Holding hands durring the Our Father?

[InnocentFortune]

Telling someone to go have their hippie hug fest is attacking a person (goodness knows, I would hate to be called a hippie).

Well I didn’t call you one nor anybody else so it isn’t ad hominem, got it?

 

[bmadamsberry]

Glancing at someone is a far cry for what happens a typical sign of piece and you know.

This is the Our Father, not the sign of peace. (Continuing along the sign of peace, however) Nevertheless, what is supposed to happen is different from what happens. One doesn’t throw out a part of the Mass because people abuse that part. Instead, one educates.

It is a break from the mass where we all smile and shake hands and say hello and blah blah blah. Would be completely inappropriate thing to do at the real crucifixion which is supposed to be what the mass is, right?

Nope. Christ tells us in Matt. 5:23-24 “Therefore, if you are offering your gift at the altar and there remember that your brother has something against you, leave your gift there in front of the altar. First go and be reconciled to your brother; then come and offer your gift.”

It is not a “break from the Mass.” It is a part of the Mass! You’re the one that seems to think that the Sign of Peace (which is not part of this thread) is separate from the Mass.

 

[InnocentFortune]

Since we seem to value different liturgical expressions now, I wish we could just herd to touchy feely worshipers into one mass and have another mass with a more sober disposition. You guys can hold hands and hug and kiss. Hey maybe even dance or speak in tongues and stuff, whatever you’re into. I would bet all the flip flop wearing football jersey sporting parishioners would be into that. And one wonders where the faith in the eucharist has gone…

 

[bmadamsberry]

Well I didn’t call you one nor anybody else so it isn’t ad hominem, got it?

Post #53 “I wish you people would have your hippie hug fests in the parking lot.” One who participates in a hippie hug fest would be a hippie (quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, etc.; the only thing, it would seem, that doesn’t fit this is the Eucharist, lol). It would be similar to me telling you to go have your half-brained liturgy somewhere else. That would be implying that you are half-brained (which, for clarification, I am not doing. Instead, I am subtly equating hippies with half-brains).

 

[bmadamsberry]

Since we seem to value different liturgical expressions now, I wish we could just herd to touchy feely worshipers into one mass and have another mass with a more sober disposition. You guys can hold hands and hug and kiss. Hey maybe even dance or speak in tongues and stuff, whatever you’re into. I would bet all the flip flop wearing football jersey sporting parishioners would be into that. And one wonders where the faith in the eucharist has gone…

Oh, I certainly wouldn’t want any dancing. That’s against the directives of the CDF and the Holy See (although Pope John Paul II allowed liturgical dancing when he was in a country where dancing was an integral part of religious worship, like many African countries).

Also, and I might just have been a bad philosophy student, but I think you are exaggerating what I am saying and making a straw man. Holding hands during the Our Father, which has not been suppressed by the Vatican and is not in conflict with any rubrics that I am aware of, is much different than everything you suggested above (the case would be different if your bishop specifically suppressed the practice).

 

[InnocentFortune]

Post #53 “I wish you people would have your hippie hug fests in the parking lot.” One who participates in a hippie hug fest would be a hippie (quacks like a duck, walks like a duck, etc.; the only thing, it would seem, that doesn’t fit this is the Eucharist, lol). It would be similar to me telling you to go have your half-brained liturgy somewhere else. That would be implying that you are half-brained (which, for clarification, I am not doing. Instead, I am subtly equating hippies with half-brains).

That is not an Ad hominem attack no matter what you say. You simply sound ignorant by insisting that it is. An Ad hominem attack would be we shouldn’t do the sign of peace because the guy who started it was a Freemason or something. That fact that he is or isn’t a mason has no bearing on whether or not we should or shouldn’t use it. THAT is ad hominem. Calling it a hippie hug fest is using an unflattering description but I’m not saying that we shouldn’t do it because hippies hug each other. Do you get it? So I hope you at least learned what an ad hominem argument is so you don’t look so stupid in the future by continuing use a term you don’t even understand.

 

[InnocentFortune]

Oh, I certainly wouldn’t want any dancing. That’s against the directives of the CDF and the Holy See (although Pope John Paul II allowed liturgical dancing when he was in a country where dancing was an integral part of religious worship, like many African countries).

Also, and I might just have been a bad philosophy student, but I think you are exaggerating what I am saying and making a straw man. Holding hands during the Our Father, which has not been suppressed by the Vatican and is not in conflict with any rubrics that I am aware of, is much different than everything you suggested above (the case would be different if your bishop specifically suppressed the practice).

I don’t care if you hold hands just don’t bother me and my family during mass by trying to take our attention away from the altar. Thank you.

