Holding Hands

[netmilsmom]

Mordocai:

In my Parish, holding hands during the Our Father is common. But, sometimes I just don’t wanna
Here’s what I usually do:
If I don’t want to hold hands, as soon as the priest announces the the Lord’s Prayer, I just bow my bead, close my eyes, and fold my hands and raise them to my chest to indicate that I have no intention of holding hands.
I see nothing wrong with doing that to politely avoid it. If others want to hold hands, let them! Aint nothin wrong with emphasizing the fact of God being OUR Father.
They can simply hold out their hands and await a clasp, if they don’t receive a clasp…well then no big deal. This should never be offensive I don’t think.
I think if there were proper reverence in Mass, none of these issues would even be brought up.
haha we should be thinking about the Lord’s Goodness during Mass, and instead we worry about hand holding!
I like to think of the Novus Ordo (properly done) as silent communion with your brothers and sisters in adoration of God.
Silence tells much more than body language ever could anyway.
But then again, if a holy person were next to me at Mass, I’d sure wanna hold their hand
Ask Mary to take you by the hand! She will lead you to Jesus!

God Bless!
Mordocai

Read through some old threads on this.
Not everyone is so polite to drop his hand.

 

[MrS]

Dr. Bombay:

I only have one enemy, John. The same one as you and every other human being. Old Scratch.

That’s why I’ve drawn the line in the sand. I can tolerate the girl altar boys, the inventive prayers, a priest glad-handing from narthex to nave during the Sign of Peace, the glass chalices, the hoardes of EMHC, Church doctrine being ridiculed from the ambo, the"worship space" “we are church” “presider” and other sickening newchurch speak, the abstract felt wall hangings, the corpus-less crucifixes, the buzz-cut girls giving homilies and I can even tolerate Glory and Praise or Journeysongs. But that’s it. I’m making my stand right here. You will go this far and you will go no farther (further?).

And if that makes me uncharitable, or someone who just doesn’t understand the corporate worship aspect of the Mass, then so be it. I don’t care. I’m a bitter old coot anyway. Hands off! Darn kids. :tsktsk:

When I stepped outside this morning it was bitter cold… guess that makes me a bitter old coot too… Later today, I will be just an old coot… Either (eIther) way, I must totally agree with you Dr.B

Our pastor is doing 3 talks on the Mass on his days off (Mondays) … 1]scriptural foundation… 2]proper site, layout of sacristy etc for the liturgy, and a third (un-announced as yet)… perhaps the abuses. There is a small ray of hope. So this old coot is smiling today.

 

[ncjohn]

Dr. B and Mr S,

Thanks for your comments as they kind of answered my question and maybe give me a little more perspective. I can understand your distress when things seem to be so out of control.

The reason I brought the question up to begin with was to find out what it was that I was saying that was so offensive, and after reading what you’re saying, I think it’s really not what I’m saying at all since I have not advocated any of the things you mention. I do have to admit that many of them are inconsequetial to me even if they are not the way I might set things up if I was in charge. Of course many of the things you’re mentioning have been recently addressed in Redemptionis Sacramentum so maybe we’ll see some improvement in some of the areas of real abuse.

Just one comment I would make to put things in a little perspective. Life in general is full of little irritations by things that aren’t done the way they are supposed to be, or the way that we’d like them to be. From the fact that our kids don’t do the things we ask them or that we know they should, to people who ignore traffic laws, to neighbors who let their dogs make a mess on our lawns, to stores that provide poor customer service or give us sugar in our coffee when we specifically asked for it black, to politicians and government who seem to be out for no one’s good but their own. No matter how much we might wish for the world to work the way it should, it’s full of imperfect people like you and me. We all make mistakes; we all are inconsiderate at times; we all have bad days; we are all prone to actual “evil” at times, and we all have different opinions of what that “perfect world” would look like. As such, no matter how much we might wish it weren’t so, we’re going to have things in life that aren’t going to be to our liking.

While it is certainly important to stand up for the things that are really important, if we allow our joy to be taken by things of this world that really aren’t “the One” we will never be able to live the peace that Jesus was trying to pass on to us, and that we are called to pass on to each other. The only way we can have peace is if we continue to spread it to each other.

