Holding hands during the Our Father?

[runandsew]

Somewhere is scripture (don’t ask me chapter and verse since I’m Catholic) St. Paul talk about that all food is clean and you can eat it, but if someone with a weak faith thinks that it is unclean, then we should not eat that food in front of them, so we don’t make them stumble in their faith. I know the arguements against holding hands, But if someone doesn’t understand all this, and they feel holding hands during the Our Father builds up their understanding of communion, then in my not holding their hands am I causing them to stumble, like St. Paul is talking about?

 

[LeahInancsi]

Somewhere is scripture (don’t ask me chapter and verse since I’m Catholic) St. Paul talk about that all food is clean and you can eat it, but if someone with a weak faith thinks that it is unclean, then we should not eat that food in front of them, so we don’t make them stumble in their faith. I know the arguements against holding hands, But if someone doesn’t understand all this, and they feel holding hands during the Our Father builds up their understanding of communion, then in my not holding their hands am I causing them to stumble, like St. Paul is talking about?

You’re not causing me to stumble because I am secure in my Faith and I know that it is you as an individual who chooses not to hold my hand during the Our Father.

My mother simply doesn’t like to be touched by people she doesn’t know.

 

[netmilsmom]

Again, as I said, I don’t want to get into a debate on this since it is not the topic of the thread, but there is a definite difference here.

They had to get permission to make it the prescribed position, not to use the position. They would not have been able to get permission to prescribe a position that is a “reserved” position, which is why I, along with the other commentaries I have seen on the topic, have concluded that the orans cannot then be a “reserved” position.

As I said though, there may be more to the story that just hasn’t come to light yet, so I am personally not stating anything as “fact” at this point beyond their having received permission.

Peace,

And honestly, neither one of us can get a reference that the permission was asked or given by Italy.

Are you stating that the Vatican could not give permission for a reserved position ? Really? This isn’t the USA, the Vatican can do what it wants.

But again, Italy got the permission, we didn’t.

 

[netmilsmom]

This group is NOT representative of the Catholics in the pews at Catholic churches I was attended. Almost everybody (95+%) holds hands at Mass. No one that I know of has been struck by lightning.

As with any other innovation, no one will be.
And thankfully, it will change.

I heard Cardinal Arinze speak on it this weekend, live here in Detroit.
He basically said that if it doesn’t say it in the GIRM, don’t do it. And that he is not going to get into it anytime soon because there are bigger problems to deal with.

AND on that happy note, my children were quite proud of themselves to have attended a mass at a classic church downtown and did not give in to the handholding and Orans.

God Love them! They will do fine out in the real world.

 

[palmas85]

Somewhere is scripture (don’t ask me chapter and verse since I’m Catholic) St. Paul talk about that all food is clean and you can eat it, but if someone with a weak faith thinks that it is unclean, then we should not eat that food in front of them, so we don’t make them stumble in their faith. I know the arguements against holding hands, But if someone doesn’t understand all this, and they feel holding hands during the Our Father builds up their understanding of communion, then in my not holding their hands am I causing them to stumble, like St. Paul is talking about?

If someone is so weak in the faith that they could posibly have problems because you did not hold their hands during a prayer, they have a major problem.

 

[palmas85]

Just curious. . . why do you refer to members of your parish community as “strangers”? Aren’t we all brothers and sisters in Christ? Aren’t we all sharing the same meal with our Father? Just because I don’t know someone’s name, or anything else about them, doesn’t make them a stranger.

Ah the community aspect rears its head. No mention of the sacrifice of Christ, just the sharing of a communal meal. Could it be possible that the person at the Church is not from the Parish, or even from the Catholic faith? There are many non-catholics attending the Liturgy these days, from many of these posts probably out numbering the faithful… That would make them a stranger in more ways than one.