 

[bmadamsberry]

That is not an Ad hominem attack no matter what you say. You simply sound ignorant by insisting that it is. An Ad hominem attack would be we should do the sign of peace because the guy who started it was a Freemason or something. That fact that he is or isn’t a mason has no bearing on whether or not we should or shoudn’t use it. THAT is ad hominem. Calling it a hippie hug fest is using an unflattering description but I’m not saying that we should do it because hippies hug each other. Do you get it? So I hope you at least learned what an ad hominem argument is so you don’t look so stupid in the future by continuing use a term you don’t even understand.

An ad hominem “is an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person supporting it.”(en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem#cite_note-0)

Here, one is trying to negate holding hands during the Our Father by “pointing out a negative… belief of the person supporting it,” namely, hippie.

Sorry that I sound ignorant and that I look stupid to you. I hope I don’t offend you.

 

[bmadamsberry]

I don’t care if you hold hands just don’t bother me and my family during mass by trying to take our attention away from the altar. Thank you.

Well, it would be wrong for me to force you to hold hands (I myself do not hold hands during the Our Father, but I also don’t ridicule the practice).

 

[InnocentFortune]

An ad hominem “is an attempt to negate the truth of a claim by pointing out a negative characteristic or belief of the person supporting it.”(en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ad_hominem#cite_note-0)

Here, one is trying to negate holding hands during the Our Father by “pointing out a negative… belief of the person supporting it,” namely, hippie.

Sorry that I sound ignorant and that I look stupid to you. I hope I don’t offend you.

I said that we should not do the sign of peace because it distracted from the reality of the crucifixion. That is the assertion that I made. It was not based on pointing out a negative of someone who supports it. I took a crack at the practice by calling it a hippie hug fest but my argument was not based on the negative beliefs of hippies. Thus my argument was not Ad hominem. It’s okay. I understand that people wanna sound smart and use big impressive latin words to sound smart but you gotta be careful to use them correctly or it just makes you look dumber that’s all.

 

[bmadamsberry]

I said that we should not do the sign of peace because it distracted from the reality of the crucifixion. That is the assertion that I made. It was not based pointing out a negative. I took a crack at the practice by calling it a hippie hug fest but my argument was not based on the negative beliefs of hippies. Thus my argument was not Ad hominem.

This thread is on the Our Father, not the Sign/Rite of Peace.

While, indeed, one of your arguments for not using the Sign/Rite of Peace and/or the Our Father (again, this thread is on the Our Father) was that it distracts from the reality of the crucifixion, you also called it a hippie hug fest.

Please follow: calling the practice a hippie hug fest is insulting those that practice that thing (again, this thread is on the Our Father, not the Sign/Rite of Peace, but you just stated the Sign of Peace so I am not sure which one you are actually talking about).

Furthermore, one would surmise that one of your arguments is that the practice is a hippie thing to do, and therefore that practice does not have merit/has less merit. This is an ad hominem attack.

It’s okay. I understand that people wanna sound smart and use big impressive latin words to sound smart but you gotta be careful to use them correctly or it just makes you look dumber that’s all.

Again, I’m sorry for my part in escalating our discussion to using insults. If I’ve offended you, I apologize.

 

[CMatt25]

Good. If it’s not about you then you shouldn’t have a problem with anybody not showing you the attention that you seem to crave from people who are trying to cling to their faith in the sacraments.

I only crave people who strive to exemplify Christ in their place of worship. Like I said, Christ Himself had no problem saying the words, “peace be with you”. And neither do I. Nor apparently do a lot of Catholics on this thread. They seem to understand it is part of the Mass which is what I am getting from them. Does it also distract you from focusing on the crucifixion when you hear the Resurrection story told at Mass? What about the Gospel of love one another which the priest at the Mass I attended last Sunday spoke about? When you hear your priest say during the Mass “the peace of the Lord be with you always”, is that distracting to your focus as well? .

 

[jes3890]

I’m not gonna lie, everyone. As a recent Catholic convert, I am surprised that petty issues such as a family or group of friends holding hands during a corporate prayer during the Mass could stir up such intense emotions and opinions. I find it very difficult to believe that God or the Church could/would condemn a group of people who voluntarily hold hands during a corporate prayer. Seriously, where is the heresy in this? Is this really an issue that should be treated as a hindrance to the Gospel? If the Gospel is so weak that it is hindered by a family holding hands during a corporate prayer during the Mass, then I think we have a major problem with our faith. Perhaps if we stopped pointing accusatory fingers at each other just because some of us like to hold hands, and focus more on charity and loving other people as ourselves, the Church would come closer to the mind of Christ.

