Holding hands during the Our Father

[jen_fla]

The prisoners I work with have less of phobia about grasping each others hands in prayer than most on this thread. They do it freely. They want to know God and the salvation of Christ.

Peace,
FAB

i am sure many of them want to know God, but holding hands has nothing to do with that. again, all i’m saying is that you should take a vote or something or at the very least give them the courtesy of discussing it before making assumptions that they like it.

the best prayer comes from when you are internally quiet and have put the outside distractions to rest. holding hands takes away from this inner quiet as it’s creating a physical sensation.

peace.

 

[nice2000]

Today at Mass in the pew in front of me a woman who was by herself reached out to the people on each side of her to hold hands during the Our Father. I noticed that both people on each side were hesitant and tried to continue in their prayer, looking down, but the woman held out her hands until they agreed and held hands and then raising them high at end.
I really don’t like doing the hand holding bit during the Our Father, especially raising them at the end. I feel that is meant for the priest. I have read different places where it is a liturgical abuse, though, a minor one.

I was once at a Mass where the priest told everyone we were to hold hands. I didn’t return to that parish.

My question is: If you do not want to hold hands during the Our Father and someone is holding their hand out and almost insisting what would you do? What should you do?

I should say also that at this parish very few people do this.

I do not hold hands. Most recently past couple of months I started holding my hands together (palm to palm) while saying the Lords Prayer. I used to hold my hands out (without holding hands).

 

[BettyM]

The prisoners I work with have less of phobia about grasping each others hands in prayer than most on this thread. They do it freely. They want to know God and the salvation of Christ.

Peace,
FAB

It isn’t necessarily a phobia in regards to holding hands. Some of it could be the way you were taught to pray when you were a child.
When I am out to eat with my protestant friends we hold hands and pray. I do it because it is initiated by them and I don’t want to refuse them and I don’t mind, but it is harder to concentrate on the prayer. I was taught to fold my hands and bow my head. So when it is me leading the prayer I don’t initiate handholding because I was taught different. It is how I pray. Also, I read as Catholics when we make the sign of the cross before a prayer we are showing our unity.

Alot of times in a handholding prayer time, there is a going around the circle and allowing each person to pray about something. That’s fine. It’s great. I have done that, too, but not at Mass during a very solemn moment when the priest is just about to raise up the body of Christ. This is a different type of moment. A moment that happens only during Mass and if someone wants to concentrate on the moment of the miracle happening and not be distracted they should be allowed to do that. So that nothing takes away from the closeness to Jesus they are desiring at that moment.

Reaching out and holding our fellow human beings should be done whenever it is appropriate but there are times when people do not want to be hugged or have their hands held and there are apparently people here who feel at that particular time of the Mass they do not want to be holding hands. They want to be in prayer.

I saw one church website that actually addressed this issue by saying people had the option to hold hands but please be considerate of those who do not want to.

I haven’t seen too many people refuse the sign of peace so I think we can say this is not about whether people want to touch other people or not. Maybe some people, but most I think just don’t want to at that moment.

Also, as a nurse I do know that there are people who don’t want to be touched. They have their reasons but it doesn’t mean they love any less than people who like to be touched and hugged. There are many ways to show love to people.

 

[Malkin71]

I cannot concentrate on prayer with my eyes open.
The only way I’d ever know if someone wanted to hold my hands during the Pater Noster (or shake my hands for the sign of piece) is if someone tugged my sleeve. A tug might get a polite nod.

In 1975 Rome answered this question saying the Practice should be discouraged. I got this from EWTN.

ewtn.com/expert/answers/holding_hands_at_mass.htm

Concerning holding hands in the Eucharistic Liturgy the Congregation for Divine Worship in Rome responded as follows:

QUERY: In some places there is a current practice whereby those taking part in the Mass replace the giving of the sign of peace at the deacon’s invitation by holding hands during the singing of the Lord’s Prayer. Is this acceptable? REPLY: The prolonged holding of hands is of itself a sign of communion rather than of peace. Further, it is a liturgical gesture introduced spontaneously but on personal initiative; it is not in the rubrics. Nor is there any clear explanation of why the sign of peace at the invitation: “Let us offer each other the sign of peace” should be supplanted in order to bring a different gesture with less meaning into another part of the Mass: the sign of peace is filled with meaning, graciousness, and Christian inspiration. Any substitution for it must be repudiated: Notitiae 11 (1975) 226. [Notitiae is the journal of the Congregation in which its official interpretations of the rubrics are published.]