You know what I’ve been wondering, we seem to have an almost maniacal desire to return to the practices, or rather, the perceived pratices of the early church, communion under both kinds, in the hand, no kneeling, vernacular usage etc. So why not take it all the way? One of the original duties of the Deacon was to act as a Master at Arms and run all of the Catechumans out before the breaking of the bread. So since we seem to have an ongoing problem with literally thousands of non Catholics attending the mass and illicitly taking part in Holy Communion, lets station the Deacons at the door and run them out. St Cyril no less, the champion of the communion in the hand crowd wrote that the deacons at the Jerusalem Church would make the announcement, “Let all catechumans depart. Let not one remain” Then we could truly be representative of the early church.

 

[Walking_Home]

Some of us will sit at our Thanksgiving dinners with our families in very formal settings, and without any hugging with family members on arrival or departure. Others of us will express our joy and thanksgiving in very physical ways, and with what might seem to some to be a “free for all” at the dinner table. And sometimes you’ll have a mixture of both since some family members might be more prone to expressing their affection physically or verbally than others. Neither is right or wrong or inappropriate, as long as we don’t make them feel uncomfortable by trying to push them into something they prefer to avoid.

It really shouldn’t be much different as we come to our Abba’s table. We may express our joy and love for Him differently, but that really should be a cause for joy that we are there rather than a time to be condemning because someone responds differently.
Peace,

---

vatican.va/roman_curia/synod/documents/rc_synod_doc_20050707_instrlabor-xi-assembly_en.html

The Perception of the Eucharistic Mystery among the Faithful

1. Generally speaking, the responses to the Lineamenta reveal a certain decrease in the understanding of the mystery celebrated. The Eucharist as gift and mystery is not always perceived. This is witnessed in various cultural nuances. For example, in those countries enjoying a general climate of peace and prosperity—primarily western countries—many perceive the Eucharistic mystery as simply the fulfilment of a Sunday obligation and a meal of fellowship. Instead, in those countries experiencing wars and other difficulties, many understand the Eucharistic mystery more fully, that is, including its sacrificial aspect. The paschal mystery, celebrated in an unbloody manner on the altar, gives profound spiritual meaning to the sufferings of Catholic Christians in these lands, helping these people to accept them as a participation in the mystery of the death and resurrection of the Lord, Jesus Christ.

Some responses, coming from the Church in Africa, mention that the idea of sacrifice is indigenous to the cultures of that continent. Therefore, this understanding, properly taken and purified of elements extraneous to the Gospel, is often used in pastoral catechesis for a better understanding of the sacrificial aspect of the Eucharist.

Catechesis is faced with the difficulty of preserving the sacrificial aspect of the Eucharist as well as the idea of the Eucharist as a meal. Oftentimes, the latter receives more emphasis than the former.

 

[ncjohn]

Generally speaking, the responses to the Lineamenta reveal a certain decrease in the understanding of the mystery celebrated.

For example, in those countries enjoying a general climate of peace and prosperity—primarily western countries—many perceive the Eucharistic mystery as simply the fulfilment of a Sunday obligation and a meal of fellowship

That may indeed be true in some cases. But I would hold that among many the fact that it is also to incorporate the aspect of the community meal is totally denied–with the *total *emphasis on the vertical and the “me and God”–that tendency being particularly prevalent at this site.

Incorporating one element of somewhat horizontal community praise, as Vatican 2 emphasized was so important, does not in anyway negate the vertical element, nor does it in any way imply that those of us who look at that one element differently than some others are any less mindful of the vertical. It simply means that we may express it differently. Even in that horizontal element we incorporate the vertical since it is still all about giving praise to our God while offering our petition.

Having now added “just fulfilling the Sunday obligation” to the judgment of being irreverent and disobedient, is it at all possible that we might consider that none of us has the ability to determine anyone else’s motivation or piety? It is possible for someone to find something distasteful without having to condemn someone else who does not. I personally detest eggplant, opera, and country music, but that wouldn’t give me the right to be questioning the intelligence or good taste of those who enjoy those things. Somehow we have got to get past this idea that any of us have the sole way to communicate with our God. He really is much bigger than our individual preferences.

Peace,

 

[Maureen_Fiore]

Yes I hold hands, because in my Parish we hold hands, so therefore I hold hands.

