M
MusicMan
Guest
As we have had a new General Instruction (2000) promulgated since this document was produced (1997), is this document still in force, or did the GIRM of 2000 reprobate it?
- Status
O
OhioBob
Guest
Angels Watchin:
Gee, if it’s that clear, why does the issue cause such a ruckus?
N
netmilsmom
Guest
Because no one has SPECIFICALLY SAID no holding hands.Gee, if it’s that clear, why does the issue cause such a ruckus?
Just like I never SPECIFICALLY told my five year old that she can’t cut the cat’s fur, or Daddy’s hair for that matter!
D
Dr.Bombay
Guest
netmil(name removed by moderator):
Maybe every parish could have several cats that get distributed during the Our Father. Then people have a choice. Shave the cat, or hold hands. Everyone’s happy.
With my brilliant ideas for compromise, I’m surprised I haven’t been made a bishop yet.
I’d rather that people would cut the cat’s fur than grab my hand uninvited.
Maybe every parish could have several cats that get distributed during the Our Father. Then people have a choice. Shave the cat, or hold hands. Everyone’s happy.
With my brilliant ideas for compromise, I’m surprised I haven’t been made a bishop yet.
P
paramedicgirl
Guest
netmil(name removed by moderator):
Has your daughter ever tried the duct tape hair removal thing while Daddy was sleeping? My 10 year old daughter springs that on her dad now and then
N
netmilsmom
Guest
Dr. Bombay:
I’d vote for you!
N
netmilsmom
Guest
Well gee! I never specifically told her not to!Has your daughter ever tried the duct tape hair removal thing while Daddy was sleeping? My 10 year old daughter springs that on her dad now and then
D
Dr.Bombay
Guest
netmil(name removed by moderator):
Unless something happens to me like that guy in the Middle Ages who was elected Pope when a dove landed on his head. Personally, I’m certain it was just a dirty pigeon, but a dove sounds so much more mystical. :yup:
Thanks, mom. That’s my only hope.
Unless something happens to me like that guy in the Middle Ages who was elected Pope when a dove landed on his head. Personally, I’m certain it was just a dirty pigeon, but a dove sounds so much more mystical. :yup:
A
Angels_Watchin
Guest
Nothing in the new GIRM speaks directly to this, so…
it stands.
Most of the very large, inclusive documents (like the GIRM) specifically state that “all other rules remain” (not a direct quote - but, that’s the essence of it.)
Now, we just have to TELL EVERYBODY!! (because many of the people who are supposed to be doing that job (bishops job is to tell priests, priests job is to tell laity) are not doing their jobs.
I recently read that the newly assigned ‘administrator’ (assigned July 2005) at that parish in Huntington Beach (under the authority of Bishop Tod Brown) was very adamantly defending his actions with the 1985 Sacramentary! And he did it in the BULLETIN! In October of 2005 he was not even aware that a new GIRM had been promulgated! and he had been a pastor (or associate pastor)for a few** years** at another parish within the same diocese just prior to his current appointment. Most of the priests in the Diocese of Orange are CLUELESS (or silent) when you mention ANY liturgical abuse to them. I’ve done it, they usually laugh at you and literally flip their hand as though they were flicking away a fly! And then they walk away!
Pretty obvious that Bishop Brown is leaving his pastors and priests in the dark - or they do know and they’re afraid to do anything that IS in accord with the teachings of the church if they DO happen to “discover” the actual teachings, lest they be banished to the outposts (Mexico included).
Is there anyone out there who, from the canon law perspective, knows if he can be charged with anything substantial for this particular abuse? (now that we have a new nuncio?)
God help us,
Angel
M
MusicMan
Guest
By your logic and in view of your document, we really weren’t supposed to be crossing our foreheads, lips, and hearts at the start of the Gospel either, because up until the GIRM of 2000, it wasn’t proscribed for the laity to do so. We were just mimmicking the priests who had been doing it for hundreds of years.
We’ve been using the orans position for the Our Father for quite some time now. According to other posters in this forum, they were being taught to do it back in the 1950s.