Net made a comment that she and I can’t work together to solve the problems because she’s up in MI and I’m down in NC. I tend to disagree. If the 28,000 of us in these forums went to our priests and Bishops and asked them to promote common courtesy and Christian charity in how we treat each other on these issues, I think we could accomplish a tremendous amount. None of us would get everything we’d like since we vary in what that is, but I think we could get an accomodation that would get rid of the serious problems and allow as best possible the opportunities for at least most of us to be able to have reverent liturgies that spoke to us. It wouldn’t be perfect, but it might be as close as we get in this life where we can’t even get a steak cooked the way we want sometimes.

I wish you both peace and joy, and hope that we really can in our own ways continue to work to bring the Kingdom without losing our joy.

 

[MrS]

ncjohn:

I wish you both peace and joy, and hope that we really can in our own ways continue to work to bring the Kingdom without losing our joy.

Amen to that… boy, being a Catholic really is the toughest thing you can do in this life… but it has the greatest reward!

 

[Orionthehunter]

Dr. Bombay, please take this in the spirit intended. I sense a great deal of frustration and cynicism in your post. This is not of God but of your enemy Scratch. That wily son of a gun knows how to get to each of us. For some, he uses our human weaknesses to distance us from God. For others, he appeals to our scrupulousness to try to make us think that the Catholic Church is somehow defective. He is a liar and a cheat.

If I can, I’d like to try to be a vehicle for the Holy Spirit and pray that I am in my response.

From Dr. Bombay: The thing that irritates me about the hand-holding is peer pressure.

If you don’t want to hold hands, don’t succumb. It isn’t required. Just continue to generously make yourself open to those around you during the Sign of Peace.

From Dr. Bombay: Then we have armies of EMHC at most every Mass. They are supposed to be used in very limited and specific situations.

I think the proper limitation is “necessary”. It is the judgment of the Pastor on what is necessary. At our parish, we usually have 6 or 7 EMHC’s (depending on if the Deacon is available) because it is necessary for us to conclude Mass in an hour, clear the church and parking lot to allow the people for the next Mass to park and have time to prepare for Mass. Give your Pastor the benefit of the doubt. Satan would love to have you questioning your Pastor at every turn.

From Dr. Bombay: Communion under both kinds, is now distributed at even daily Masses, a huge departure from the intent of the Fathers of Vatican II.

Unless you know something more than I about the intent of V2, it is my understanding that use of only one form (Body) at Daily Mass is primarily a concession to cost and time as many worshippers are attending Mass on the way to work, over the noon hour, or on the way home from work. If the usually attendees of Daily Mass want both species, is this really something to get tied up in knots over? Personally, I like both species as it gives me an opportunity to say a quick prayer prior to recieving the Body thanking Christ for coming to this world to reveal himself and teach and then a quick prayer prior to recieiving the Blood to thank Him for shedding His blood for my salvation.

From Dr. Bombay: And it doesn’t matter whether the Church issued an official document prohibiting the practice. It would be ignored in the vast majority of parishes where hand-holding is practiced. Even if it was brought to the attention of the pastor, he’d dismiss it with some catty remark about it just being a “guideline” or how he likes to follow the “spirit” of the law.

I admit that this has been the case as Bishops and Priests didn’t fully understand where flexibility began and ended and the proper course of action. However, everything I have read about Pope BXVI and the USCCB in recent years is they are grasping the harm being done and taking action. These abuses didn’t happen overnight and won’t be resolved in a day. As the abuses were grounded in poor catechesis, the correction also requires good catechesis so both the Priests and faithful understand why the change is made. Part of the confusion is that we have endured change (some good and some bad) that we never understood. Keep in mind we have almost two generations who don’t have any experience with anything but the current situation. Our cause isn’t helped if people are left wondering if this is just another bad change. As Catholics, we need to have more confidence in our Pope and Bishops to ultimately get it right. They are also sinners and make mistakes. They need our prayers.

However, while being frustrated, you have come to accept some things that I believe are abuses and the Bishops seem to becoming active to change as in “glass chalices, Church doctrine being ridiculed from the ambo, the “worship space” “we are church” “presider” and other sickening newchurch speak, corpus-less crucifixes, the buzz-cut girls giving homilies”. But in the meantime, I’ll not allow my views to affect how I percieve the Church. It isn’t perfect to the extent that it is run by imperfect humans but it is perfect in that it is instituted by Christ and protected by the Holy Spirit.