I think that unity in your Parish is very important. If people have an issue with holding hands then they should take it up with their priest, but until then I believe that one should not stand out from the rest on the people. What is the bigger wrong, holding hands during the Our Father, or not being unified with your Parish? Now this would be different, if it is something that would be against the Churches teachings, or invalidate the Mass, but I think that one not holding hands when everyone else does is a sign of individualism , and is not in the spirit of communion. I know that we are not suppose to do this, but again I say if you have an issue with it take it up with your Priest, and until then do what everyone else is doing so you do not stand out, the Mass is not suppose to focus on you and your actions.

But, we are united, we are united through the Eurcharist so there is no reason to hold hands during the Our Father. When we hold hands we are calling for individual unity.
I disagree with your reasoning that if “do what everyone else is doing so you don’t stand out”. This reasoning IMO is wrong. I will not do what I feel is not right. I don’t discourage people from holding hands, just don’t hold mine. I was asked once and I politely declined and it was OK.

I went to a church where everyone stood during the Consecration. My family knelt and we were the only family that did. I receive the Eucharist on the tongue, my preference, my children receive in the hand, that was the way they were taught. I don’t discourage this but I don’t want to be forced into something I believe is wrong.

 

[Walking_Home]

That may indeed be true in some cases. But I would hold that among many the fact that it is also to incorporate the aspect of the community meal is totally denied–with the *total *emphasis on the vertical and the “me and God”–that tendency being particularly prevalent at this site.

Incorporating one element of somewhat horizontal community praise, as Vatican 2 emphasized was so important, does not in anyway negate the vertical element, nor does it in any way imply that those of us who look at that one element differently…

Having now added “just fulfilling the Sunday obligation” to the judgment of being irreverent and disobedient, is it at all possible that we might consider that none of us has the ability to determine anyone else’s motivation or piety? It is possible for someone to find something distasteful without having to condemn someone else who does not. I personally detest eggplant, opera, and country music, but that wouldn’t give me the right to be questioning the intelligence or good taste of those who enjoy those things. Somehow we have got to get past this idea that any of us have the sole way to communicate with our God. He really is much bigger than our individual preferences.

Peace,

---

Our Mass is Christ centered and Trinitarian—so yes—it is vertical—about our Lord. Our Mass does not deny the ‘meal’ since it becomes evident when we recieve Holy Communion.

I did not judge you in whether you attend Church on Sunday—since I have no knowledge of that. What I did respond to—was your words on Thanksgiving dinner. How people approach Thanksgiving dinner differently. For some more formal–for others a free forall----and how it shouldn’t be much different as we come to Abba’s table.

Isn’t this what the Church has been fighting against all these years. How the Mass has been manipulated because people want to worship their own way----instead of how the Church intends. Your words on the 'dinner" seem to reflect this quite well.

The Church is the custodian of God’s Truths and of His Mass–and we should not be be going against Her and then----trying to justify our actions by saying-----God is much bigger than our individual preferences. Our preferences should reflect what the Church intends.

 

[ncjohn]

---

Our Mass is Christ centered and Trinitarian—so yes—it is vertical—about our Lord. Our Mass does not deny the ‘meal’ since it becomes evident when we recieve Holy Communion.

Yet the horizontal aspect which the Vatican 2 documents specifically address is so often totally denied. It’s fine if you want to focus on one or the other, but please don’t try to say that those who focus on both as we are called to do are wrong.

I did not judge you in whether you attend Church on Sunday—since I have no knowledge of that. What I did respond to—was your words on Thanksgiving dinner. How people approach Thanksgiving dinner differently. For some more formal–for others a free forall----and how it shouldn’t be much different as we come to Abba’s table.

Your words on the 'dinner" seem to reflect this quite well.

Well, let’s see…your quote that YOU highlighted, in response to a post from me, specifically addresses “thinking of mass attendance as an obligation” and characteristic of a decreased understanding of the mass as just a meal of fellowship. I’d say the implication is pretty clear, but I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt.

What I won’t give you the benefit of the doubt on is the rest of the above quote. I took an imperfect example to simply show that people are not all formal and not all “touchy feely” to indicate that we respond to each other and God in different ways. You instead, with the snide “Your words…seem to reflect this quite well”, referencing the “free for all” idea, yet again imply that I specifically (and people who hold hands in general) are all about creating chaos and disturbing your personal worship space, with the implication that you have “the” right way and anyone else is just “wrong”.

