Hand holding in the OF during the OF

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sugnaflow
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
S

Sugnaflow

Guest
There has been a lot of discussion recently relating to holding hands during the Our Father during the Ordinary Form.

I am all for the idea that changes in the mass should be incremental and organic, rather than arbitrarily and abrupt. My question is: Can hand-holding be seen as one of these organic changes? It seems to be something that happens spontaneously according to the sense of the faithful.

The subtext of my question is this. Traditional catholics are quite right to criticize arbitrary and disruptive liturgical changes. But when a change seems to occur organically – like hand-holding – they criticize it, as well.

More broadly, then, what is an example of an organic change that would be acceptable?
 
Sugnaflow said:
There has been a lot of discussion recently relating to holding hands during the Our Father during the Ordinary Form.

I am all for the idea that changes in the mass should be incremental and organic, rather than arbitrarily and abrupt. My question is: Can hand-holding be seen as one of these organic changes? It seems to be something that happens spontaneously according to the sense of the faithful.

The subtext of my question is this. Traditional catholics are quite right to criticize arbitrary and disruptive liturgical changes. But when a change seems to occur organically – like hand-holding – they criticize it, as well.

More broadly, then, what is an example of an organic change that would be acceptable?
Click to expand...
Excellent question!
 
I think that until told not to do it, and it is still respectful of those not willing or wishing to participate, something like this is not at all in-appropriate.

If the local ordinary, or higher sees that it is inappropriate, then he can make a pronouncement that it should not be done.
 
Sugnaflow said:
There has been a lot of discussion recently relating to holding hands during the Our Father during the Ordinary Form.

I am all for the idea that changes in the mass should be incremental and organic, rather than arbitrarily and abrupt. My question is: Can hand-holding be seen as one of these organic changes? It seems to be something that happens spontaneously according to the sense of the faithful.

The subtext of my question is this. Traditional catholics are quite right to criticize arbitrary and disruptive liturgical changes. But when a change seems to occur organically – like hand-holding – they criticize it, as well.

More broadly, then, what is an example of an organic change that would be acceptable?
Click to expand...
Holding Hands during the Our Father was a “bleed over” of the Charismatic Movement, it was not an “organic” change by any means, I don’t think.

But, feel free to hold hands with whomever you want, whenever you want, as long as it is not required or encouraged, I don’t care what the lot of you do.
 
Irish_Polock said:
Holding Hands during the Our Father was a “bleed over” of the Charismatic Movement, it was not an “organic” change by any means, I don’t think.

But, feel free to hold hands with whomever you want, whenever you want, as long as it is not required or encouraged, I don’t care what the lot of you do.
Click to expand...
Why if it is a “bleed over” from the Charismatic Movement, is it automaticly NOT an organic change?
 
Big_Feet said:
Why if it is a “bleed over” from the Charismatic Movement, is it automaticly NOT an organic change?
Click to expand...
I think this is a good question. I used to hold hands during the Our Father because I thought we were supposed to and no one told me differently. After doing some reading here and elsewhere, and some prayerful reflection, I’ve decided to stop doing so and I think it’s been to my personal spiritual benefit. But, what about the development makes it non-organic (or inorganic…chemistry joke!)

I understand that there is a Protestant Charismatic movement, and that there is also a Catholic Charismatic movement. I also understand that handholding may have come from AA. Wouldn’t people who saw those practices there and began doing them during Mass be the definition of an “organic” change?
 
silicasandra said:
Wouldn’t people who saw those practices there and began doing them during Mass be the definition of an “organic” change?
Click to expand...
In this sense, I wonder if certain things would better be in the category of “experimentation” rather than “organic change,” the latter of which I haven’t seen an adequate definition of either.
 
I personally never liked the idea of holding hands for a couple reasons.

One is, why during the Our Father? Do we really want to give the parishioners the impression “now we’re holding hands because now we’re praying together, the rest of the time we just daydream.” It doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.

