I have never found a “groundless flight of fancy” and never have I experienced or seen “reading really convoluted significances to the Mass that aren’t really there” when contemplating the mystery of the sacrifice of the Mass. Could you provide some examples of this?
I can think of a few examples. I was once told that the amen after the Eucharistic Prayer was the particular moment at which we unite our sacrifice of ourselves with Christ’s offering of himself to the Father. But then it was pointed out to me by a liturgical traditionalist friend of mine (who is studying sacred music) that that particular amen has no special status in the rubrics; nowhere does it say it is especially different from any other amen spoken by the congregation in the Mass, nowhere does it say that it should be sung. As far as I know, the idea that this amen was somehow an extra special moment was someone’s rather groundless conjecture.
The other example was the one I already mentioned. I’ve often been told that holding hands during the Our Father detracts from the vertical (or sacrificial) aspect of the Mass. But I fail to see why that is necessarily the case. Why should it necessarily take away from the Mass as a sacrifice? I realize that this is not the argument you made; your argument is different and more sophisticated. But at the moment I’m just giving examples of groundless claims about the symbolism of the Mas.
But I didn’t really have specific examples in mind when I wrote about groundless flights of fancy in examining the symbolism of the Mass, except for examples specifically relating to the issue of hand holding. I was mainly mentioning it as a theoretical possibility. We should be careful not to accept any and every claim about symbolism or meaning in the Mass (or in anything) just because it sounds solemn and cool. Sometimes, supposed symbols are just a stretch; they just were not the original intent, or are just not really there.
Since then I have found no reason to tamper with the actions, words, gestures, or postures of the Mass.
But there is no hand posture during the Our Father to tamper with, because no hand posture is specified. It is not a question of tempering with a norm, but deciding what to do in an area where there is no norm.
Instead I have become in awe of how the liturgy of the Mass has remained basically the same since St. Justin Martyr wrote about it in the second century.
Indeed!
The detraction is the in the interruption and distr… nify a sign of peace to others (a wave of the hand, or nod of the head).
A few comments. I would not agree that hand holding interrupts the flow of the Mass; simply by virtue of the fact that everyone is saying the same words at the same time ensures the exact same flow every time at this point in the liturgy. Also,it seems to me that there is generally a much greater lack of charity for hand-holders by people who object to the practice than vice-versa.
But on the whole I agree with you. I do not personally like hand holding during the Our Father, and I don’t do it, for many of the same practical reasons you mention. In particular, I think trying to take hold of the hand of someone you don’t know and who might not like to hold hands during the Our Father is an
awful idea that consistently causes a minor ruckus for those involved.
I have already explained the Mass moving forward toward intimacy with Jesus in the Eucharist and that hand holding is more intimate than a handshake, which causes backwards motion in the liturgy, which is anathema when everything in the Mass progresses to and points to Jesus in the Eucharist.
I still honestly don’t find this convincing. If everything should constantly grow in intimacy during the Mass until the reception of the Eucharist, then why do we reach the peak of horizontal intimacy during the sign of peace and then never really interact with our neighbors again until after Mass? It seems like horizontal intimacy, rather than continuing to grow, drops off completely right after the sign of peace! But why is it terrible for horizontal intimacy to reach its peak during the Our Father anyway? Why not have it reach its peak there and then drop off, to give way to a greater emphasis on vertical intimacy with Jesus Christ? The idea that the sign of peace must be more intimate than the Our Father just seems so arbitrary. And even if it is true, why is the solution necessarily to not hold hands during the Our Father? We could just as easily fix the problem by continuing to hold hands during the Our Father and start hugging or kissing during the sign of peace!
Just because it is ‘licit’ does not make it right or warranted.
This is certainly true. A Catholic has every right to hold that a particular practice, while licit, is a terrible idea; I never meant to deny that.
For example, if a Catholic Man and woman are living together, but have decided to remain celibate until they are married, all of the Church laws and statutes indicate it might be licit for each of them to receive the Eucharist. However, for various reasons (e.g. to protect the community or to avoid scandalizing fellow parishioners), it may not be right or proper for them to receive the Eucharist.
I think cohabitation
is condemned as such, though, isn’t it?
If someone extends their hand to me, I take it. To me it’s just good manners and I’d never want to make my brothers and sisters in Christ feel uncomfortable, especially during Mass when we are all united in Christ more deeply and fully then elsewhere in this life.