Finally, I am glad that you’ve come to accept the changes made regarding female altar servers (as a father of three girls, their experience on the altar has been a positive spritual experience), the abstract felt wall hangings (bad decorating taste will only have a short shelf life), and contempory music (I remember fondly how such music spoke to me when I was younger and see the same reaction to my daughters now. Without sacrificing vital matters of Teaching, Doctrine, Morals and worship, we need to allow the Mass to speak to people at all the stages of their life).

 

[netmilsmom]

Orionthehunter:

If you don’t want to hold hands, don’t succumb. It isn’t required. Just continue to generously make yourself open to those around you during the Sign of Peace.

I’m not sure that you still get the idea of how uncomfortable it is to be put into a situation where one must look “uncharitable”.
And try explaining it to your six year old.

Check with your Bishop. By extending your hand YOU may be the one who is disobedient.

 

[Orionthehunter]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

I’m not sure that you still get the idea of how uncomfortable it is to be put into a situation where one must look “uncharitable”.
And try explaining it to your six year old.

Check with your Bishop. By extending your hand YOU may be the one who is disobedient.

If my Bishop wanted worshippers to not hold hands, he would tell us. He wouldn’t hesitate.

Secondly, I’ll repeat myself. If you don’t want to hold hands, don’t as it isn’t required. To address your concern about being percieved as uncharitable, make yourself enthusiastically available in the Sign of Peace.

Finally, nobody said parenting is easy.

 

[netmilsmom]

Orionthehunter:

If my Bishop wanted worshippers to not hold hands, he would tell us. He wouldn’t hesitate.

Secondly, I’ll repeat myself. If you don’t want to hold hands, don’t as it isn’t required. To address your concern about being percieved as uncharitable, make yourself enthusiastically available in the Sign of Peace.

Finally, nobody said parenting is easy.

Again, you seem to discount the uncomfortable situation being imposed on those who see this as an intimate gesture. From the Diocese of St. Louis website.
Is holding hands during the Lord’s Prayer allowed or encouraged?

BCL Newsletter, October-November 1989

No. The community’s corporate act of receiving communion is the primary symbol of unity with Christ and the Church. The Sign of Peace immediately preceding the reception of Communion is a liturgical rite that should not be minimized or duplicated in any way. A separate but related issue is the situation of individuals who for personal reasons feel uncomfortable with the practice of holding hands. In this case those individuals feel increasingly excluded from the worshipping community. Sensitivity is needed to include all and draw all to the true symbol of unity.

Where else in American society are we expected to hold hands with people we have just met?

Parenting can be easier when we are all on the same page.

 

[netmilsmom]

From Karl Keeting Holding hands at the Lord’s Prayer
In America, we shake hands with one another at the sign of peace. In Japan parishioners bow to one another. In other countries there may be other conventions.

At the sign of peace we’re saying “I’m at peace with you” or “I feel reconciled to you.” We convey that through words (“The peace of Christ be with you”) and through an action that is friendly but not intimate or intrusive (since most of those around us likely will be strangers).

This act of demonstrating reconciliation is undermined by holding hands at the Our Father. That prayer comes immediately before the sign of peace. In those parishes where people hold hands during that prayer, they are engaging in an action that is much more intimate than a handshake.

If we hold hands during the Our Father, it undercuts the significance of the following act, since holding hands trumps shaking hands. The sign of peace withers. A prescribed part of the liturgy (the sign of peace) loses much of its significance (much of its “sign value”) when parishioners hold hands at the Our Father.

(It’s good to say “I love you” to your spouse, but if you say that to everyone you meet on the street, your spouse will feel your words have been devalued.)

Another point: In our culture, hand-holding is approved of when adults hold the hands of young children, when boyfriend and girlfriend hold hands, and when married couples hold hands (though this commonly stops a few weeks after the honeymoon ).

We do not hold hands with strangers to whom we are introduced. We shake hands instead. Holding hands in such a situation would be perceived as too intimate. And in some cases, holding hands even suggests something unsavory, as when we see two men holding hands as they walk down the sidewalk.

Can anyone think of any situation, other than at the Our Father during Mass, in which people commonly hold hands with strangers? I can’t, and I think there is a reason: Hand holding is a sign of a certain intimacy. It’s not something we take lightly.

To hold hands with strangers at Mass strikes me as artificial, and it has become a detriment to a proper appreciation of the liturgy. Yes, it is easy enough to avoid, but I think it remains a problem. It is one kind of problem for those who don’t wish to hold hands, and it is another kind of problem (the problem of not understanding the role of signs in the Mass) for those who like the practice.
__________________

 

[fix]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

To hold hands with strangers at Mass strikes me as artificial, and it has become a detriment to a proper appreciation of the liturgy. Yes, it is easy enough to avoid, but I think it remains a problem.