While this addresses the holding of hands at the Sign of Peace the reasons given apply also elsewhere in the Mass, including at the Our Father.

1. It is an inappropriate “sign,” since Communion is the sign of intimacy. Thus, a gesture of intimacy is introduced both before the sign of reconciliation (the Sign of Peace), but more importantly, before Holy Communion, the sacramental sign of communion/intimacy within the People of God.
2. It is introduced on personal initiative. The Holy See has authority over the liturgy according to Vatican II’s “Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy” #22 and canon 838 of the Code of Canon Law.

This gesture has come into widespread use, often leaving bishops and pastors at a loss as to how to reverse the situation. For individuals, I would recommend closed eyes and a prayerful posture as sufficient response, rather than belligerence. Most laity, and probably many priests, are blind to the liturgical significance of interrupting the flow of the Mass in this way. It is not necessary to lose one’s peace over this or be an irritation to others. Some proportion is required. If asked why you don’t participate, simply, plainly and charitably tell the questioner of your discovery. If some chance of changing the practice is possible talk to the pastor or work with other laity through the parish council. You can also write the bishop, as is your right in the case of any liturgical abuse not resolved at the parish level. If your judgment is that no change is possible then I believe you are excused from further fraternal correction.

 

[FAB]

In 1975 Rome answered this question saying the Practice should be discouraged. I got this from EWTN.

ewtn.com/expert/answers/holding_hands_at_mass.htm

Concerning holding hands in the Eucharistic Liturgy the Congregation for Divine Worship in Rome responded as follows:

QUERY: In some places there is a current practice whereby those taking part in the Mass replace the giving of the sign of peace at the deacon’s invitation by holding hands during the singing of the Lord’s Prayer. Is this acceptable? REPLY: The prolonged holding of hands is of itself a sign of communion rather than of peace. Further, it is a liturgical gesture introduced spontaneously but on personal initiative; it is not in the rubrics. Nor is there any clear explanation of why the sign of peace at the invitation: “Let us offer each other the sign of peace” should be supplanted in order to bring a different gesture with less meaning into another part of the Mass: the sign of peace is filled with meaning, graciousness, and Christian inspiration. Any substitution for it must be repudiated: Notitiae 11 (1975) 226. [Notitiae is the journal of the Congregation in which its official interpretations of the rubrics are published.]

While this addresses the holding of hands at the Sign of Peace the reasons given apply also elsewhere in the Mass, including at the Our Father.

1. It is an inappropriate “sign,” since Communion is the sign of intimacy. Thus, a gesture of intimacy is introduced both before the sign of reconciliation (the Sign of Peace), but more importantly, before Holy Communion, the sacramental sign of communion/intimacy within the People of God.
2. It is introduced on personal initiative. The Holy See has authority over the liturgy according to Vatican II’s “Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy” #22 and canon 838 of the Code of Canon Law.

This gesture has come into widespread use, often leaving bishops and pastors at a loss as to how to reverse the situation. For individuals, I would recommend closed eyes and a prayerful posture as sufficient response, rather than belligerence. Most laity, and probably many priests, are blind to the liturgical significance of interrupting the flow of the Mass in this way. It is not necessary to lose one’s peace over this or be an irritation to others. Some proportion is required. If asked why you don’t participate, simply, plainly and charitably tell the questioner of your discovery. If some chance of changing the practice is possible talk to the pastor or work with other laity through the parish council. You can also write the bishop, as is your right in the case of any liturgical abuse not resolved at the parish level. If your judgment is that no change is possible then I believe you are excused from further fraternal correction.

Notice the date is from 1975, apparently the comment has had little effect.