Also - just a personal opinion - I don’t like the taste it leaves in my mouth. Very kumbaya-let’s all get together - dare I say it, quasi-liberal. It seems like an interruption of the reverent mood of the mass.

But that’s just me, a cranky old man before age 20 :rolleyes:
 
silicasandra said:
I think this is a good question. I used to hold hands during the Our Father because I thought we were supposed to and no one told me differently. After doing some reading here and elsewhere, and some prayerful reflection, I’ve decided to stop doing so and I think it’s been to my personal spiritual benefit. But, what about the development makes it non-organic (or inorganic…chemistry joke!)

I understand that there is a Protestant Charismatic movement, and that there is also a Catholic Charismatic movement. I also understand that handholding may have come from AA. Wouldn’t people who saw those practices there and began doing them during Mass be the definition of an “organic” change?
Click to expand...
I would say, no, because the Charismatic movement in and of itself is not organic to the Catholic Church.

But, to be certain, define “organic change” and we can go from there.
 
I think the problem with hand holding and the orans position by laity in mass (which I will simply call “hand holding” all together in this post from now on) is that it resembles a common mega church-type Protestant practice.

It is true to say that, so far at least, there is some credibility to the argument that hand holding is an organic change in the Church. I agree. It has been done for many years in recent history in some parishes, and has spread by the laity. Right. By itself, it seems that this wouldn’t be a problem. But as I stated above, it is very common to see hand holding in most large Protestant churches. This lends to the question: is it healthy to do something that is a very outward action when Protestants also do it, even if it has, so far at least, happened organically?

I say no, for three principal reasons.
  1. It is not approved. It is not a recognized practice of the laity during mass. Furthermore, it obscures the role of the priest and laity. When the laity do something the priest does, it sends a bad message to, say, discerning converts. We need to preserve the outward distinction between clergy and laity.
  2. It obscures the distinction between Catholicism and Protestantism. It hit me as very odd when I attended my first mass before I converted that there was hand holding in the Catholic church I was at. It sent me a weird message, so much so that, in my mind, I thought, “Catholicism isn’t much different from Protestantism,” which is a quite unhealthy attitude. Sure, my opinion there wasn’t only influenced by hand-holding, but it was a major contributor.
  3. It is a “horizontal practice.” It does not add to the emphasis on God. While it does not detract explicitly from it, it does so implicitly.
 
Equites_Christi said:
I personally never liked the idea of holding hands for a couple reasons.

One is, why during the Our Father? Do we really want to give the parishioners the impression “now we’re holding hands because now we’re praying together, the rest of the time we just daydream.” It doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.

Also - just a personal opinion - I don’t like the taste it leaves in my mouth. Very kumbaya-let’s all get together - dare I say it, quasi-liberal. It seems like an interruption of the reverent mood of the mass.

But that’s just me, a cranky old man before age 20 :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I agree with this post.
 
Irish_Polock said:
But, to be certain, define “organic change” and we can go from there.
Click to expand...
This is an excellent suggestion. Because to me if the holding hands happened because some people did it and eventually other people started doing it as well, whats not organic about that? Of course people have their pros and cons, and its best to understand what organic change really is so we can be fair in our evaluation.
 
I think another good observation is that just because something is an organic change doesn’t mean it is good. It certainly adds to its credibility, but does not make it good in and of itself. It is good if a licit and valid change is done organically and over time, of course, but just because something is done organically and over time does not mean it should be assumed to be licit and valid, or even conducive to the mass.

I agree that all changes should be made organically, over time, but just because something is, doesn’t mean it should be done.
 
YoungTradCath said:
I think another good observation is that just because something is an organic change doesn’t mean it is good. It certainly adds to its credibility, but does not make it good in and of itself. It is good if a licit and valid change is done organically and over time, of course, but just because something is done organically and over time does not mean it should be assumed to be licit and valid, or even conducive to the mass.

