Holding hands during mass for Our Father

[porthos11]

Hi,

The 1975 GIRM is superceded by the 2002 edition, but even if it were not, this addresses hand holding at the sign of peace. It is misapplied to another part of the Mass, such as the Lord’s prayer.

This response regarding the Orans posture is more appropriate, but still not exact.

Orans

You are just as incorrect to say one may not hold hands as to say one may not fold their hands or use the orans posture. It is not up to the individual to interprete Girm instructions, and also incorrect to instruct or forbid anything on their own authority.

Lux

I’m not talking about the 1975 GIRM. I’m talking about Notitiae 11.

 

[FrCorey]

Unfortunately some Priests are directing folks to do things that are not in the rubrics. I’ve been at a few parishes and told to do the “meet and greet thing” by the Priest at the beginning of Mass after he processes in and reaches the sanctuary.
I believe this is what is known as adding to the Mass and should not be done.

yep, adlibbing is frowned upon.
thats why we have our manuals,
they are not suggestions of rites.
not doing a rite right invalidates it.

 

[TLM08]

Is there an ‘official’ ruling on holding hands with the people next to you during the Our Father at mass?

It’s yet another unauthorized adaptation to make the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass look more like a protestant service. Hand holding is nothing but a celebration of human unity when we should be uniting our hearts, minds and souls with the Lord God Almighty. I refuse to engage in it!

 

[TLM08]

In addition, I find the multitudes standing in the pew in the “orans” posture during the Our Father to look like a bunch of potted plants. This is a priestly gesture that should be reserved for the celebrant. …and NO thank you, I do not wish to hear anything about us being a “royal priesthood”. This was not the intent of the scripture. I can’t help but to wonder how many of these people are doing this for show. Can’t people just fold their hands and pray? Again I simply refuse to engage in these “hip” displays of theatrics!

 

[ncjohn]

That’s right. However, while most hand-holding is not done in lieu of the sign of peace, the reasoning remains sound, that (1) it is a sign of communion, and this is not the place for it; and (2) it is a personal initiative and not in the rubrics.

I think a reasoned reading of this Notitiae clearly shows that holding of hands during the Lord’s Prayer in general (judging from the first sentences) is not what the Holy See wants.

I would say that a more reasoned reading would be to take it at face value. Had the Vatican wanted holding hands to cease they would most certainly have said so when addressing it at this point, which would have been quite easy. Since they did not do so then, and have declined to do so or make such a “clarification” at any time since, it is quite a stretch to go reading such an interpretation into what is specifically NOT said.

Folding one’s hands or putting them in one’s pockets is also a matter of “personal initiative and not addressed in the rubrics.” The bishops made it clear in their response to the question on the Orans that there is no specified posture. Individuals trying to impose one or delete one are indeed attempting to introduce something that is not there, which is specifically forbidden.

Ultimately, though, I think the lasting solution to this hand-holding business is that the rubrics be amended and call for the priest to keep his hands joined (since the Lord’s Prayer is no longer a presidential, but common prayer) instead of extended. Do that, and I’ll bet that hand-holding will die out soon enough.

I think there is a pretty good chance that that can no longer be done. Under Canon law a practice that has been in existence unabated for a substantial time, usually considered to be 30 years, becomes a custom. Just as the Vatican ruled that kneeling for reception of communion could not be abrogated because it is such an immemorial custom, a strong argument can be made that this also exists as such a custom at this point. That doesn’t mean that it would become required but that it could not be taken away.

I think it is pretty clear–given the considerable complaining about this through the years and the fact that it is not addressed by either the latest GIRM nor Redemptionis Sacramentum, specifically written to deal with abuses–that the Vatican does not consider it an issue.

All that being said, it would be best all around for all to act with charity, neither imposing their preference on anyone else or making judgments about other’s piety.