Dealing with my own pride issues from time to time, I understand what that is like and will pray that you have adequate time at confession and in prayer to ask for some forbearance in the level of arrongance and sarcasm that comes across from your posts. I don’t question your devotion to God or the Church, but I will say that your method of communication destroys any credibility your statements might hold. I had specifically ignored your other posts, as I will from here on, rather than get into these kind of discussions.

I wish you peace,

 

[Walking_Home]

Yet the horizontal aspect which the Vatican 2 documents specifically address is so often totally denied. It’s fine if you want to focus on one or the other, but please don’t try to say that those who focus on both as we are called to do are wrong.

Well, let’s see…your quote that YOU highlighted, in response to a post from me, specifically addresses “thinking of mass attendance as an obligation” and characteristic of a decreased understanding of the mass as just a meal of fellowship. I’d say the implication is pretty clear, but I’ll give you the benefit of the doubt.

What I won’t give you the benefit of the doubt on is the rest of the above quote. I took an imperfect example to simply show that people are not all formal and not all “touchy feely” to indicate that we respond to each other and God in different ways. You instead, with the snide “Your words…seem to reflect this quite well”, referencing the “free for all” idea, yet again imply that I specifically (and people who hold hands in general) are all about creating chaos and disturbing your personal worship space, with the implication that you have “the” right way and anyone else is just “wrong”.

Dealing with my own pride issues from time to time, I understand what that is like and will pray that you have adequate time at confession and in prayer to ask for some forbearance in the level of arrongance and sarcasm that comes across from your posts. I don’t question your devotion to God or the Church, but I will say that your method of communication destroys any credibility your statements might hold. I had specifically ignored your other posts, as I will from here on, rather than get into these kind of discussions.

I wish you peace,

Quote= ncJohn
Some of us will sit at our Thanksgiving dinners with our families in very formal settings, and without any hugging with family members on arrival or departure. Others of us will express our joy and thanksgiving in very physical ways, and with what might seem to some to be a “free for all” at the dinner table. And sometimes you’ll have a mixture of both since some family members might be more prone to expressing their affection physically or verbally than others. Neither is right or wrong or inappropriate, as long as we don’t make them feel uncomfortable by trying to push them into something they prefer to avoid.

It really shouldn’t be much different as we come to our Abba’s table. We may express our joy and love for Him differently, but that really should be a cause for joy that we are there rather than a time to be condemning because someone responds differently.​

Destroys my credibility— I included above your exact words from post 48. And of course–lets throw in the negative conotations of “pride” ,adequate confession, forbearance. arrogance etc. Sorry this tricks don’t with me anymore–nice try though.

The following is what the Church says on expressing ourselves in different ways. I do not know what it is that you are refering to when you state " the horizontal aspect which the Vatican 2 documents specifically address"------haven’t come across this in the documents of Vat II. RS 2004 does mention the Council.

RS 2004
[7.] Not infrequently, abuses are rooted in a false understanding of liberty. Yet God has not granted us in Christ an illusory liberty by which we may do what we wish, but a liberty by which we may do that which is fitting and right.[18] This is true not only of precepts coming directly from God, but also of laws promulgated by the Church, with appropriate regard for the nature of each norm. For this reason, all should conform to the ordinances set forth by legitimate ecclesiastical authority.

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 reign to his own inclinations, even if he is a Priest, injures the substantial unity of the Roman Rite, which ought to be vigorously preserved

[4.] “Certainly the liturgical reform inaugurated by the Council has greatly contributed to a more conscious, active and fruitful participation in the Holy Sacrifice of the Altar on the part of the faithful.”[10] Even so, “shadows are not lacking”.[11] In this regard it is not possible to be silent about the abuses, even quite grave ones, against the nature of the Liturgy and the Sacraments as well as the tradition and the authority of the Church, which in our day not infrequently plague liturgical celebrations in one ecclesial environment or another. In some places the perpetration of liturgical abuses has become almost habitual, a fact which obviously cannot be allowed and must cease.