It is also rumored that the orans position was going to be a part of the 2000 GIRM to correct the hand-holding. Clearly there is a legitimate push worldwide for the laity to adopt this posture.
However, the orans position recommended for the laity is lower than the one the priest is commanded to use. The laity are to extend their arms at their waists, while the priest extends his arms at his shoulders. There is clearly a posture difference between the orans of the priest and the orans of the laity.
So, unless we extend our arms at the shoulders, we’re not mimmicking the priests.
We’ve been using the orans position for the Our Father for quite some time now. According to other posters in this forum, they were being taught to do it back in the 1950s.
It is also rumored that the orans position was going to be a part of the 2000 GIRM to correct the hand-holding. Clearly there is a legitimate push worldwide for the laity to adopt this posture.
However, the orans position recommended for the laity is lower than the one the priest is commanded to use. The laity are to extend their arms at their waists, while the priest extends his arms at his shoulders. There is clearly a posture difference between the orans of the priest and the orans of the laity.
So, unless we extend our arms at the shoulders, we’re not mimmicking the priests.
N
ncjohn
Guest
netmil(name removed by moderator):
I’m sorry, but that argument just doesn’t hold water no matter how many times it gets made or how many different ridiculous examples get thrown out there.
The question has been asked of the Church repeatedly and the Church, along with the USCCB, just keeps saying “there is no specific posture required” and specifically does not condemn it despite the protests of those who just don’t like it.
Each time these statements get made, it is just more judgment of other people’s piety and devotion. This is not an issue of people looking for ways to make you miserable!!! This is nothing more than some people responding differently in prayer than you do. It’s not “kumbaya Catholocism” with all the condescension that implies to those making the statements. It is a dfference in preference about how we address OUR Father.
I can fully understand your preference, and have no problem with it whatsoever, just as I have no problem with the Charismatic preference although I don’t personally feel comfortable with it. And please don’t give me the “we’ll stop complaining when we can have masses where we don’t have to do it.” There are ways to address it in a spirit of charity–by simply not participating, by asking the priest to clarify the charitable aspect, by creating a “no hand holding” area, etc. If you tell me that we can’t do that because everybody else is doing it and it makes you uncomfortable, I’ll ask you what my mother always asked me, and what I bet you ask your own kids: “if all your friends go jump off the cliff are you going to jump too?”
Worst case, we might have to do the hardest part of the Christian calling and let it be our cross to bear. To come to me and tell me that you want to deny me this very meaningful expression of my devotion to God because you don’t like it is just as uncharitable as someone trying to force you to hold their hand if you don’t want to. Both “sides” need to act charitably and respect the wishes of the other.
I’m going now…to go spend some time trying to make sure my heart is ready for the coming of my Lord on Christmas. Hopefully I won’t be upset while I’m standing at the manger if one of the kings or shepherds hugs me with joy at the sight of the King.
Peace,
Except that I bet your daughter hasn’t been cutting the cat’s fur for over 30 years. If she was, and you said nothing about it over that 30 years while speaking volumes about other “novelties” or “abuses” it would be reasonably assumed by the entire world that you didn’t have a problem with it.
I’m sorry, but that argument just doesn’t hold water no matter how many times it gets made or how many different ridiculous examples get thrown out there.
The question has been asked of the Church repeatedly and the Church, along with the USCCB, just keeps saying “there is no specific posture required” and specifically does not condemn it despite the protests of those who just don’t like it.
Each time these statements get made, it is just more judgment of other people’s piety and devotion. This is not an issue of people looking for ways to make you miserable!!! This is nothing more than some people responding differently in prayer than you do. It’s not “kumbaya Catholocism” with all the condescension that implies to those making the statements. It is a dfference in preference about how we address OUR Father.