Peace,

 

[FrDavid96]

You are just as incorrect to say one may not hold hands as to say one may not fold their hands or use the orans posture. It is not up to the individual to interprete Girm instructions, and also incorrect to instruct or forbid anything on their own authority.

Lux

On the contrary, one cannot interpret the words of Sacrosanctum Concilium #22 (“Therefore no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the Liturgy on his own authority.”) to mean that one may add a ritual to the Mass on his own authority. Saying that no one may add anything means precisely that. No one may add anything.

No one

may add

anything

The words are quite clear.

If a priest forbids hand holding, he is not acting on his own authority, he is acting on the authority of the Church. There is a difference.

 

[yellowbicycle]

I’ll tell ya…I don’t like it. Never have. I do it. I’m nice about it. It’s just not how I would prefer it is all.
Fortunately, I have babies, so my hands are always occupied holding them.
Looks like I’m gonna need alot more babies, if I’m going to be able to avoid this forever.

 

[KingAlfred]

Is there an ‘official’ ruling on holding hands with the people next to you during the Our Father at mass?

I’ve never liked it, and usually try to sit at the end of the pew so I don’t have to hold anyone’s hand but my wife’s. I’ve often stood next to others who don’t like it either, and haven’t extended their hands. The practice of raising your other hand, when and if it’s not clasping on to someone else’s, is something I suspect just ‘snuck’ into the Mass, promoted by the laity, and stuck. I don’t do that either. In fact, I only do those things I learned as a child, attending a German-Catholic parish in a small farming community out west. Those were the Masses I grew up loving – stoic, dignified, spiritually rewarding.

 

[Annemariels]

hmmmm, maybe our touchy-feel tendencies are connected to our cultural backgrounds. I came from an Irish Catholic family with none of that, and my husband is Sicilian Catholic and, well, it’s not a secret that his culture is into touchy-feely - and drama. He loves the hand-holding at church - imagine that?!

Also, I think some of us are of a more contemplative nature and some more charismatic.

For me, there’s nothing like the 25 - 30 min.daily Mass where we just get down to business without the bells and whistles of a Sunday Mass. I feel like I pray more powerfully and can focus on what’s going on at the altar. And I can park myself on the lets-just-give-each-other-a-little-wave side of the church.

 

[Brigadoon]

My 6 yo flat out refuses to hold anyone’s hand but mine. We sit in the front row and our priest noticed this.
He whispered to me after mass one day, “I don’t like holding hands either.” (He never does it during mass). And he told my dd that if she didn’t want to she didn’t have to.

My dd has a Mother Angelica-like stubbornness to her.

 

[ljprevo]

Oh boy here is my “Holding Hands/Sign of Peace” Story.

When I met my wife, the 1st thing we did was attend mass together at Assumption Grotto in Detroit (Where I am proudly a member now).

I went to mass and when it came time to “Shake and Hold hands” nothing happened. I was confused. After mass I asked my future wife at the time, why didn’t we have the sign of peace and hold hands during the Our father. She told me that the sign of peace is optional and holding hand is not part of the rubric of the mass.

I was then on a mission. I researched it and sure enough, SHE WAS RIGHT! Wow, have i been lied to my whole life?

I think back when I went to “St. Subrbia” that I used to get nervous holding others hands, because my hands would always sweat, so the whole time during the Our Father I worried about what the person next to me was thinking about my sweaty hands, I was not focusing on what I should be.

 

[ncjohn]

If a priest forbids hand holding, he is not acting on his own authority, he is acting on the authority of the Church. There is a difference.

I would have to respectfully disagree.

The authority to regulate the liturgy is given to the Bishops conferences, not to individual priests. Since the USCCB has stated that there is no prescribed position, for an individual priest to state that there IS, or to attempt to prohibit one, would be exceeding his authority. He would definitely not be acting on the authority of the Church as the Church has expressed no such prohibition at any time.

