Hand Holding and Guitars at Mass?

[WhiteDove]

Nichevo:

Cherub,
I spoke with your pastor this afternoon and made him aware of the problem with the statue in the sanctuary. I recommended that he make a change that is more in keeping with orthodoxy. He felt that the parish would be better served by a statue that truly embodied the vision of what he felt the Church should be.

http://romancathanachronism.typepad.com/photos/my_buddy/jsbstash_1785_5241059.jpg

Is this for real? He looks like he’s performing a rap song!

 

[catsrus]

I found it to be lacking and full of what I consider liturgical abuse…maybe I am just paranoid…there were a couple of things that struck me as strange. First, they had a band instead of a choir and they had guitars and other instruments and it was very annoying and it upset me

Dums, this is getting scary, I agree with you AGAIN! (I did yesterday on another thread)
I was received into a Catholic Church with not only guitars and drums and bongos, but litugical dancers, NO kneeling at all, no crucifix, A LOT of prot music (I recognized it from my youth**), **congregants clapping and swaying and prayer that was expressed, “may the Lord accept the sacrifice at your hands for the praise and glory of God’s name for our good and the good of all God’s Church”. (inclusive language). I could go on, but why bother. You get the gist of it. I knew no better at the time so accepted the explanations that all this is approved since VatII. I have now found another parish where none of this is present and I feel far more reverant. We still hand hold though.
Whether some of this “modern” stuff is acceptable or not, I have felt the TLM calling me for awhile now. Got to find one first though.

 

[otm]

terrcatholic:

That altar is sick, demented and belongs in a heathen church

Apparently you have never been to a Mass in a battelfield. That altar is neither sick nor demented. While it is more stark than you may be used to, it is both the Altar of Sacrifice and Table of Sacred Meal as much as any other altar. At the Last Supper, Christ did not institute the Eucharsit at an altar of any kind; he did it at a table in an upper room during the Passover Meal. Would you call that demented?

terrcatholic:

who wants to hold the teachings of the church and not be heretical, as most of the new teachings are.

You seem more interested in vitriol than facts. Care to back up that statement with a list of the new teachings you are so critical of?

terrcatholic:

How can something that was taught for 1900 years all of a sudden be wrong, as well as a Mass that edified and fed millions be BANNED over night. Agenda maybe?

Or maybe change, just like there has been change over that 1900 years that you were never taught about. Your view of the Mass appears to be that there were no changes since Trent. There were numerous changes made along the way, and someone seems to have failed to point that out to you. You also appear to not understand that there are more similarities between the Pauline rite and the Tridintine right than there are differences.

 

[Nichevo]

WhiteDove:

Is this for real? He looks like he’s performing a rap song!

It’s a parody of modernism taken from the movie “Dogma.”

 

[dumspirospero]

Cats…maybe we have more in common that we first thought It is great to see we share some of the same views…Good luck on finding the TLM in your area…I was blessed to find out they offer an Indult TLM here in Baton Rouge when I moved here…I go whenever I get a chance…they offer it each Sunday at 9:30…it is absolutely my favorite. Check out unavoce.org/index.html
I believe there is a list or link to a list of churches throughout the US that offers the TLM…good luck and God Bless

catsrus:

Dums, this is getting scary, I agree with you AGAIN! (I did yesterday on another thread)
I was received into a Catholic Church with not only guitars and drums and bongos, but litugical dancers, NO kneeling at all, no crucifix, A LOT of prot music (I recognized it from my youth**), **congregants clapping and swaying and prayer that was expressed, “may the Lord accept the sacrifice at your hands for the praise and glory of God’s name for our good and the good of all God’s Church”. (inclusive language). I could go on, but why bother. You get the gist of it. I knew no better at the time so accepted the explanations that all this is approved since VatII. I have now found another parish where none of this is present and I feel far more reverant. We still hand hold though.
Whether some of this “modern” stuff is acceptable or not, I have felt the TLM calling me for awhile now. Got to find one first though.

 

[kovalcik]

I am finding many of the comments on this thread disturbing. I find many are confusing “Liturgically Proper” with “What I like”.

