that time

That is part of the problem - Mass is not primarily there for our emotional needs.

 

[palmas85]

It always seemed somewhat artificial to hold hands during the prayer, much the same way the sign of peace usually seems artificial and strained except among family members and close friends. While I understand the symbolism behind it in practice both actions don’t really work.

 

[netmilsmom]

Penny's Gram:

yes I believe cntact with the person next to me in such
a beautiful prayer adds something to my feelings at that time

Why don’t you hold hands for the Creed?
It’s all about “We”. Wouldn’t that be appropriate?

 

[ncjohn]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

Why don’t you hold hands for the Creed?
It’s all about “We”. Wouldn’t that be appropriate?

And here we go again with the straw men and inapplicable examples of things that are not occuring and would be stopped by available means if they did. The topic is about the accepted practice (unless banned by the bishop with jurisdiction) of holding hands during the Our Father.

GoldenArrow:

Here’s a good article against the Gesture, written by Fr. Saunders, dean of the Notre Dame Graduate School of Christendom College and pastor of Queen of Apostles Parish, both in Alexandria.

That is interesting, but is still only just another opinion that does not speak for the Church.

We’ve been through all of this ad infinitum. Except in places where the appropriate bishop bans it, the practice is licit at this time, unles someone can produce a document of higher and more recent value than Redemptionis Sacramentum.

As such, can we please just stick to the topic and be charitable? I think we all understand why people do and don’t like it after a few hundred posts on the topic. We need to stop dividing into camps over this and respect each other’s preferences so we can fight the “real” battles together.

Peace,

 

[fix]

ncjohn:

And here we go again with the straw men and inapplicable examples of things that are not occuring and would be stopped by available means if they did. The topic is about the accepted practice (unless banned by the bishop with jurisdiction) of holding hands during the Our Father.

That is interesting, but is still only just another opinion that does not speak for the Church.

We’ve been through all of this ad infinitum. Except in places where the appropriate bishop bans it, the practice is licit at this time, unles someone can produce a document of higher and more recent value than Redemptionis Sacramentum.

As such, can we please just stick to the topic and be charitable? I think we all understand why people do and don’t like it after a few hundred posts on the topic. We need to stop dividing into camps over this and respect each other’s preferences so we can fight the “real” battles together.

Peace,

I have not read through all of these posts so I want to ask how you came to the conclusion it is licit to hold hands?

 

[ncjohn]

fix:

I have not read through all of these posts so I want to ask how you came to the conclusion it is licit to hold hands?

I have a couple posts below that address it. #130 probably summarizes it best.

Peace,

 

[netmilsmom]

"Why don’t you hold hands for the Creed?

• It’s all about “We”. Wouldn’t that be appropriate?"*

ncjohn:

And here we go again with the straw men and inapplicable examples of things that are not occuring and would be stopped by available means if they did. The topic is about the accepted practice (unless banned by the bishop with jurisdiction) of holding hands during the Our Father.

I’m sorry John that you don’t care for this kind of question. It’s is a valid question is the course of the discussion. What makes the Our Father, those 40 seconds, the place where unity by physically touching each other is needed.
By your definition, holding hands at the Creed is not illicit, so why not hold hands then? Or the Gospel, or any other part of the Holy Mass.
The question is, why at that time?
And why would you think that an innovation like this would be stopped if holding hands at the Our Father is continued, even in places where the Bishops have condemned it?

 

[MrS]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

You are wonderfully determined…please know how many agree with you…and are holding your hand in this discussion.

The last few Sundays I have noticed a decrease in handholding and a decrease in standing-till-communion-is-over at a local parish. Some of it comes from the new and very sincere priest, some from the parishioners waking up, and some from the influx of new parishioners who just know better and are setting a quiet example.

 

[space_ghost]

…if i am standing next to wife or children i will hold their hand… if a stranger reaches for mine, i will hold their hand, … i do not reach for a strangers hand…

Peace:thumbsup:

 

[netmilsmom]

MrS:

You are wonderfully determined…please know how many agree with you…and are holding your hand in this discussion.

.

No pun intended, right?

 

[MrS]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

No pun intended, right?

I used to intend to pun, but the abuse has now become the norm.