I can fully understand your preference, and have no problem with it whatsoever, just as I have no problem with the Charismatic preference although I don’t personally feel comfortable with it. And please don’t give me the “we’ll stop complaining when we can have masses where we don’t have to do it.” There are ways to address it in a spirit of charity–by simply not participating, by asking the priest to clarify the charitable aspect, by creating a “no hand holding” area, etc. If you tell me that we can’t do that because everybody else is doing it and it makes you uncomfortable, I’ll ask you what my mother always asked me, and what I bet you ask your own kids: “if all your friends go jump off the cliff are you going to jump too?”
Worst case, we might have to do the hardest part of the Christian calling and let it be our cross to bear. To come to me and tell me that you want to deny me this very meaningful expression of my devotion to God because you don’t like it is just as uncharitable as someone trying to force you to hold their hand if you don’t want to. Both “sides” need to act charitably and respect the wishes of the other.
I’m going now…to go spend some time trying to make sure my heart is ready for the coming of my Lord on Christmas. Hopefully I won’t be upset while I’m standing at the manger if one of the kings or shepherds hugs me with joy at the sight of the King.
Peace,
T
thistle
Guest
Angels Watchin:
N
netmilsmom
Guest
Just like liturgical dance? It took them many years to overcome that one. Give them time.
If my daughter was snipping little pieces of hair off for a long time, for a while no one would notice. Then when it began to ge noticed, we would think that it would stop on it’s own, then finally we would take steps to stop it. If she was cutting her Dad’s hair at the same time, the cat would take a back burner. The Vatian started working on the abuses, it will get to the innovations in time.
Thirty years is a blip in Vatican history. Give them time. A few Catholics may have been doing this for thrity years but to the average Joe in the pew this is a recent innovation. (as my Dear Friend JKirkLVNV says, hand holding is an innovation started at the time of "love children) You can’t even give the number on how many parishes and how long this innovation has been going on. You can assume, but can’t come up with hard facts.
That’s the problem we run into in our parishes.
“My way or the highway” “You make yourself uncomfortable so we can be comfortable.” Hmmmmmm.
What’s wrong with a liturgy without innovation John? No one is going to tell you to stop holding hands with your family or take away a mass that you can do this in, why must WE be charitable while the innovators are not?
Put the shoe on the other foot. Laying prostrate could become the posture. Every mass. Would you be happy to stop your way of worshiping? Would you stand while everyone else is laying on the floor?
That’s what you are telling me, my soon to be Catholic husband, my eight and my five year old to do.
N
netmilsmom
Guest
"This is repeatedly made clear in the Church’s liturgical documents. For example, the Ceremonial of Bishops notes: “Customarily in the Church a bishop or presbyter addresses prayers to God while standing with hands slightly raised and outstretched” (CB 104).
Instruction on Collaboration (Nov. 13, 1997) “Neither may . . . non-ordained members of the faithful use gestures or actions which are proper to the . . . priest celebrant” (ICP, Practical Provisions 6 §2)."
Here are the Vatican documents giving directions for the Priest to use this posture. Could you please give us a reference to where the Vatican gives direction to the laity to stand with palms up?
N
ncjohn
Guest
netmil(name removed by moderator):
I found a quote from Dr. Bombay in another thread that seems very applicable here: “Cardinal Newman also warned that to reverse the course of an existing development is not a development but a corruption.” If there’s a valid reason to reverse it, I’m sure the Church will in time. If it hasn’t been reversed, maybe there is a valid reason why not. In the meantime, I will just continue to call on charity from all and a lack of judgment about each other’s motives and piety.
You know I have not said this here, nor have I ever said any such thing. My contiinual call has been for ALL to be charitable of each other’s preferences. At all times and in all places.
Again, there are many charitable ways to accomplish this. Very, very few people are really going to persist in trying to “force” you into holding their hands with the slightest indication at all that you don’t want to. You really damage your credibility and your charitablility when you imply that people who want to hold hands are mean-spirited, impious people just looking for a way to make you uncomfortable. I’m sure there are exceptions, just as there are mean-spirited people on the other side who just don’t want to see anything but their way, whether there is a valid reason for that or not–my way or the Highway, hmmmm.