That is a good summation.

In my parish it really cannot be avoided as everyone, including the priest and others on the altar, hold hands.

 

[Orionthehunter]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

From Karl Keeting Holding hands at the Lord’s Prayer
In America, we shake hands with one another at the sign of peace. In Japan parishioners bow to one another. In other countries there may be other conventions.

At the sign of peace we’re saying “I’m at peace with you” or “I feel reconciled to you.” We convey that through words (“The peace of Christ be with you”) and through an action that is friendly but not intimate or intrusive (since most of those around us likely will be strangers).

This act of demonstrating reconciliation is undermined by holding hands at the Our Father. That prayer comes immediately before the sign of peace. In those parishes where people hold hands during that prayer, they are engaging in an action that is much more intimate than a handshake.

If we hold hands during the Our Father, it undercuts the significance of the following act, since holding hands trumps shaking hands. The sign of peace withers. A prescribed part of the liturgy (the sign of peace) loses much of its significance (much of its “sign value”) when parishioners hold hands at the Our Father.

(It’s good to say “I love you” to your spouse, but if you say that to everyone you meet on the street, your spouse will feel your words have been devalued.)

Another point: In our culture, hand-holding is approved of when adults hold the hands of young children, when boyfriend and girlfriend hold hands, and when married couples hold hands (though this commonly stops a few weeks after the honeymoon ).

We do not hold hands with strangers to whom we are introduced. We shake hands instead. Holding hands in such a situation would be perceived as too intimate. And in some cases, holding hands even suggests something unsavory, as when we see two men holding hands as they walk down the sidewalk.

Can anyone think of any situation, other than at the Our Father during Mass, in which people commonly hold hands with strangers? I can’t, and I think there is a reason: Hand holding is a sign of a certain intimacy. It’s not something we take lightly.

To hold hands with strangers at Mass strikes me as artificial, and it has become a detriment to a proper appreciation of the liturgy. Yes, it is easy enough to avoid, but I think it remains a problem. It is one kind of problem for those who don’t wish to hold hands, and it is another kind of problem (the problem of not understanding the role of signs in the Mass) for those who like the practice.

OK. We get the point. You feel strongly about this. Keating as good a man as he is, his opinion is just that- his opinion. You agree with Keating. He is neither a Bishop or most importantly not my Bishop. Our primary obligation of obediance and submission is to our Bishop. Maybe this is an innovation that the Bishops should change if it detracts from the Sign of Peace. You have raised good arguments (especially regarding your comments about allowance for local customs regarding holding hands or bowing. However, this runs in the face of so many other comments about similar matters of local “flavor” or custom that should be snuffed out). But there are others who also have well-intentioned and reasoned arguments

Your attitude toward me seems to think that I think holding hands should be the norm. This is not true. Personally, in most cases, I prefer not to hold hands for the very reasons articulated- it appears to be more intimate than proper for people we don’t know well- but do so when near people with whom I have a relationship. My position is quite simple-until the Bishops address the issue, it continues as a matter of personal choice. People on both sides need to be charitable toward the others.

P.S. Keating’s remark that “And in some cases, holding hands even suggests something unsavory, as when we see two men holding hands as they walk down the sidewalk” is nonsense. IMHO, society would be served if every expression of affection wasn’t immediately assumed to be something inappropriate. I’m a hugger and think there is too little hugging and expressions of affection going on. This past weekend, I traveled to see an old friend’s son play a h.s. football game (we live hundreds fo miles apart and seldom see each other but the game was near my home). More than once, during the tense moments I reached over and grabbed his hand. After the game, we hugged passionately (I even had tears in my eyes as the evening and our parting made me realize how much I missed him) and I did the same to his wife. I love him dearly and love her because of how much she means to my friend. If anyone thought that we had anything but a pure philia (fellowship) love relationship, it is indicative of how they have allowed the sickness in the culture to invade them.

 

[Maurelian]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

The women behind us were not from our parish. My daughter didn’t notice through most of the mass when they did the innovations. However. the Our Father started with the hand holding Orans going on behind us. I was lost in prayer when I looked over to see my daughter staring with wide eyes at the ladies behind us. Luckily, at that moment, the prayer ended and she turned to the front.
I WAS truly embarrassed!