A third party cannot be the instigator to either demand or prohibit this as that would be adding to what the rubrics call for, as the rubrics call for nothing at all in this case. Spontaneous actions of the faithful are not adding to the liturgy.

All that being said, a priest would certainly be within his rights to express his misgivings about the practice and to make a request that it not be used. I think if done properly most people would likely comply. If he gets heavy-handed about it though, people who know better will likely make that known and he will end up diminishing his credibility. I’ve seen that happen and it’s not a pretty sight.

Peace,

 

[George14]

For before mass, I prefer the simple, “Good morning.” and only to someone I pass or sit next to. End of problem.

During mass for the Lord’s prayer, often I will simply not extend or offer my hand. I don’t care what impression it may give: perhaps others will be relieved themselves to see someone else who’s figured out how to get around that uncomfortable gesture. I smile if eye contact happens, but I’m not coerced by an announcement unless I choose to be.

 

[FrDavid96]

I would have to respectfully disagree.

The authority to regulate the liturgy is given to the Bishops conferences, not to individual priests. Since the USCCB has stated that there is no prescribed position, for an individual priest to state that there IS, or to attempt to prohibit one, would be exceeding his authority. He would definitely not be acting on the authority of the Church as the Church has expressed no such prohibition at any time.

A third party cannot be the instigator to either demand or prohibit this as that would be adding to what the rubrics call for, as the rubrics call for nothing at all in this case. Spontaneous actions of the faithful are not adding to the liturgy.

All that being said, a priest would certainly be within his rights to express his misgivings about the practice and to make a request that it not be used. I think if done properly most people would likely comply. If he gets heavy-handed about it though, people who know better will likely make that known and he will end up diminishing his credibility. I’ve seen that happen and it’s not a pretty sight.

Peace,

John,
The prohibition is in SC #22 “Therefore no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the Liturgy on his own authority.”

Would you kindly tell me how a priest who is applying SC #22 is exceeding his authority?

 

[ncjohn]

John,
The prohibition is in SC #22 “Therefore no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the Liturgy on his own authority.”

Would you kindly tell me how a priest who is applying SC #22 is exceeding his authority?

Because the actions of an individual are not adding anything to the liturgy therefore he would not be applying that section.

Could you demand that people fold their hands? Or clasp them, or simply put them on the back of the pew? Or prohibit them from doing so? Of course not. The rubrics do not address what to do with the hands at the Our Father except for the priest and deacon. As such, to create such a demand or prohibition, which the Church has not, is to exceed what the rubrics call for. THAT would be adding to, or changing what is called for.

Since both the Vatican and the USCCB have specifically declined to regulate this, there is no authority from the Church to create such a regulation. I don’t remember the full wording of paragraph 22, but my recollection is that it was primarily concerned with priests not deviating from the liturgical texts and that it had nothing to do with actions of the congregation. Either way, nobody has produced any documentation of any kind from the Vatican that this practice is not allowed or giving priests any authority to regulate it.

Peace,

 

[FrDavid96]

Because the actions of an individual are not adding anything to the liturgy therefore he would not be applying that section.

Could you demand that people fold their hands? Or clasp them, or simply put them on the back of the pew? Or prohibit them from doing so? Of course not. The rubrics do not address what to do with the hands at the Our Father except for the priest and deacon. As such, to create such a demand or prohibition, which the Church has not, is to exceed what the rubrics call for. THAT would be adding to, or changing what is called for.

Since both the Vatican and the USCCB have specifically declined to regulate this, there is no authority from the Church to create such a regulation. I don’t remember the full wording of paragraph 22, but my recollection is that it was primarily concerned with priests not deviating from the liturgical texts and that it had nothing to do with actions of the congregation. Either way, nobody has produced any documentation of any kind from the Vatican that this practice is not allowed or giving priests any authority to regulate it.

