Having a sign of unity in the Mass does not necessitate a change of the enitre focus of the Mass. If it did it would be wrong to have any sign of unity with others. In otherwords, holding your child/sibling/spouses hand etc would be wrong and unfitting for Mass. This argument simply does not hold true.
Lack of teaching,
I guess, but it seems to me that many of the people doing this are not young people and know it is a relatively knew thing and has not always been part of the mass.I agree.
Not to derail the thread but I agree and the peace sign (bunny ears) I don’t like either but kind of gives me a chuckle.But who decided to place this sign of unity at that particular moment of the Mass? FWIW, I heard they are considering moving the option of the sign of peace to the offertory or somewhere around there.Having a sign of unity in the Mass does not necessitate a change of the enitre focus of the Mass. If it did it would be wrong to have any sign of unity with others. In otherwords, holding your child/sibling/spouses hand etc would be wrong and unfitting for Mass. This argument simply does not hold true.
Does it really matter who first thought up the idea? If, for some people, this is simply a sign of unity among friends or family, and not viewed as the position of the assembly, is that really to be considered an abuse? In that instance it is only a few doing it, and Ty do not view it as the action of the assembly. My point is simply that, while admittedly it currently is almost always an abuse in the states it is not always and it is not necessarily an abuse in and of itself.
I think it does matter. People don’t dictate the rubrics of the Mass. They went to a lot of trouble to place what and where in the Mass and the sequence is significant to the meaning of the Mass. There is the sign of peace already. Do you think that was brought about by the people?
So it would be wrong for me to hold my sisters hand during mass?
Of course not. I dont know why this is so difficult for all of us to show. There is a certain point every Mass where the people outside of the instruction of the Church do the SAME Gesture every single Mass at the exact same spot.
It isn’t a personal devotion, it isn’t something you do with someone you care about and are at Mass with like your sister, it is something that is expected and done at the same point every Mass. To sell it as ok, or not forbidden by name, or spontaneous is not understanding what is going on. The church dictates the Mass to the people, not the other way around. You of course can hold your sisters hand but if you and every single person in Mass give a giant thumbs up at the consecration EVERY MASS, because you want to show joy and everyone in the parish is doing it ! That would be outside of the bounds. Same here.Very true.
Yes, of course not everything goes. I’m really nit sure if you’ve actually read what I’vebeen saying. I’ve been saying that yes, there is an abuse going on, but holding hands during the Our Father is not in and of itself an abuse, so please don’t talk about it as if it is always an abuse.Of course not. I dont know why this is so difficult for all of us to show. There is a certain point every Mass where the people outside of the instruction of the Church do the SAME Gesture every single Mass at the exact same spot.
If say on 9-12 2001 you were saying the our father at Mass and everyone was weeping then yes go ahead! Hold a hand, but every Mass every day of every week!? That is inserting something into the Mass that doesn’t belong.
Football teams like to show unity and community by slapping each other on the backside.
Do you think this would be appropriate at the Our Father for Masses involving these team members? nope.
I am not in ant way trying to claim that the abuse that many experience is ok. So I really don’t understand why you seem to think that’s what I’m saying. some people were disagreeing about holding hands and i thought it was because they were not making a distinction between the abuse and the innocent legitimate practice and for some reason some thought that meant I didn’t think there was an abuse going on. That is not what I was trying to say.In what context is it “ok” can you tell me how you think it is being done correctly?Yes, of course not everything goes. I’m really nit sure if you’ve actually read what I’vebeen saying. I’ve been saying that yes, there is an abuse going on, but holding hands during the Our Father is not in and of itself an abuse, so please don’t talk about it as if it is always an abuse.
I am not sure if you are correct. The questions isn’t if families are holding hands. It is about the practice of the congregation holds hands. When the Congregation holds hands, then it is an abuse in my opinion based on the fact that it is being unlawfully added to the Mass.Yes, of course not everything goes. I’m really nit sure if you’ve actually read what I’vebeen saying. I’ve been saying that yes, there is an abuse going on, but holding hands during the Our Father is not in and of itself an abuse, so please don’t talk about it as if it is always an abuse.
I always keep my hands together at my chest (palms and fingers together, right thumb over left). This makes it clear that I am not going to hold hands and it would make anyone who tried to hold my hand clearly violate my personal space to do so. Once, however, I had the woman on my right reach across me and hold the hand of the woman on my left. It was rather odd having these women hold their hands right in front of my chest, especially when they lifted them right in front of my face during “For thine is the kingdom…”
Okay, that was totally rude of them.
Well, in her defense, she probably thought it was rude of me to not hold her hand.
Hey, that is awesome. And that is how it should be used. Now if everyone helpd your mother’s hand that would be awkward. I’m still waiting for red rover to send someone right over at the Lords Prayer.