You’ve no reason to be so embarassed. If the women didn’t want to be stared at, they wouldn’t have been doing innovative and spontaneous gestures that are not called for in the rubrics.

 

[ncjohn]

Maurelian:

You’ve no reason to be so embarassed. If the women didn’t want to be stared at, they wouldn’t have been doing innovative and spontaneous gestures that are not called for in the rubrics.

No, of course there is no possibility that they were showing their devotion to God!

Those darned exhibitionists!! We ought to shoot every last one of them!

http://bestsmileys.com/sad/4.gif

 

[fix]

ncjohn:

No, of course there is no possibility that they were showing their devotion to God!

Those darned exhibitionists!! We ought to shoot every last one of them!

http://bestsmileys.com/sad/4.gif

MayI take the opposing view? Anything goes as long as I want to do it and I feel it is showing devotion?

 

[Maurelian]

fix:

MayI take the opposing view? Anything goes as long as I want to do it and I feel it is showing devotion?

Which I can agree with. But I’m not going to feel embarassed for a child who looks at you bewildered when you do something no one else is.

 

[Maurelian]

Moreover, a priority at Mass and other liturgical acts is worship of God. The liturgy is not a field for self-expression, free creation and the demonstration of personal tastes. Idiosyncrasies tend to attract attention to the person rather than to the mysteries of Christ being celebrated. They can also upset, puzzle, annoy, mislead or confuse the congregation.
Liturgical Norms and Liturgical Piety
+ Francis Cardinal Arinze
April 8, 2005

 

[fix]

Moreover, a priority at Mass and other liturgical acts is worship of God. The liturgy is not a field for self-expression, free creation and the demonstration of personal tastes. Idiosyncrasies tend to attract attention to the person rather than to the mysteries of Christ being celebrated. They can also upset, puzzle, annoy, mislead or confuse the congregation.
Liturgical Norms and Liturgical Piety
+ Francis Cardinal Arinze
April 8, 2005

The cardinal should read this thread and correct himself. If one has any inclination to introduce some gesture that is not specfically prohibited they are in keeping with the spirit of the rubrics. If anyone is unsettled by that they need to keep a stiff upper lip and be an adult.

Now, that is settled.

 

[ncjohn]

fix:

MayI take the opposing view? Anything goes as long as I want to do it and I feel it is showing devotion?

And let me see, this is “anything goes” in what respect?? Use of a recognized practice that has been in place for many years and which the Church has specifically declined to stop. Yup, I guess that would define it.

Maurelian:

Moreover, a priority at Mass and other liturgical acts is worship of God. The liturgy is not a field for self-expression, free creation and the demonstration of personal tastes. Idiosyncrasies tend to attract attention to the person rather than to the mysteries of Christ being celebrated. They can also upset, puzzle, annoy, mislead or confuse the congregation.
Liturgical Norms and Liturgical Piety

• Francis Cardinal Arinze
  April 8, 2005

So we’re going to apply this quote to something that is recognized and widespread and act like that is some “idiosyncracy.” And yet, I see no one using this quote to recognize that individuals kneeling for communion is a problem, despite *specific prohibitions * in the GIRM. Am I the only one who see’s a little “do as I say, not as I do” inconsistency here? (BTW, let me state again for the record: I prefer to kneel for communion although I do not do so since my Bishop has said not to, so I am not condemning in any way those who prefer to kneel.)

If we want to talk about actual abuses and maybe call that “anything goes” I’ll join right in with you. If we’re going to use the term to apply to “anything that I don’t like” I don’t think you’re helping your cause. I’m trying really hard to stand for reason and charity while staying firmly within Church teaching. Can we work on that together instead? Is there anyone who will join me there rather than fighting turf battles?

Peace,

 

[fix]

ncjohn:

And let me see, this is “anything goes” in what respect?? Use of a recognized practice that has been in place for many years and which the Church has specifically declined to stop. Yup, I guess that would define it.

Where can I read the Church has specifically declined to stop it?

The Church allows all manner of illicit things to go unchecked for any number of reasons.

 

[Orionthehunter]

ncjohn:

And let me see, this is “anything goes” in what respect?? Use of a recognized practice that has been in place for many years and which the Church has specifically declined to stop. Yup, I guess that would define it.

John, this is probably the weakest argument I’ve ever seen you post. Just because the Church hasn’t found it something so important as to prohibit doesn’t make it “endorsed”.