Holding Hands during the Our Father

[Annabelle_Marie]

Please post a source for this statement.

The source I have is our priest who was there holding the chalice…one of many because the altar was not large enough…this was for the celebration of the year of the priest…when lots of priests were in Rome.

 

[GodIsMyLight]

At first it was strange for me, because it seems that the common rule in the US is to hold hands during the Our Father, where back home we didn’t do this. I don’t dislike it though, I don’t love it either but I am fine with it.

 

[adrift]

That question is irrelevant. It is not an abuse; the opinions of the misinformed vulgus are of no import whatsoever.

Most people do not understand the term abuse. When the Church uses the term, it is meant anything that is not directed to be done by the rubrics. So since hand holding by the congregation is not directed in the GIRM it is an abuse. If as at the Church I attend the priest holds hands with the servers when it is directed that he is in the oran position it IS an abuse. It is irrelevant that you declare it as not an abuse the Church defines it as such. And your are right about opinions which you amply demonstrate about yourself.

 

[PatrickSanDiego]

Does this bother anyone else? I mostly just let it go but when a Priest tells the congregation to hold hands during the Our Father it really just peeves me. This happened at a funeral at another church. Not only did the Priest tell everyone to hold hands, he finished the Our Father with …and thine is the kingdom and the …etc.

It doesn’t bother me, but I can also be happy not doing it. As much as would like to believe it’s not a big deal, I think it really does add a much needed human touch to the Mass. It’s warm and friendly. I don’t look at it anymore than that.

But, I dare not defy the Magisterium. If the Church said “no” on it, I would stop.

 

[TempleServant]

It is about the community.

-Tim-

It may seem that way. A mass, however, can be said without a congregation. You can even say one without a server. And it is still sufficient. For what? To propitiate, thank, adore and petition God.

It’s not in its essence a play staged for the edification of the audience, where their active (busy, noisy) particaption is important.

 

[thewanderer]

Most people do not understand the term abuse. When the Church uses the term, it is meant anything that is not directed to be done by the rubrics. So since hand holding by the congregation is not directed in the GIRM it is an abuse. If as at the Church I attend the priest holds hands with the servers when it is directed that he is in the oran position it IS an abuse. It is irrelevant that you declare it as not an abuse the Church defines it as such. And your are right about opinions which you amply demonstrate about yourself.

Now I am confused again… I assume you mean that it is an abuse you mean under the circumstances that you previously brought up?

I feel like there is some confusion on this thread because some people are refering only to the abuses when they talk of Handholding during the Our Father, whereas others are not.

 

[adrift]

Now I am confused again… I assume you mean that it is an abuse you mean under the circumstances that you previously brought up?

I feel like there is some confusion on this thread because some people are refering only to the abuses when they talk of Handholding during the Our Father, whereas others are not.

abuse is when things are done that are not in the GIRM. The case is made that holding hands is not disallowed by the GIRM as it does not proscribe and action by the congregation at this point. Others point out that the GIRM does not state that hand holding should be done at this time. Others say so what it is a minor thing and should be ignored.

I wonder those who engage in this believe that it is part of Mass? It started out as an abuse that is priest are the ones who introduced it to be done. If it began as an abuse, why would it not be an abuse now? If it truly had been spontaneous than I think it would not be abuse but as I have stated this is not the case. It was a deliberate promotion therefore abuse.

 

[aicirt]

abuse is when things are done that are not in the GIRM. The case is made that holding hands is not disallowed by the GIRM as it does not proscribe and action by the congregation at this point. Others point out that the GIRM does not state that hand holding should be done at this time. Others say so what it is a minor thing and should be ignored.

I wonder those who engage in this believe that it is part of Mass? It started out as an abuse that is priest are the ones who introduced it to be done. If it began as an abuse, why would it not be an abuse now? If it truly had been spontaneous than I think it would not be abuse but as I have stated this is not the case. It was a deliberate promotion therefore abuse.

Priests introduced the hand holding obviously years ago. So what was prohibiting a bishop from stopping the practice immediately?

Last night, THE WORLD OVER interviewed a bishop from Maryland. The bishop had invited a group of Spanish Jesuits to take over a parish. They’ve been there for about two years. They wanted to eliminate Eucharistic servers and I can’t remember what else. Sixty percent of the parshioners are going along with this and 40% want the priests removed. So now the challenge seems to be who is in charge: the parshioners or the bishop?

That is why things need to be nipped early before they blowout into a major problem.

 

[thewanderer]

abuse is when things are done that are not in the GIRM. The case is made that holding hands is not disallowed by the GIRM as it does not proscribe and action by the congregation at this point. Others point out that the GIRM does not state that hand holding should be done at this time. Others say so what it is a minor thing and should be ignored.

I wonder those who engage in this believe that it is part of Mass? It started out as an abuse that is priest are the ones who introduced it to be done. If it began as an abuse, why would it not be an abuse now? If it truly had been spontaneous than I think it would not be abuse but as I have stated this is not the case. It was a deliberate promotion therefore abuse.

I am not saying that it is not often an abuse. I guess I am confused because I thought we had determined earlier in this thread that people holding hands at the Our Father is not necessarily an abuse. You talked about the difference petween it being done privately, or by the assembly. If it is thought to be required then it is an abuse, if the priest encourages it, that is an abuse, etc. So, yes, it is often an abuse, but I though we had determined that it is not always an abuse. Which is why I think there is confusion on this thread, some are referring only to the abuse, and others are refeing to the private practice.

 

[TimothyH]

It may seem that way. A mass, however, can be said without a congregation. You can even say one without a server. And it is still sufficient. For what? To propitiate, thank, adore and petition God.