 

[Jegudiel]

Funny I can’t stand it. I wish you people would have your hippie hug fests in the parking lot after mass not right after Christ is lifted up on the cross. Just seems so inappropriate to carry on like that at the re-presentation of the crucifixion.

“Hippie?” Why would you use such a term in this context? I hear the terms “hippie” and “liberal” used by people who have difficulty expressing themselves due to their limited vocabularies. Is this true in your case or does “hippie” have some meaning I am not aware of?

In any event I feel sorry for those who somehow feel the Mass is “improved” by eliminating the kiss of peace. In my parish the kiss of peace is quite dignified – there is no carrying on as you suggest.

 

[Jegudiel]

I’m not gonna lie, everyone. As a recent Catholic convert, I am surprised that petty issues such as a family or group of friends holding hands during a corporate prayer during the Mass could stir up such intense emotions and opinions. I find it very difficult to believe that God or the Church could/would condemn a group of people who voluntarily hold hands during a corporate prayer. Seriously, where is the heresy in this? Is this really an issue that should be treated as a hindrance to the Gospel? If the Gospel is so weak that it is hindered by a family holding hands during a corporate prayer during the Mass, then I think we have a major problem with our faith. Perhaps if we stopped pointing accusatory fingers at each other just because some of us like to hold hands, and focus more on charity and loving other people as ourselves, the Church would come closer to the mind of Christ.

In all sincerity see posting #17. It pretty much explains their behavior…

 

[Jegudiel]

The Roman Missal, the priest uses, has these instructions:

We can love each other without holding hands. The hand holding is not in the liturgy. We shouldn’t add to the liturgy to “make it better”.

It’s not an addition. The Church doesn’t tell us what to do at that point in the Mass with our hands. There is no required orans or 5-on-5 with our hands or anything else.

 

[jes3890]

In all sincerity see posting #17. It pretty much explains their behavior…

Obviously we shouldn’t be forcing other people to hold hands with us. That is inexcusable. I never suggested that. I said family members or friends who voluntarily hold hands with each other during a corporate prayer. I really don’t think it’s fair to compare well-meaning family members and friends to those who nefariously try to invade other peoples’ personal bubble, so to speak.

 

[Ohana]

I’m not gonna lie, everyone. As a recent Catholic convert, I am surprised that petty issues such as a family or group of friends holding hands during a corporate prayer during the Mass could stir up such intense emotions and opinions. I find it very difficult to believe that God or the Church could/would condemn a group of people who voluntarily hold hands during a corporate prayer. Seriously, where is the heresy in this? Is this really an issue that should be treated as a hindrance to the Gospel? If the Gospel is so weak that it is hindered by a family holding hands during a corporate prayer during the Mass, then I think we have a major problem with our faith. Perhaps if we stopped pointing accusatory fingers at each other just because some of us like to hold hands, and focus more on charity and loving other people as ourselves, the Church would come closer to the mind of Christ.

Bless you Jes. Yes this is much ado about not much. Mea Culpa.

I personally like holding hands during the Our Father. It symbolizes for me a corporate joy and thanksgiving for Jesus great sacrifice and our joining with Him in offering it to the Father in all humility. If the person standing next to me indicates they do not want to hold hands, no problem. If I have a cold or some such (even though I carry hand sanitizer) I will refuse also. That is, except for my husband who is exposed anyway. So I guess I am saying we need to use sense and sensitivity, but also need to hold our own in how we express our faith in that portion of the Mass.

 

[superamazingman]

Obviously we shouldn’t be forcing other people to hold hands with us. That is inexcusable. I never suggested that. I said family members or friends who voluntarily hold hands with each other during a corporate prayer. I really don’t think it’s fair to compare well-meaning family members and friends to those who nefariously try to invade other peoples’ personal bubble, so to speak.

Why is the Our Father more of a corporate prayer than the rest of the Mass? It really seems to place an over the top importance on the our father.

 

[TimothyH]

The liturgy also does not tell us to breath during the liturgy, and yet we do. I know it’s a ridiculous analogy (I would even say a false analogy, but I made it anyway).

However, the liturgy we have today was formed from centuries of organic changes. Organic change does not happen on the level of bishops and popes, but rather that of the laity and the priests. Bishops and Popes don’t just come up with changes and implement them; instead, they see organic changes to the liturgy and either suppress them or encourage them (depending on whether it’s a good change or a bad change).

There is a large difference between directly breaking a liturgical rule, and adding a pious devotion. This may be one of those. There are bishops that have suppressed this practice, and others that have encouraged it. I would point people to the directives of their bishops.

This is the punchline.

When the change is agreed with it is slow, deliberate and organic, in line with proper development. When change is not agreed with, it is Protestant, modernist incrementalism.

-Tim-