Our church has 4 masses, each with a distinctive style (each meeting liturgical requirements set out in the GIRM). The styles range from a contemporary choir (with guitar, keyboard, and, yes (gasp) drums) which I direct with my wife, to a quiet 7AM mass with only congregational singing. We also have a choir with organ and another small group that leads our vigil mass.

Each mass has its following of people who find the style conducive to his idea of worship. The Catholic church has recognized the importance of various liturgical styles by allowing local customs and styles to be implemented into the celebration of the mass.

We also respect tradition. Our music repertoire includes chants and selections in latin in addition to other songs that have a rock, folk, or even bluegrass feel. All written specifically for Catholic worship BTW, no showtunes or Top 40 here. We also take great pains to encourage the congregation to participate and strive to make it clear that we are there to lead the music, not perform. Songs that are received well by the congregation and fit the liturgy are brought back, others are forgotten. I am not so arrogant to think that my style of music is appreciated by everybody, but I do know that the people who gravitate to the mass we are responsible for benefit from it. At the same time it would an abject failure to put our choir at the 7AM mass. No one’s worship would be be enhanced. This diversity allows the whole Church to be stronger.

I would also question the approach you use to get your point across. I have never been to a Latin mass. Except for historical curiousity, I do not see what I would get out it spiritually. Instead of tearing down a style of worship that I and many others find rewarding, why don’t you explain why you want whatever your favorite style of worship is? Maybe you could work with your priest or another local priest to have a Latin mass once a month to introduce more people to it. We should be taking time to build up the Church, not tear down what we personnally do not like.

The Catholic mass provides a rich and diverse environment for worship. We need to take advantage of this richness to enhance everyones worship.

Well, I am getting long and rambling so I better end this.

Peace

 

[joandarc]

Praise the LORD! Praise God in his sanctuary; praise him in his mighty firmament!
Praise him for his mighty deeds; praise him according to his exceeding greatness!
**Praise him with trumpet sound; praise him with lute and harp!
Praise him with timbrel and dance; praise him with strings and pipe!
Praise him with sounding cymbals; praise him with loud clashing cymbals!
**Let everything that breathes praise the LORD! Praise the LORD!
-Psalm 150

People have been worshipping God since the beginning of time. But if you would rather not go back that far. . .since the beginning of Holy Mother Church. . .when there were no electric guitars. . .or organ either for that matter. Praise God that He has given us breath with which to praise Him. . .and hands to play instruments and instruments to play!

 

[otm]

kovalcik:

I am finding many of the comments on this thread disturbing. I find many are confusing “Liturgically Proper” with “What I like”.

Our church has 4 masses, each with a distinctive style (each meeting liturgical requirements set out in the GIRM). The styles range from a contemporary choir (with guitar, keyboard, and, yes (gasp) drums) which I direct with my wife, to a quiet 7AM mass with only congregational singing. We also have a choir with organ and another small group that leads our vigil mass.

Each mass has its following of people who find the style conducive to his idea of worship. The Catholic church has recognized the importance of various liturgical styles by allowing local customs and styles to be implemented into the celebration of the mass.

We also respect tradition. Our music repertoire includes chants and selections in latin in addition to other songs that have a rock, folk, or even bluegrass feel. All written specifically for Catholic worship BTW, no showtunes or Top 40 here. We also take great pains to encourage the congregation to participate and strive to make it clear that we are there to lead the music, not perform. Songs that are received well by the congregation and fit the liturgy are brought back, others are forgotten. I am not so arrogant to think that my style of music is appreciated by everybody, but I do know that the people who gravitate to the mass we are responsible for benefit from it. At the same time it would an abject failure to put our choir at the 7AM mass. No one’s worship would be be enhanced. This diversity allows the whole Church to be stronger.

I would also question the approach you use to get your point across. I have never been to a Latin mass. Except for historical curiousity, I do not see what I would get out it spiritually. Instead of tearing down a style of worship that I and many others find rewarding, why don’t you explain why you want whatever your favorite style of worship is? Maybe you could work with your priest or another local priest to have a Latin mass once a month to introduce more people to it. We should be taking time to build up the Church, not tear down what we personnally do not like.