I agree that all changes should be made organically, over time, but just because something is, doesn’t mean it should be done.
Click to expand...
Which bishops have stated that this practice is illicit at this point? While not specifically called for, it has not been specificly denounced, either, leaving much room for interpretation and opinion. “good” or “bad” in your case above is strictly an opinion at this point.
 
Equites_Christi said:
I personally never liked the idea of holding hands for a couple reasons.

One is, why during the Our Father? Do we really want to give the parishioners the impression “now we’re holding hands because now we’re praying together, the rest of the time we just daydream.” It doesn’t make a lot of sense to me.

Also - just a personal opinion - I don’t like the taste it leaves in my mouth. Very kumbaya-let’s all get together - dare I say it, quasi-liberal. It seems like an interruption of the reverent mood of the mass.

But that’s just me, a cranky old man before age 20 :rolleyes:
Click to expand...
I know this is a separate issue, but is smiling quasi-liberal, too? Is all human contact, even outside of mass? I respect your right to view this as you want, but I just wonder sometimes whether traditional Catholics take stoicism to an unprecedented and frightening level.
 
YoungTradCath said:
I think the problem with hand holding and the orans position by laity in mass (which I will simply call “hand holding” all together in this post from now on) is that it resembles a common mega church-type Protestant practice.

It is true to say that, so far at least, there is some credibility to the argument that hand holding is an organic change in the Church. I agree. It has been done for many years in recent history in some parishes, and has spread by the laity. Right. By itself, it seems that this wouldn’t be a problem. But as I stated above, it is very common to see hand holding in most large Protestant churches. This lends to the question: is it healthy to do something that is a very outward action when Protestants also do it, even if it has, so far at least, happened organically?

I say no, for three principal reasons.
  1. It is not approved. It is not a recognized practice of the laity during mass. Furthermore, it obscures the role of the priest and laity. When the laity do something the priest does, it sends a bad message to, say, discerning converts. We need to preserve the outward distinction between clergy and laity.
  2. It obscures the distinction between Catholicism and Protestantism. It hit me as very odd when I attended my first mass before I converted that there was hand holding in the Catholic church I was at. It sent me a weird message, so much so that, in my mind, I thought, “Catholicism isn’t much different from Protestantism,” which is a quite unhealthy attitude. Sure, my opinion there wasn’t only influenced by hand-holding, but it was a major contributor.
  3. It is a “horizontal practice.” It does not add to the emphasis on God. While it does not detract explicitly from it, it does so implicitly.
Click to expand...
As far as #2…I don’t understand why it’s bad or unhealthy to think that Catholics are not much different then Protestants? They are our separated brethren…we are all Christians after all… Obviously there are theological differences but there are those differences between Protestants themselves…🤷
 
YoungTradCath said:
I think another good observation is that just because something is an organic change doesn’t mean it is good. It certainly adds to its credibility, but does not make it good in and of itself. It is good if a licit and valid change is done organically and over time, of course, but just because something is done organically and over time does not mean it should be assumed to be licit and valid, or even conducive to the mass.

I agree that all changes should be made organically, over time, but just because something is, doesn’t mean it should be done.
Click to expand...
But who decides what is good and what is not good? If a bishop forbids it, he has the right to do so because he regulates Liturgy in his diocese. But most of the time its us lay people who discuss the for-or-against issues of such practices.
 
It would be great if we don’t allow this thread to be derailed into whether handholding is good or not. We have tons of threads on that.

Does anyone have any examples of organic changes that happened over the centuries and how they came about?
 
TrueLight said:
It would be great if we don’t allow this thread to be derailed into whether handholding is good or not. We have tons of threads on that.

Does anyone have any examples of organic changes that happened over the centuries and how they came about?
Click to expand...
Adding saints to the calendar or adding prefaces, things which could be easily accepted by most. Just my opinion.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top