Holding hands during the Our Father?

  • Thread starter Thread starter psteichen
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
nana3 said:
I use to hold hands all the time with parishioners, but in the church I went to the priest asked us not to and not to raise our hands to the heavens either. He said that was reserved for the priest only and it is per Vatican II. He wants us hold our hands in a prayer way by ourselves. He told me that if I didn’t like it to go to the Assembly of God religion. Thank God, my faith is not based on a priest. When I am in his parish, I respect his choice and put prayerful hands, but I have transfered out of that parish and the one I am in now, I hold hands with my husband and daughter.

I don’t know what is approved by the Church and never asked another priest.
Click to expand...
Now I may not agree on the hand holding but for a priest to say go that to you that is just not right. I am glad you didn’t blame it on the Catholic Church.
 
lrs said:
I am afraid to even comment further on this. I guess I stand at why is it inappropriate for a Woman to have her feet washed by a Priest.
Click to expand...
Then why did you Private Mail me with your rant?
 
nana3 said:
I use to hold hands all the time with parishioners, but in the church I went to the priest asked us not to and not to raise our hands to the heavens either. He said that was reserved for the priest only and it is per Vatican II. He wants us hold our hands in a prayer way by ourselves. He told me that if I didn’t like it to go to the Assembly of God religion. Thank God, my faith is not based on a priest. When I am in his parish, I respect his choice and put prayerful hands, but I have transfered out of that parish and the one I am in now, I hold hands with my husband and daughter.

I don’t know what is approved by the Church and never asked another priest.
Click to expand...
Sorry, that is just rude.
He is correct in that only the Priest is given the directive for the Hands Extended (Orans) posture, but to tell you that you can’t hold hands with your family is just plain wrong. To tell you to try another denomination is not very priestly.

I would say that this priest had the same experience
as I had. “Happy Catholics” taking over a parish and tossing anything traditional, but geez a priest should have a little more tact.
 
netmil(name removed by moderator) said:
Sorry, that is just rude.
He is correct in that only the Priest is given the directive for the Hands Extended (Orans) posture, but to tell you that you can’t hold hands with your family is just plain wrong. To tell you to try another denomination is not very priestly.

I would say that this priest had the same experience
as I had. “Happy Catholics” taking over a parish and tossing anything traditional, but geez a priest should have a little more tact.
Click to expand...
I agree and he has done so much more that is not very priestly to others and we felt that we had to leave. He is very orthodox and that is one good quality that goes towards him.

If only the priest is to raise his hands, why are most Catholic churches doing this? The parish we go to now has a very holy orthodox priest, he has made no mention of not raising our hands.
 
netmil(name removed by moderator) said:
Actually, everyone in my parish assumes the second. But we have Altar Boys (who wear gloves when carrying candles), Choir Girls, still do May Crownings and celebrate Corpus Christi with four outdoor Altars and have no women who have their feet washed on Holy Thursday. Maybe it’s just that we are kind of traditional.
Click to expand...
As a child I was taught the way it shows in the second picture in Catechism before my First Communion I’ve been doing it ever since. I can count on one hand the number of people at my parish that does the second position. Most do the first.
 
lrs said:
The feet washing comment clinches it-
Jesus washed the Disiciple Feet at Holy Thursday- was this show of humble servitude only meant for the Disciples or for all humankind?? What was the intentions of such an Act?.
I am afraid to even comment further on this. I guess I stand at why is it inappropriate for a Woman to have her feet washed by a Priest.
Perhaps you and I, we are far too distant on our Spirituality to have a meaningful conversation that merits an answer to this.

Lisa
Click to expand...
Without getting into it to much here, as that would sidetrack this thread, here are three links you can go to, to discover for yourself why washing the feet of women on Holy Thursday is not an acceptable practice.

zenit.org/english/

zenit.org/english/

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=103185&highlight=foot+washing
 
lrs said:
Netmill(name removed by moderator),
may the Peace of Christ penetrate you!
Feel free to expose my “rant”. Copy and Paste it here.
I stand firm in my belief we are all created equal in God’s eyes.
Lisa
Click to expand...
:rotfl:

Can’t you cut and paste yourself? You took the time to write it, you do it.
 
nana3 said:
I agree and he has done so much more that is not very priestly to others and we felt that we had to leave. He is very orthodox and that is one good quality that goes towards him.