The Catholic mass provides a rich and diverse environment for worship. We need to take advantage of this richness to enhance everyones worship.

Well, I am getting long and rambling so I better end this.

Peace

Well said and a good post. The problem with those who are somewhere between conservative and arch-conservative is that they hold for no room other than their own way. They are won’t to quote documents at length, often selectively, and have a mindset that worship is not worship if it does not meet their expectations.

Keep up the good work!

 

[netmilsmom]

Deacon Ed

Holding hands during the Our Father is a thing that arose spontaneously from the people. <<

Deacon, could you please tell me WHO “the People” are? I hear this all the time. Everyone I know is not happy with it.

One final thought: the orans position does not belong to the priest, it is the traditional posture for prayer derived from, at least, Jewish times.<<
Could you please give a reference for this? I heard that the orans position at the time of the Our Father is the priest leading his flock to the words of Our Lord. How can a member of the congregation be doing that at the same time. Lifting one’s hands to heaven to pray to God is going against the idea that God in the Eucharist is on the altar.

In the Byzantine tradition the people always pray the Lord’s prayer (Our Father) with their hands in the orans position.<<

Wonderful, but we are Roman and not Byzantine. When the same people who are pushing the hand holding, orans and guitar masses get as Orthodox as the Byzantines, I will accept this statement.

 

[netmilsmom]

I have never been to a Latin mass. Except for historical curiousity, I do not see what I would get out it spiritually.<<

This sentance is very telling. Perhaps you should try a Latin Mass before you make that judgement.

I had a young girl next to me on Sunday who sounded like an angel singing the Latin parts. It was VERY moving. Perhaps if you attend, you would see why many people feel it is heaven on Earth. (and our mass is not even entirely in Latin!)

 

[katherine2]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

Deacon Ed

Holding hands during the Our Father is a thing that arose spontaneously from the people. <<

Deacon, could you please tell me WHO “the People” are? I hear this all the time. Everyone I know is not happy with it.
Then why are they doing it if they are all unhappy with it? It was spontaneously (organic) in my parish.

Could you please give a reference for this? I heard that the orans position at the time of the Our Father is the priest leading his flock to the words of Our Lord. How can a member of the congregation be doing that at the same time. Lifting one’s hands to heaven to pray to God is going against the idea that God in the Eucharist is on the altar.

You contradict yourself. Why is the priest doing this, then?

It is not a priestly gesture but a posture of prayer.

In the Byzantine tradition the people always pray the Lord’s prayer (Our Father) with their hands in the orans position.<<

Wonderful, but we are Roman and not Byzantine. When the same people who are pushing the hand holding, orans and guitar masses get as Orthodox as the Byzantines, I will accept this statement.

No one has to prove their orthodoxy to you.

 

[genevieve.oz]

**Praise him with trumpet sound; praise him with lute and harp! **
**Praise him with timbrel and dance; praise him with strings and pipe! **
**Praise him with sounding cymbals; praise him with loud clashing cymbals! **
Let everything that breathes praise the LORD! Praise the LORD!
-Psalm 150

Thankyou for this quote! I have recently been thinking over ‘appropriate’ music for mass because I may be in a position this coming year to be involved in the music ministry at my church. The Vatican Council II states ‘The pipe organ is to be held in high esteem…The use of other instruments may also be admitted in divine worship, …, provided that the instruments are suitable for sacred use, or can be adapted to it, that they are in keeping with the dignity of the temple, and truly contribute to the edification of the faithful.’ It also includes ‘the following come under the title of sacred music here: Gregorian chant, sacred polyphony in its various forms both ancient and modern, sacred music for the organ and other approved instruments, and sacred popular music, be it liturgical or simply religious.’
I grew up in a parish where we (the youth group) provided the music for our Sunday night mass and it included up-tempo hymns and the use of guitars, drums, and other ‘unconventional’ instruments, I loved it and would love to provide a little of this for my own teenage children and their friends (providing the priest allows it).
Apart from musical tastes, is there any legitimate reason why this should not be done?