 

[benedictgal]

The rule for the USA and some other conferences is that you may do this. But it is not mandatory. People need to learn to read other people’s body language. If your hands are in praying arrow position, that should be a sign that you do not hold hands. I would just politely smile and keep praying the Lord’s Prayer.

Franciscans don’t hold hands with lay people, ever. So when we go to a mass where someone reaches out to us, we just slip our hands into our habit sleeves and people are very nice. They understand and then move on to the next person.

Fraternally,

Br. JR, OSF

JR, with all due respect, there is no such rule. Please cite your sources since this provision appears nowhere in the GIRM nor within the scope of the “American adaptations”. Quite the contrary, no one can insert something into the Mass on his own authority, not even the celebrant.

 

[FAB]

i am sure many of them want to know God, but holding hands has nothing to do with that. again, all i’m saying is that you should take a vote or something or at the very least give them the courtesy of discussing it before making assumptions that they like it.

the best prayer comes from when you are internally quiet and have put the outside distractions to rest. holding hands takes away from this inner quiet as it’s creating a physical sensation.

peace.

Since they do it freely and of thier own accord, initiating the practice themselves, that is a faily strong vote.

When you are praying by yourself, I agree with your second comment. But when two or more are gathered it’s a different type of prayer.

Peace, FAB

 

[FAB]

JR, with all due respect, there is no such rule. Please cite your sources since this provision appears nowhere in the GIRM nor within the scope of the “American adaptations”. Quite the contrary, no one can insert something into the Mass on his own authority, not even the celebrant.

Benedictgal, I know you are very educated on these matters. I went back an read the specific instructions in the Roman Missal, and says the priest may not add or subtract anything, I did not see the same restriction on the layity as they practice person devotions.

Peace,
FAB

 

[Malkin71]

Notice the date is from 1975, apparently the comment has had little effect.

Vatican II stated that Latin is to be retained in the Liturgy and it has fallen from it. There are other instances from the Congregation and from Rome where The Vatican ruled on things and it got ignored on the Parish level.

The questions that should be asked is…

Who and when started the innovation of “Holding Hands” during the "Our Father?

It was not a gesture in the 1962 Missal.

Why is it used?

Vatican II stated No Priest, Bishops can make changes, Innovations to the Mass!

Also, during the sign of Peace I just nod to the people around me and say “Piece be with you”. The reason I do not want to shake someones hand and get sick. True story. I shook a kids hand a while back and I had a cold for a Month. Hand shaking is a way to spread viruses.

 

[Malkin71]

Benedictgal, I know you are very educated on these matters. I went back an read the specific instructions in the Roman Missal, and says the priest may not add or subtract anything, I did not see the same restriction on the layity as they practice person devotions.

Peace,
FAB

vatican.va/archive/hist_councils/ii_vatican_council/documents/vat-ii_const_19631204_sacrosanctum-concilium_en.html

SACROSANCTUM CONCILIUM

III. The Reform of the Sacred Liturgy
A) General norms

1. Therefore no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the liturgy on his own authority.

 

[benedictgal]

Notice the date is from 1975, apparently the comment has had little effect.

Just because a document is dated 1975, that does not necessarily mean that it has an automatic expiration date, FAB. What was true in 1975 is still true today. Encouraging folks to hold hands during the recitation of the Pater Noster while at Mass is ilicit.

 

[benedictgal]

Benedictgal, I know you are very educated on these matters. I went back an read the specific instructions in the Roman Missal, and says the priest may not add or subtract anything, I did not see the same restriction on the layity as they practice person devotions.

Peace,
FAB

Actually, the Constitution on the Sacred Liturgy, and reaffirmed by Redemptionis Sacramentum, includes the laity in this prohibition, FAB.

 

[archangel04]

I read these type of complaints all the time. I really see a hint of false piety.

Peace,
FAB

I am not sure what you mean by this statemnet, are you reffering to the other poster who was attacking Vatican 2?

 

[MarkThompson]

Just because a document is dated 1975, that does not necessarily mean that it has an automatic expiration date, FAB. What was true in 1975 is still true today. Encouraging folks to hold hands during the recitation of the Pater Noster while at Mass is ilicit.