It’s not in its essence a play staged for the edification of the audience, where their active (busy, noisy) particaption is important.

It doesn’t matter who is there.

The Eucharistic prayers which the priest say while Jesus is on the altar speak clearly about the Church as a family, one body of christ throughout the whole world, the community of believers, etc.

It doesn’t matter if Blessed Pope John Paul II is saying Mass for a million people in Poland or a priest in the middle of nowhere says Mass by himself.

The way it seems to anyone has nothing to do with it. The words of the Mass itself speak of community.

-Tim-

 

[thewanderer]

It doesn’t matter who is there.

The Eucharistic prayers which the priest say while Jesus is on the altar speak clearly about the Church as a family, one body of christ throughout the whole world, the community of believers, etc.

It doesn’t matter if Blessed Pope John Paul II is saying Mass for a million people in Poland or a priest in the middle of nowhere says Mass by himself.

The way it seems to anyone has nothing to do with it. The words of the Mass itself speak of community.

-Tim-

This is correct. The Mass and the LOTH are the public prayers of the Church. In other words, no matter how few people attend it is always the offering of the whole Church to God.

 

[Orogeny]

Most people do not understand the term abuse. When the Church uses the term, it is meant anything that is not directed to be done by the rubrics. So since hand holding by the congregation is not directed in the GIRM it is an abuse. If as at the Church I attend the priest holds hands with the servers when it is directed that he is in the oran position it IS an abuse. It is irrelevant that you declare it as not an abuse the Church defines it as such. And your are right about opinions which you amply demonstrate about yourself.

I have only skimmed over this thread, so my apologies if this has already been addressed, but what does the GIRM direct us to do with our hands during the Lord’s Prayer?

Peace

Tim

 

[White_Peony]

We always do that at my parish.

 

[TimothyH]

I have only skimmed over this thread, so my apologies if this has already been addressed, but what does the GIRM direct us to do with our hands during the Lord’s Prayer?

Peace

Tim

It offers no direction on the subject. It is silent.

Some believe that anything done which is not specified in the rubrics is an abuse. Others believe that they are free to do it becaue the rubrics don’t specify not to do it. Many take a middle ground, seeing this particular behaivior more as a cultural issue than anything else, and suggest prudence and reasonableness.

Nice name.

-Tim-

 

[EcceAgnusDei]

This is correct. The Mass and the LOTH are the public prayers of the Church. In other words, no matter how few people attend it is always the offering of the whole Church to God.

Now, maybe more people could start praying the Divine Office… imagine the graces that the* whole *Church could receive from that

• PAX

 

[adrift]

I am not saying that it is not often an abuse. I guess I am confused because I thought we had determined earlier in this thread that people holding hands at the Our Father is not necessarily an abuse. You talked about the difference between it being done privately, or by the assembly. If it is thought to be required then it is an abuse, if the priest encourages it, that is an abuse, etc. So, yes, it is often an abuse, but I though we had determined that it is not always an abuse. Which is why I think there is confusion on this thread, some are referring only to the abuse, and others are referring to the private practice.

Grabbing your spouses hand or children’s hand is not an abuse. An abuse only comes into play when it becomes and action of the congregation. I do not believe this came about because a parent or spouse held hands spontaneously. It came about because people were told to do it. They believe that it is part of Mass.

I believe that it can rightly be called an abuse but not a deliberate one. I don’t like it but as long as my not holding hands is respected it is no big deal. I also don’t like it when people wave to others at the sign of peace but of course that is another thread.

 

[TempleServant]

It doesn’t matter who is there.

The Eucharistic prayers which the priest say while Jesus is on the altar speak clearly about the Church as a family, one body of christ throughout the whole world, the community of believers, etc.

It doesn’t matter if Blessed Pope John Paul II is saying Mass for a million people in Poland or a priest in the middle of nowhere says Mass by himself.

The way it seems to anyone has nothing to do with it. The words of the Mass itself speak of community.

-Tim-

That doesn’t address my point. The community is mentioned in the mass. It is not the focus of the mass.

 

[Orogeny]

It offers no direction on the subject. It is silent.

Some believe that anything done which is not specified in the rubrics is an abuse. Others believe that they are free to do it becaue the rubrics don’t specify not to do it. Many take a middle ground, seeing this particular behaivior more as a cultural issue than anything else, and suggest prudence and reasonableness.

Well, if it is an abuse if we do something that isn’t directed in the GIRM and there isn’t a direction as to what to do with our hands during the Lord’s Prayer in the GIRM, doesn’t that mean that whatever we do with our hands is an abuse?

Nice name.

-Tim-

What’s even better, my last name starts with an H. Good thing I chose the name I did or you might not have been able to use your name!

Peace

Tim

 

[thewanderer]

Now, maybe more people could start praying the Divine Office… imagine the graces that the* whole *Church could receive from that

• PAX

I agree!!

 

[thewanderer]

Grabbing your spouses hand or children’s hand is not an abuse. An abuse only comes into play when it becomes and action of the congregation. I do not believe this came about because a parent or spouse held hands spontaneously. It came about because people were told to do it. They believe that it is part of Mass.

I believe that it can rightly be called an abuse but not a deliberate one. I don’t like it but as long as my not holding hands is respected it is no big deal. I also don’t like it when people wave to others at the sign of peace but of course that is another thread.

And my point is exactly that, that because holding hands during Mass is not always an abuse that some people are objecting to refering to it as always an abuse without making this distinction. In other words, I’m pretty sure a lot of the disagreement on this thread is simply about what people mean by the words they use, not necessaarily in the reality they are using those words to refer to.