 

[O.S.Luke]

Someone above said that singing “Prepare ye the way of the Lord” was from Jesus Christ Superstar. That’s incorrect; it was, of course, from Godspell.

Musical instruments in the Church have had a mixed history. The early church had taken a dim view of the organ because of its secular use, and it was not a regular part of Christian worship from the early years until some time during the 10th century, and then not in the Eastern Church but only in the West (these organs were not the organs we are accustomed to today). Even then, depending on geographical location, the organ wasn’t a real fixture in the Church until the Middle Ages and Renaissance era.

The organ began to flourish at the beginnings of the post-Reformation era. The pipe organs that most of us love are a result of the late 18th century; the days of Bach and other Viennese composers.

Whether I am visiting in a Catholic church or in the church I serve as pastor, I love the pipe organ. Before I was ordained, I served as an organist in both Catholic and Protestant Churches. The music is virtually the same in churches that HAVE a pipe organ.

Problem? Fewer churches have them, and those who do have a hard time securing someone who can actually PLAY one. The main problem is expense; buying one and maintaining one is becoming a great luxury. You can easily sink $500,000 in a pipe organ in construction, tuning, and maintenance in a very short time. Add to that the constant temperatures needed which add to heating/cooling costs of a building. The church I serve has an organ nearly 100 years old (it replaced a previous opus); we maintain it adequately, but there is no way we could afford to install a new one of comparable size.

Re: “music wars”… regardless of whether one is Catholic or Protestant… to many the pipe organ is an archaic instrument. Our protests of guitars and contemporary music are the exact protests that earlier Christians had about using a pipe organ in worship: it was too modern, it was too secular, it was too loud. The arguments in the Early Church was that plainsong chant was the music pleasing to God, not the bellows and pipes of a man-made instrument. God created the human voice to sing His praises, etc. (you get the idea). I guess the 150th Psalm was ignored.

I’m obviously prejudiced about my musical tastes. But the fact is that Christian orthodoxy is not dependant on musical preference, as someone said above. Orthodoxy is concerned with doctrine. A parish can be orthodox regardless of whether a pipe organ, piano, electronic keyboard, or guitar is used.

I’d probably draw the line at a kazoo or accordian.

O+

–

“Welcome to heaven: here’s your harp.” - St. Peter
“Welcome to hell: here’s your accordian.” - Satan
Perfect pitch: Tossing a banjo into a dumpster without hitting the sides.
“A gentleman CAN play the bagpipes, but doesn’t.” - unknown

 

[netmilsmom]

>>Holding hands during the Our Father is a thing that arose spontaneously from the people. <<

Then why are they doing it if they are all unhappy with it? It was spontaneously (organic) in my parish. <<

They are doing it because they do not want to feel out of place. It was the most “Look at Me” people who started it, then more and more did it, but I can tell you from being very active in that parish that most people are not happy with it. I assisted at CCD and was part of the Education Committee there. I had contact with many people. They did it because more and more people went along with the crowd. They didn’t feel it, they did it. In fact when I held my daughter’s hands and told her to close her eyes to be humble, many of the people around us put their hands down as well. Did they do it because of us or because they didn’t want to do it anyway? Only God knows.
I actually asked one of the senior ladies, who had terrible arthritis in her shoulder why she did not stop when she was in pain every mass. She told me that she would look out of place.
You can say that if everyone stood at the consecration, you would kneel, but not everyone is this strong.

You contradict yourself. Why is the priest doing this, then? <<
Read my answer again.
The priest standing on the altar is calling his flock to the word of God. He is not looking up, he is looking out.
The parishioner is doing what?
If one believes that the Consecrated Host is truly Our Lord, then why would anyone in the congregation raise his/her hands to heaven. God is before them, God is with them.