If only the priest is to raise his hands, why are most Catholic churches doing this? The parish we go to now has a very holy orthodox priest, he has made no mention of not raising our hands.
Click to expand...
It’s a huge debate, but it comes down to this,
Never is the Laity directed to use the Orans position in all the church documents. The priest is always.
It is a priestly gesture.
 
Netmills,
I do not have your permission to copy and paste.
GOODBYE AND PEACE with a handshake.

Lisa
 
lrs said:
Netmills,
I do not have your permission to copy and paste.
GOODBYE AND PEACE with a handshake.
Click to expand...
:rolleyes:

Hmmmmm, I didn’t know that you needed my permission to post your own e-mail, but I guess I have the power.

Pity you never answered a question.
 
netmil(name removed by moderator) said:
Thirty five years? That’s a push. To say that some parishes have done this for thiry five years is reasonable but the majority of parishes started this in the late 90’s. I never saw handholding in my parish until I moved to Detroit in 1997. Along that line, to say the that posture of handholding, which was not used in the 1970 year history of the Catholic Church, and was pushed by certain lay ministers, should now be taken as “tradition” is surely abstact.
Click to expand...
According to Canon Law, a custom, when practiced for thirty continuous years, carries the weight of law. So, this wasn’t abstract. It was straight out of Canon Law:
Can. 26 Unless it has been specifically approved by the competent legislator, a custom which is contrary to the canon law currently in force, or is apart from the canon law, acquires the force of law only when it has been lawfully observed for a period of thirty continuous and complete years. Only a centennial or immemorial custom can prevail over a canonical law which carries a clause forbidding future customs.
Click to expand...
Of course, I don’t presume to interpret Canon Law. I can only go by what my Bishop teaches, and he teaches, by example, that holding hands during the Our Father is allowed, but never required.
 
Michael_Welter said:
According to Canon Law, a custom, when practiced for thirty continuous years, carries the weight of law. So, this wasn’t abstract. It was straight out of Canon Law:

Of course, I don’t presume to interpret Canon Law. I can only go by what my Bishop teaches, and he teaches, by example, that holding hands during the Our Father is allowed, but never required.
Click to expand...
RS 2004

[27.] …Accordingly, individual Bishops and their Conferences do not have the faculty to permit experimentation with liturgical texts or the other matters that are prescribed in the liturgical books…

[28.] All liturgical norms that a Conference of Bishops will have established for its territory in accordance with the law are to be submitted to the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments for the recognitio, without which they lack any binding force.
 
Didn’t Rome send a letter to the bishops responsible for the new translation of our liturgy stating that using the excuse of---- “people becoming accustomed” ----was not going to be a valid reason to make adaptations to our liturgy.

I seem to remember this letter in a thread months back concerning the new translation.
 
lrs said:
The feet washing comment clinches it-
Jesus washed the Disiciple Feet at Holy Thursday- was this show of humble servitude only meant for the Disciples or for all humankind?? What was the intentions of such an Act?.
I am afraid to even comment further on this. I guess I stand at why is it inappropriate for a Woman to have her feet washed by a Priest.
Perhaps you and I, we are far too distant on our Spirituality to have a meaningful conversation that merits an answer to this.