 

[netmilsmom]

MrS:

I used to intend to pun, but the abuse has now become the norm.

You’re the best!!
Sometimes it gets old to hear that legitimate questions are personal attacks.
I try to research and put in references, yet I “attack”. (okay, the Dork comment may have been a bit much, but it’s the truth for me)

Sometimes I need a humor break, thanks!

 

[ncjohn]

"Why don’t you hold hands for the Creed?

• It’s all about “We”. Wouldn’t that be appropriate?"*

I’m sorry John that you don’t care for this kind of question. It’s is a valid question is the course of the discussion. What makes the Our Father, those 40 seconds, the place where unity by physically touching each other is needed.
By your definition, holding hands at the Creed is not illicit, so why not hold hands then? Or the Gospel, or any other part of the Holy Mass.
The question is, why at that time?
And why would you think that an innovation like this would be stopped if holding hands at the Our Father is continued, even in places where the Bishops have condemned it?

It’s not a valid question for this thread because the thread topic is a simple question of whether you hold hands during the Our Father.

Secondly, it is proposing a new situation as compared to one that has existed for decades without the Church finding it to be illicit. You may be right that the Church would similarly decline to find that illicit either. There is a mechanism in place though to determine that, so implying that it would be just because a longstanding and widespread practice exists is misleading at best. It is a straw man tactic designed to say “if we continue to allow this, look what else “they” might try to do.” It’s really just a more subtle form of the juggling or bar-b-quing scenarios. If you want to propose such a thing, show me a place where it was or is being done and it wasn’t or isn’t beinig addressed.

Redemptionis Sacramentum just very effectively dealt with all manner of abuses and there is certainly no reason to think that any new question wouldn’t be dealt with also, especially given the Pope’s dedication to liturgical purity,

Peace,

 

[fix]

ncjohn:

It’s not a valid question for this thread because the thread topic is a simple question of whether you hold hands during the Our Father.

Secondly, it is proposing a new situation as compared to one that has existed for decades without the Church finding it to be illicit. You may be right that the Church would similarly decline to find that illicit either. There is a mechanism in place though to determine that, so implying that it would be just because a longstanding and widespread practice exists is misleading at best. It is a straw man tactic designed to say “if we continue to allow this, look what else “they” might try to do.” It’s really just a more subtle form of the juggling or bar-b-quing scenarios. If you want to propose such a thing, show me a place where it was or is being done and it wasn’t or isn’t beinig addressed.

Redemptionis Sacramentum just very effectively dealt with all manner of abuses and there is certainly no reason to think that any new question wouldn’t be dealt with also, especially given the Pope’s dedication to liturgical purity,

Peace,

I take a very different view. I have read the following analogy regarding issues such as hand holding. In a college campus there were paved areas for students to walk on and grass areas that were not for walking. Eventually some of the students began to cut across the lawn as they felt it was to their benefit. A path was formed and instead of the authorties correcting these folks they just paved over the grass and gave in to their disobedience.

What started out as an abuse was overlooked to appease the few who decided to change things on their own accord. That happens many times and I disagree with it.

 

[netmilsmom]

ncjohn:

It is a straw man tactic designed to say “if we continue to allow this, look what else “they” might try to do.” It’s really just a more subtle form of the juggling or bar-b-quing scenarios. If you want to propose such a thing, show me a place where it was or is being done and it wasn’t or isn’t beinig addressed.

Steps used in creating and using a straw man argument:

Step 1: Build the Straw Man: “Evolution is false! How could a mouse evolve into an elephant!?”
Step 2: Knock down the Straw Man by any means necessary: “How could a mouse evolve into an elephant? There would have to be billions of changes for that to occur, and nobody has ever seen speciation anyway!”

Step 3: Connect the original position to the Straw Man:“So it’s silly…who has ever seen a mouse evolve into an elephant? Nobody!!”

Step 4: Claim to negate the opposing position by the connection in 3. “Therefore, evolution must be false!”

This is not at all what the question, “Why not hold hands at the Creed?” is about.

The question remains, why those particular 40 seconds to hold hands?

Now, if you need an example of something being done which no one has stopped, do a search for the Dogs in the Mass thread. It is being done, and no one has stopped it. By your reasoning it is licit as well.