No one has to prove their orthodoxy to you.<<
That is very true.
However is a poster is stating that the Orthodox do something and that makes it right, perhaps the poster should consider that many other things they do are right. Why pick and choose?*

 

[CrusaderNY]

How about some good old Reverence at Mass Once Again and Take the Emphasis of you and I and back on Our Lord and Savior…

How to Assist at Mass , taken from the St Andrew Daily Missal, Traditional Mass, printed 1945

"First of all, we must never forget that the Mass is a Sacrifice, and act by which the Church gives to almighty God, and in the name of all, worship of the highest kind, adoration or Latria, which is due to Him alone, in virtue of the supreme excellence of His divine Being from which everything comes and to which everything must return. Therefore, the Mass is offered to the three Persons of the Blessed Trinity.
What the Priest offers to God as an acknowledgement of His soverign domination over all Creatures, and is none other than our Lord Jesus Christ, who, by His Sacrifice on the Cross, has rendered to his father an infinite act of worship…

The Holy Sacrifice is offered in honour of the Saints…

How the Faithful can Take Part in the Sacrifice

1.Reconstruct the Historic setting in which took place…
2. Offer to God, for His Greater glory the mystery of our Redeemers life which is to be commemorated…
3. Ask of God (during the Pater Noster) and receive from him the intercession of our Lord and His Saints…
4. To these three waysof interior and Spiritual Participation, which can be practiced at every Mass, we should as allowed, add Prayers with the Priest, in singing Congregational and Gregorian Chant at High Mass, in responding aloud at Low Mass, and best of all, in receiving Holy Communion with the Priest during Mass…

Before Holy Communion, we should say not only the Confetitor with the server, but the Dominine non sum dignus, which the Priest says at the moment on our behalf…
In the Ordinary of the Mass, all sentences that may be said by the faithful are printed in heavier type.

The assistance at the Holy Sacrifice is the ideal preparation for Holy Communion since it is the same that the Church imposes on the Pope, the Bishops, and all Priests, whenever we celebrate Mass…"

I can go on, as you can see, in the TLM, the faithful are encoraged to assist, but in a way that glorifies God and Our Lord, not some eucharistic Minister who wants to read or hand out our Lord. The entire Mass prepares us for the most important reason why we are there, to glorify God, and for the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass and to receive his body. And note how even the Pope is placed on the same plane in the last paragraph, as we are again there for the Holy Sacrifice.

The Novus Ordo does not do that, as it the emphasis is on SELF worship, and not to worship God or Jesus, I cant help but feel that we as Catholics have felt the whammy from God and Our Lord as payback for changing the Mass.

 

[kovalcik]

>> I have never been to a Latin mass. Except for historical curiousity, I do not see what I would get out it spiritually.<<

This sentance is very telling. Perhaps you should try a Latin Mass before you make that judgement.

I had a young girl next to me on Sunday who sounded like an angel singing the Latin parts. It was VERY moving. Perhaps if you attend, you would see why many people feel it is heaven on Earth. (and our mass is not even entirely in Latin!)

I would love to attend a Latin mass sometime. I wish I could find one in my area. I have attended Byzantine masses in Slovanic (An Eastern rite equivalent to Latin), Marionite services in a Middle Eastern equivalent language (I cannot recall the proper name), and even attended a modern day mass in Spanish. While all were beautiful and moving in a way, I felt disconnected by not being able to follow the prayers word for word and respond with the conviction I felt. It is on that basis that I made my above comment.

However, that was not my initial point. My point was that I would rather know what the Latin mass does to enhance your spirituality and worship than to read about how awful you feel my preferred mass style is. I know many people feel deeply about the Latin mass, please tell me why in a positive way.

 

[katherine2]

*

>>Holding hands during the Our Father is a thing that arose spontaneously from the people. <<

Then why are they doing it if they are all unhappy with it? It was spontaneously (organic) in my parish. <<

They are doing it because they do not want to feel out of place.
No one wants to do it, but everyone does it because that’s what eh crowd wants? That borders on making no sense at all.

It was the most “Look at Me” people who started it,

How do you know that? I think the problem is with you, who are too focused on noticing if a loving wife is holding her husband’s hand or a father his little daughter’s hand and making negative judgements.