The document does not say that. It says that you cannot omit the Sign of Peace and decide to substitute holding hands during the Pater Noster instead, and that’s it. The rest is just the personal opinion of an EWTN, as you can read here, and not anything from Church authorities.

 

[Malkin71]

The document does not say that. It says that you cannot omit the Sign of Peace and decide to substitute holding hands during the Pater Noster instead, and that’s it. The rest is just the personal opinion of an EWTN, as you can read here, and not anything from Church authorities.

Read post 210.

 

[benedictgal]

The document does not say that. It says that you cannot omit the Sign of Peace and decide to substitute holding hands during the Pater Noster instead, and that’s it. The rest is just the personal opinion of an EWTN, as you can read here, and not anything from Church authorities.

However, Mark, I stand by my statements. Please read what SC and RS both state:

From SC:

1. Therefore no other person, even if he be a priest, may add, remove, or change anything in the Liturgy on his own authority.

From RS:

[11.] The Mystery of the Eucharist “is too great for anyone to permit himself to treat it according to his own whim, so that its sacredness and its universal ordering would be obscured”.27 On the contrary, anyone who acts thus by giving free rein to his own inclinations, even if he is a Priest, injures the substantial unity of the Roman Rite, which ought to be vigorously preserved,28 and becomes responsible for actions that are in no way consistent with the hunger and thirst for the living God that is experienced by the people today. Nor do such actions serve authentic pastoral care or proper liturgical renewal; instead, they deprive Christ’s faithful of their patrimony and their heritage. For arbitrary actions are not conducive to true renewal,29 but are detrimental to the right of Christ’s faithful to a liturgical celebration that is an expression of the Church’s life in accordance with her tradition and discipline. In the end, they introduce elements of distortion and disharmony into the very celebration of the Eucharist, which is oriented in its own lofty way and by its very nature to signifying and wondrously bringing about the communion of divine life and the unity of the People of God.30 The result is uncertainty in matters of doctrine, perplexity and scandal on the part of the People of God, and, almost as a necessary consequence, vigorous opposition, all of which greatly confuse and sadden many of Christ’s faithful in this age of ours when Christian life is often particularly difficult on account of the inroads of “secularization” as well.31

Thus, even if you might disagree with what was posted and with EWTN, that still does not change what both SC and RS say.

 

[Malkin71]

However, Mark, I stand by my statements. Please read what SC and RS both state:

From SC:

From RS:

Thus, even if you might disagree with what was posted and with EWTN, that still does not change what both SC and RS say.

Well put. If everyone from Cardnials, Bishops, Priests, Deacons, Religious, and Laity would read the doccuments that come from Rome The Catholic Church would be better.

 

[MarkThompson]

Read post 210.

I did. It has nothing to do with the mischaracterization of that item from Notitiae.

 

[MaryTeresa2]

Greetings Br. JR, OSF,
I always enjoy reading your very informative posts, thank you for many great ones you have submitted. I was struck by this part of your reply and respectfully wondered about it when you said that “Franciscans don’t hold hands with lay people, ever.” Will you explain if that is a rule and what it’s signifigance is? I’m sorry if this seems off track of the original question, it just caught my curiosity. I ask with all due respect and beg your pardon if I seem nosey.
Mary Teresa, OSSM

 

[benedictgal]

I did. It has nothing to do with the mischaracterization of that item from Notitiae.

It’s not a mischaracterization at all, Mark. Maybe you need to re-read the whole thing. The CDWDS was answering two questions. This is what the CDWDS noted about hand-holding:

QUERY: In some places there is a current practice whereby those taking part in the Mass replace the giving of the sign of peace at the deacon’s invitation by holding hands during the singing of the Lord’s Prayer. Is this acceptable? REPLY: The prolonged holding of hands is of itself a sign of communion rather than of peace. Further, it is a liturgical gesture introduced spontaneously but on personal initiative; it is not in the rubrics.

Even though the question treated the sing of peace and how it was bleeding into the Pater Noster, what I highlighted in bold red is what is at issue here. The CDWDS clearly states that it is not in the rubrics.