Peace,

What would you do:

You sit down in a restaurant and order a cheeseburger. You say “I want a burger on a bun with cheese. I want nothing added to it.”
The server brings you your cheeseburger. You look at it, and it has mustard.
You bring this to the server’s attention.
The server says “but you never specifically said ‘no mustard’ so I brought you what you ordered. There’s only a little mustard anyway”

Would you accept that? Would you be rude to send it back to the kitchen?

 

[ncjohn]

What would you do:

You sit down in a restaurant and order a cheeseburger. You say “I want a burger on a bun with cheese. I want nothing added to it.”
The server brings you your cheeseburger. You look at it, and it has mustard.
You bring this to the server’s attention.
The server says “but you never specifically said ‘no mustard’ so I brought you what you ordered. There’s only a little mustard anyway”

Would you accept that? Would you be rude to send it back to the kitchen?

I would turn the question right back at you.

The Vatican has, by addressing it in a very specific way originally and specifically declining to address it since, said it has no issue. The USCCB, who has regulatory authority, has said there is no regulation.

If you decide to take it upon yourself to regulate this where the Church has said there is no regulation, you have given me the hamburger with stuff on it I didn’t order. I have the right in this case. according to the Church and the USCCB, to put what I want on my individual hamburger and not have you decide for me how I want it. I’m not asking anyone else to eat my hamburger or to put the same things on it.

To start making regulations where they don’t exist, in my mind, falls under that category of being “more Catholic than the Pope.”

I can understand, in those specific instances where someone has had someone rudely grab at them when they were pretty clear they did not want to participate, that some might have a very visceral reaction to this. I truly believe those instances are quite rare though and have a really, really hard time understanding why it is that so many have so much antagonism over how someone else prays.

There are many valid reasons for one to decide that they don’t want to participate and I can respect anyone for making that choice here. In the absence of the Church declaring a problem with it though, I would truly like to be afforded that same respect. I’m not some “touchy feely liberal”, nor am I a Charismatic though I bear no ill will toward Charismatics. I am simply a Catholic who sees great significance in this particular sign. If you don’t see that significance don’t participate, and I’ll stand right by you (hands to myself ) in defending your right not to, but we really need to get away from this bickering and judgment about how people show their devotion to God and be overjoyed that they are showing that devotion.

Peace,

 

[Aramis]

Fundamentally, the Church has neither endorsed corporate handholding, nor banned handholding; it has reversed local calls for corporate handholding and absolute bans on handholding during the Pater Noster.

In short, when it is organic to the persons doing it, it’s no problem. EG: husband and wife, parents and children, siblings, close friends.

Making it requisite is an addition of a rubric to the mass. Banning it likewise is an addition of a rubric to the mass. So long as it is not done with force nor compulsion, and is not directed from the chair, its a non issue.

 

[Archangelum]

For me, there’s nothing like the 25 - 30 min.daily Mass where we just get down to business without the bells and whistles of a Sunday Mass.

Why, I couldn’t possibly agree more to this. I like to visit a Fransiscan monastery late in the evening, where an old monk does the H. Mass all by himself. For me this is far more Catholic and spiritually rewarding then a sunday High Mass with full choir, organ and the whole works. He also doesn’t turn on any of the main lights, just the ones lighting the altar, so it is like being alone in Mass in this sobre yet beautiful church with a truly christian celebrant. There’s no peace sign, no homily, no sitting next to noisy people - no, just you and the Holy Sacrament.

 

[George14]

FWIW,

The Our Father prayer makes clear that it is WE in prayer, not “Me.” By this I mean that “we” are all in this together, we support one another, we are all his children collectively. Jesus taught us that loving one another was how we expressed our love for Him–we do not live in isolation: we are interdependent and MUST love one another.

When we hold hands, I do experience this “community of faith, community of worship, community of son-ship.”

I just counted pronouns in the Lord’s Prayer:

There are five “our”; eight “us”; two “we”; and not a single “I” or “me.”

So when we raise our joined hands, I experience and submit my prayer as one of US, praying for all, not just myself…