You contradict yourself. Why is the priest doing this, then? <<
Read my answer again.
The priest standing on the altar is calling his flock to the word of God. He is not looking up, he is looking out.
The parishioner is doing what?
If one believes that the Consecrated Host is truly Our Lord, then why would anyone in the congregation raise his/her hands to heaven. God is before them, God is with them.

What’s the difference? So they laity has their hands raised looking at the altar.

The orans position is not a call. You have misinterpreted this as the priest waving to the assembly “y’all come now”. That is a far more irreverent action that priest and people prayerfully adopting the ancient gesture that our Blessed Mother used in her prayer.

No one has to prove their orthodoxy to you.<<
That is very true.
However is a poster is stating that the Orthodox do something and that makes it right, perhaps the poster should consider that many other things they do are right. Why pick and choose?

If other faithful people do it, it is hard to see it as an action whcih by its very nature is irreverent. Yes, that does not without further discussion lead to the appropriateness of its adoption by antoehr community, but it does destory your agrument that it is wrong by its nature.

 

[netmilsmom]

katherine2:

No one wants to do it, but everyone does it because that’s what eh crowd wants? That borders on making no sense at all.<<
Well you were not in the parish so you cannot understand. I’m sorry.

I think the problem is with you, who are too focused on noticing if a loving wife is holding her husband’s hand or a father his little daughter’s hand and making negative judgements. <<
You are presuming so much with this statement.

What’s the difference? So they laity has their hands raised looking at the altar. <<
Not at my ex-parish.

The orans position is not a call. You have misinterpreted this as the priest waving to the assembly “y’all come now”. That is a far more irreverent action that priest and people prayerfully adopting the ancient gesture that our Blessed Mother used in her prayer. <<
I did not interpret it. I researched it…(From EWTN for example)

Orans Posture (“Praying” Hands Extended)
The following explains the origin of the Orans position, in which the priest intercedes during the liturgy on behalf of all. In the last couple decades this posture of praying with hands extended and lifted upwards has become a popular prayer posture for many laity, especially in the Charismatic Renewal.

The Orans position (Latin for “praying”) or some variation of it, was common to almost all ancient religions as an outward sign of supplicating God (or if a pagan religion, the gods). Consider what we do when we plead with someone. We might put our arms out in front of us as if reaching for the person and say “I beg you, help me.” This seems to be a natural human gesture coming from deep within us - like kneeling to adore or to express sorrow. Now, turn that reach heavenwards and you have the Orans position.

The ancient monuments of Christianity, such as the tombs in the catecombs, often show someone in the Orans position supplicating God, to show that the prayers of the Church accompany the person in death.

The liturgical use of this position by the priest is spelled out in the rubrics (the laws governing how the Mass is said). It indicates his praying on BEHALF of us, acting as alter Christus a pastor of the flock, head of the body. It used to be minutely defined in the rubrics, which now say only, “extends his hands” or “with hands extended.” Priests understand what is meant (from observation and training), and although there is some variability between priests basically the same gesture is obtained from all of them by these words.

In the rubrics the Orans gesture is asked principally of the Main Celebrant, but on those occasions where either a priestly action is done (Eucharistic Prayer) or prayer in common (Our Father) all the concelebrants do it…
ewtn.com/expert/answers/orans_posture.htm
(You can finish reading at the website…I had to shorten the article because I was over the word limit)

I understand that the Bishops did not condemn the posture, but rather did not discuss it at all. Some Bishops are stating that it should not be done. I’m truly glad that your Bishop is not one of them if you feel a need to do it.

If other faithful people do it, it is hard to see it as an action whcih by its very nature is irreverent. Yes, that does not without further discussion lead to the appropriateness of its adoption by antoehr community, but it does destory your agrument that it is wrong by its nature.<<
Other faithful Catholics wear shorts to church, I don’t feel that is right. I’m in America, I am allowed my opinion. While I would never feel any right whatsoever to impose my opinion on another’s actions, I did the talking with my feet. I moved out of the parish I was in and to a very conservative parish. The old parish is bleeding parishoners and looking to the local Lutheran church to see how to keep them. (before the Vicariate makes it’s cuts and clusters parishes) My church is growing by leaps and bounds.