 

[palmas85]

---

vatican.va/roman_curia/synod/documents/rc_synod_doc_20050707_instrlabor-xi-assembly_en.html

The Perception of the Eucharistic Mystery among the Faithful

1. Generally speaking, the responses to the Lineamenta reveal a certain decrease in the understanding of the mystery celebrated. The Eucharist as gift and mystery is not always perceived. This is witnessed in various cultural nuances. For example, in those countries enjoying a general climate of peace and prosperity—primarily western countries—many perceive the Eucharistic mystery as simply the fulfilment of a Sunday obligation and a meal of fellowship. Instead, in those countries experiencing wars and other difficulties, many understand the Eucharistic mystery more fully, that is, including its sacrificial aspect. The paschal mystery, celebrated in an unbloody manner on the altar, gives profound spiritual meaning to the sufferings of Catholic Christians in these lands, helping these people to accept them as a participation in the mystery of the death and resurrection of the Lord, Jesus Christ.

Some responses, coming from the Church in Africa, mention that the idea of sacrifice is indigenous to the cultures of that continent. Therefore, this understanding, properly taken and purified of elements extraneous to the Gospel, is often used in pastoral catechesis for a better understanding of the sacrificial aspect of the Eucharist.

Catechesis is faced with the difficulty of preserving the sacrificial aspect of the Eucharist as well as the idea of the Eucharist as a meal. Oftentimes, the latter receives more emphasis than the former.

It is strange however that this particular thing wasn’t difficult to present and understand in previous times. It is only after Vatican II that all of a sudden it became difficult as you say to teach that the two events are in fact are in fact both occuring in the Mass.

Perhaps it is not at all coincidental that our separated brethren also believe only in the meal aspect of communion.

I know the Church has not changed her theology to reflect that attitude but there are many and I do mean many in the Church who have. Unfortunately, they are often in positions of authority and teaching. That is the real problem, pseudo theologians attempting to create a new and improved Catholicism that removes the perceived artificial barriers between Christians, of which the idea of a sacrifice in the mass paramount.

 

[Walking_Home]

It is strange however that this particular thing wasn’t difficult to present and understand in previous times. It is only after Vatican II that all of a sudden it became difficult as you say to teach that the two events are in fact are in fact both occuring in the Mass.

Perhaps it is not at all coincidental that our separated brethren also believe only in the meal aspect of communion.

I know the Church has not changed her theology to reflect that attitude but there are many and I do mean many in the Church who have. Unfortunately, they are often in positions of authority and teaching. That is the real problem, pseudo theologians attempting to create a new and improved Catholicism that removes the perceived artificial barriers between Christians, of which the idea of a sacrifice in the mass paramount.

---

I agree—there are many in the Church who have been influenced–and more who will be influence—the wrong Way.

 

[ComradeAndrei]

Somewhere is scripture (don’t ask me chapter and verse since I’m Catholic) St. Paul talk about that all food is clean and you can eat it, but if someone with a weak faith thinks that it is unclean, then we should not eat that food in front of them, so we don’t make them stumble in their faith. I know the arguements against holding hands, But if someone doesn’t understand all this, and they feel holding hands during the Our Father builds up their understanding of communion, then in my not holding their hands am I causing them to stumble, like St. Paul is talking about?

How about the folks that don’t want to participate in such nonsense? Why throw up stumbling blocks to faithful Catholics who want to practice the Faith of their fathers without all the nonsensical hippy-dippy innovations?

I would suppose that most of us just offer it up and try to persevere.

 

[LeahInancsi]

How about the folks that don’t want to participate in such nonsense? Why throw up stumbling blocks to faithful Catholics who want to practice the Faith of their fathers without all the nonsensical hippy-dippy innovations?

I would suppose that most of us just offer it up and try to persevere.

Go for it.

If you happen to stop by my parish and sit next to me, I can’t promise that I won’t wonder “what’s wrong with him” during the Our Father.

 

[Traditional_Ang]

I also just fold my hands and often bow my head.