Lisa
Click to expand...
In my Parish not only should the women have their feet washed they should have their nose hairs clipped at the same time…
 
Michael_Welter said:
According to Canon Law, a custom, when practiced for thirty continuous years, carries the weight of law. So, this wasn’t abstract. It was straight out of Canon Law:

Of course, I don’t presume to interpret Canon Law. I can only go by what my Bishop teaches, and he teaches, by example, that holding hands during the Our Father is allowed, but never required.
Click to expand...
But as I said, this is far from 30 years in the church as a whole. We never did it in my parish in Cleveland so it is a new innovation there.
Of course your Bishop is the one who sets the norms. I have always said in regard to this issue, follow your Bishop. However, one or two Bishops does not a norm make. Most are silent or discouraging handholding.
 
Walking_Home said:
RS 2004

[27.] …Accordingly, individual Bishops and their Conferences do not have the faculty to permit experimentation with liturgical texts or the other matters that are prescribed in the liturgical books…

[28.] All liturgical norms that a Conference of Bishops will have established for its territory in accordance with the law are to be submitted to the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments for the recognitio, without which they lack any binding force.
Click to expand...
And here you go again with reposting of more of the same irrelevant citations.

The first pertains to texts and other things that are prescribed. Nothing is prescribed with regards to this–NOTHING!! This passage has absolutely nothing to do with the issue at hand, no matter how many times you post it.

With regard to the second, the GIRM as used by the USCCB was in fact submitted as it is written and approved by the CDW. If/when they want to change it again this is applicable. At the current time however, the document stands and their statement that “no position for the hands is prescribed” is the authortative statement for the U.S.

I’m sorry if that sounds harsh–as I am almost never harsh or impatient–but seeing the same stuff that has nothing to do with the issue continually thrown out just pushes even my patience. I understand that you don’t like that practice and that is fine. Nobody should be asked to participate in it if they do not want to. Please though, stop trying to mislead people into thinking it is illicit. Even the very conservative Cardinal Arinze, who I think we would agree is in more of a position to make authritative statements, doesn’t try to say any such thing.

And those of you who do hold hands, please understand that nobody who doesn’t want to–for whatever reason–should be looked down on any more than you want to be for choosing to do so. This is an individual choice and not the choice of the congregation, the priest, the liturgical director, or anyone else. We need to all act charitably toward each other and stop questioning each other’s motives.

Peace,
 
ncjohn said:
And here you go again with reposting of more of the same irrelevant citations.

The first pertains to texts and other things that are prescribed. Nothing is prescribed with regards to this–NOTHING!! This passage has absolutely nothing to do with the issue at hand, no matter how many times you post it.

With regard to the second, the GIRM as used by the USCCB was in fact submitted as it is written and approved by the CDW. If/when they want to change it again this is applicable. At the current time however, the document stands and their statement that “no position for the hands is prescribed” is the authortative statement for the U.S.

I’m sorry if that sounds harsh–as I am almost never harsh or impatient–but seeing the same stuff that has nothing to do with the issue continually thrown out just pushes even my patience. I understand that you don’t like that practice and that is fine. Nobody should be asked to participate in it if they do not want to. Please though, stop trying to mislead people into thinking it is illicit. Even the very conservative Cardinal Arinze, who I think we would agree is in more of a position to make authritative statements, doesn’t try to say any such thing.

And those of you who do hold hands, please understand that nobody who doesn’t want to–for whatever reason–should be looked down on any more than you want to be for choosing to do so. This is an individual choice and not the choice of the congregation, the priest, the liturgical director, or anyone else. We need to all act charitably toward each other and stop questioning each other’s motives.

Peace,
Click to expand...
The first–RS-27 —does address experimentation within our litury. Since holding hands is not called for–it is experimentation and taking liberties with the Mass.

For some reason --you fail to comprehend that the supreme interpreter of norms is the Apostolic See. They clarify any and all norms --even Canon Law. The Apostolic see indeed has the authority to interpret how the GIRM is applied.

As far as not liking the practice----remember this. Every time you or anyone else sticks out their hand–it is an imposition on someone else. They are put in a position of either accepting the hand or denying it. If one denies it—we do not have the “community spirit”—how offensive of us to not take someones hand. So when you say–let the people do this as long as they do not impose it on someone else—the very action of extending your hand has already become imposition.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top