 

[netmilsmom]

kovalcik:

I would love to attend a Latin mass sometime. I wish I could find one in my area. I have attended Byzantine masses in Slovanic (An Eastern rite equivalent to Latin), Marionite services in a Middle Eastern equivalent language (I cannot recall the proper name), and even attended a modern day mass in Spanish. While all were beautiful and moving in a way, I felt disconnected by not being able to follow the prayers word for word and respond with the conviction I felt. It is on that basis that I made my above comment.

However, that was not my initial point. My point was that I would rather know what the Latin mass does to enhance your spirituality and worship than to read about how awful you feel my preferred mass style is. I know many people feel deeply about the Latin mass, please tell me why in a positive way.

How sweet of you to be kind!!! (that is not sarcasm, truly)
I think to understand, one must attend a Lutheran service and then a High Mass. See where you feel closer to God. Since you cannot attend a High Mass, I’m not sure that you could not do this.
I’m sure that the problem is that I attended a very Conservative parish in my childhood. Latin was always sprinkled in. I guess if one grew up in a modern parish, the Latin will not have as much meaning for you.
I wish I could bring you to my parish. We are not totally in Latin but again have some sprinkled in. To me it is wonderful. It may not be for you.
(BTW, when my four year old sings the Latin and Greek at mass it brings me to tears)

God Bless you.

 

[katherine2]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

Well you were not in the parish so you cannot understand. I’m sorry.

And you were in the hearts and minds of others?

I think the problem is with you, who are too focused on noticing if a loving wife is holding her husband’s hand or a father his little daughter’s hand and making negative judgements. <<
You are presuming so much with this statement.

How so?

I did not interpret it. I researched it…(From EWTN for example)

Orans Posture (“Praying” Hands Extended)
The following explains the origin of the Orans position, in which the priest intercedes during the liturgy on behalf of all. In the last couple decades this posture of praying with hands extended and lifted upwards has become a popular prayer posture for many laity, especially in the Charismatic Renewal.

The Orans position (Latin for “praying”) or some variation of it, was **common to almost all ancient religions as an outward sign of supplicating God **(or if a pagan religion, the gods). Consider what we do when we plead with someone. We might put our arms out in front of us as if reaching for the person and say “I beg you, help me.” This seems to be a natural human gesture coming from deep within us - like kneeling to adore or to express sorrow. Now, turn that reach heavenwards and you have the Orans position.

The ancient monuments of Christianity, such as the tombs in the catecombs, often show someone in the Orans position supplicating God, to show that the prayers of the Church accompany the person in death.

The liturgical use of this position by the priest is spelled out in the rubrics (the laws governing how the Mass is said). It indicates his praying on BEHALF of us, acting as alter Christus a pastor of the flock, head of the body. It used to be minutely defined in the rubrics, which now say only, “extends his hands” or “with hands extended.” Priests understand what is meant (from observation and training), and although there is some variability between priests basically the same gesture is obtained from all of them by these words.

In the rubrics the Orans gesture is asked principally of the Main Celebrant, but on those occasions where either a priestly action is done (Eucharistic Prayer) or prayer in common (Our Father) all the concelebrants do it…

---

You should read yor own post more carefully. The position is a position of prayer (Orans). Prayer is not an exclusively priestly function but one of all the faithful. It is a natural human gesture of supplication – something of our human nature, common to all of humanity. Ancient Christian monuments show someone (note not the priest) praying this way. Liturgical law regulates the priest’s gesutures (saying nothing about the laity). The priest uses this gesture both for priestly prayer (Eucharistic Prayer) and for common prayer – i.e both when he is acting as priest and also when he is participating in prayer with the whole assembly (“common prayer”).

You seem to miss the fact that during the Lord’s Prayer, the people are saying this prayer themselves. Since the prayer is not particular to the priest, the gesture need not be either.

. I’m in America, I am allowed my opinion-

I’m not talking about your civil rights. You do not have the moral right to propagate untrue accusations.

My church is growing by leaps and bounds.

As is my progressive, hand holding parish. Glad we are both doing well.