I don’t like to raise my hands pesonally–it makes me feel awkward and actually sort of reminds me of a “fire and brimstone” evangelical, or something, church i went to as a young teen – before I came back to the catholic church. That church sort of creeped me out and was probably very instrumental in turning me away from christianity for some time. So, yea, I don’t usually raise my hands.

If someone tries to hold my hand I will hold theirs but I don’t usually initiate that either.

PsuedoHermit:

Welcome Home.

I went to Calvery Chapel, and even lived in a Christian community for awhile. They were both Charismatic-Evangelical, with at least some of the preaching focused on the “End-Times” (Esp. at Calvery Chapel.

I think the Catholic parishes that started doing the holding hands during the “Our Father” and/or raising hands during the 'Our Father" and the Sanctus did so either because of the Cursillo Movement, the Charismatic Movement or some “Touchy Feely” thing designed at creating the “feeling of community”.

Both the Cursillo Movement and the Charismatic Movement at least tried to be Christ-centered and to submit theemselves to the Teaching Authority of the Church. The “Touchy Feely” stuff was often a substitute for real community, real preaching of the Gospel and real renewal. Although I think I participated in some at one parish some 25 years ago, it didn’t provide me with real spiritual food or a call to holiness and righteousness.

Although the Cursillo Movement didn’t have much of a biblical basis, at least they tried to submit to the Bishops, and tried to generate community organiclly, by getting people to care for each other by listening to each other.

And, Although there have been real abuses by many Charismatics who placed emotion and experience above spiritualitity, most of those in the movement had a strong Biblical basis, a submission to Authority and a willingness to see the ned for “Discernning the Spirits”.

I have found myself lifting my hands up in praise and adoration because the English language simply failed me in my expression of praise and adororation of God. I’ll try not to do it too often or too far up because I understand St. Paul’s injunctions that all things should be in good order and that nothing I do should be unintelligible (at least not without a simple explanation) or give my brother cause for stumbling. I would not want to be in a parish where something like that was forced.

If I’m in parish which holds hands, and it’s convenient, and it’s not physically uncomfortable, I’ll d it, but not across 2 or 3 pews just for the sake of holding hands with people I don’t know.

I hope this isn’t too confusing.

Your Brother in Christ, Michael

 

[Saint_Jerome]

was listening to the Cardinal Arinze podcast, and there was a question regarding community practices, such as this, and he made it clear that there is not a right or wrong. Stand, kneel, hold hands, etc. This is part of the community choice.

I would ask those people who have trouble with holding hands, if mas is a celebration of the church (people) what do you bring to the celebration? Do you sing loudly? Do you shake hands with others during the sign of peace? The resurrection of Christ is the best reason for having a party.

Another point is that we are all part of the holy priesthood. There is nothing off-limits to us, or exclusive to an ordained priest with the exception of the consecration of the hosts. When we attend mass we are all concelebrants and we should not give up too much to those ordained priests.

 

[Victorious]

I would ask those people who have trouble with holding hands, if mas is a celebration of the church (people) what do you bring to the celebration? Do you sing loudly? Do you shake hands with others during the sign of peace? The resurrection of Christ is the best reason for having a party.

I don’t know how many ways there are for me to say this: *I * DON’T * LIKE * INTERACTIONS * WITH * STRANGERS * OR * MERE * ACQUAINTANCES * THAT * ARE * APPROPRIATE * ONLY * WITH * CLOSE * FRIENDS * OR FAMILY. *** NOTHING * IN * OUR * FAITH * REQUIRES * ME * TO * PUT * UP * WITH * INAPPROPRIATE * BEHAVIOR * FROM * OTHERS. *** PERIOD!

Another point is that we are all part of the holy priesthood. There is nothing off-limits to us, or exclusive to an ordained priest with the exception of the consecration of the hosts. When we attend mass we are all concelebrants and we should not give up too much to those ordained priests.

Angels and ministers of grace, defend us.

 

[paramedicgirl]

Go for it.

If you happen to stop by my parish and sit next to me, I can’t promise that I won’t wonder “what’s wrong with him” during the Our Father.

So, are you referring to a spiritual or a character deficit when you say there is something wrong with someone who won’t hold your hand during the Our Father?