This gets really old; the constant throwing out of ridiculous scenarios, which we all know would be put to a stop immediately, and trying to compare them to something that has been in use for at least 30 years without the Church saying to stop.
If this is really wrong, the Church will get to it as you say. I quite frankly doubt it, given that they have gone this long without finding a problem with it, but if they condemn it tomorrow I will stop, and without complaining about it.
I found a quote from Dr. Bombay in another thread that seems very applicable here: “Cardinal Newman also warned that to reverse the course of an existing development is not a development but a corruption.” If there’s a valid reason to reverse it, I’m sure the Church will in time. If it hasn’t been reversed, maybe there is a valid reason why not. In the meantime, I will just continue to call on charity from all and a lack of judgment about each other’s motives and piety.
N
netmilsmom
Guest
We can all be considerate when some of us are considered.
A
Angels_Watchin
Guest
Here in the Philippines holding hands IS allowed and this was publicly clarified by the bishop.
See website link below.
rcam.org/news/2005/no_ba…ing_han ds.htm
Lots of abuses and heresy has been publicly condoned - "clarified by the bishop"s - lately. Haven’t you been reading the papers or the posts right here? Women priests, homosexual priests, married priests…
EX: Maybe you haven’t seen the photo of Bishop Tod Brown (Diocese of Orange, CA) refusing communion to a kneeling communicant.
EX: We’ve had Life Teen Masses in this diocese for YEARS with young, barely dressed boys and girls standing around the altar holding hands and swaying DURING THE CONSECRATION in full knowledge of our bishop and in full defiance of the Magisterium- and it continues STILL! - He does nothing!
Most of them KNOW what they’re supposed to be doing - MANY SIMPLY REFUSE TO DO IT! It’s called pride. “I know better than the church - I can do what I want”.
You can always find a priest/bishop somewhere that will tell you that whatever you’re doing (including mortal sin) is ok. I hope you can see that by the great number of priests and bishops who have been removed. (Most serious offenders first - the line is long!)
The ONLY truth comes from the documents of the church: the Catechism (1997 version) the GIRM 2003/ Sacramentary, RedemptionisSacramentum,Considerations Regarding Proposals…, Read them and you will know what’s supposed to be being done. ANYTHING ELSE IS SUSPECT at this point.
Liturgical abuses and heresy abound - you cannot trust that “the bishops know better than you” (and the implication is that they will do the right thing) -The thousands of young men who were raped in the seminary believed that the “bishops knew better than they”; the poor young altar boys who were raped repeatedly believed that the priest/bishop knew better that they.
The devil knows better than all of us, too, but I hope you don’t intend to listen to him.
“The smoke of Satan has entered the Sanctuary”
Pope Paul IV - 1963
THE SANCTUARY!
Up until Vatican II the only people allowed in the Sanctuary were the ordained and the altar boys.
Read up! KNOW the truth - and defend it! You will be defending Christ Himself!
Blessings,
Angel
A
Angels_Watchin
Guest
Here in the Philippines holding hands IS allowed and this was publicly clarified by the bishop.
See website link below.
rcam.org/news/2005/no_ba…ing_han ds.htm
Dear Thistle,
your link isn’t working - can you post another?
Thanks,
Angel
N
netmilsmom
Guest
Angels Watchin:
There’s is no prohibition on the holding of hands during the singing of the Our Father during the Mass. This is the clarification being made by Fr. Anscar Chupungco, OSB, executive secretary of the Commission on Liturgy of the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines.
Fr. Chupungco said that there has been no directive from the bishops that bans this practice among priests and laypeople during the celebration of the Mass. The statement coming out of the 20 th National Meeting of Diocesan Directors of Liturgy made no mention of such prohibition. While it suggested that certain “indecorous movements” must be "eliminated” these did not refer to “holding hands” during the singing of the “Our Father.”
Fr. Chupungco issued the clarification on behalf of Bishop Romulo Valles, chairman of the Episcopal Commission on Liturgy.#
** This is not applied to the American Diocese. Check with them before doing this innovation.
[/right]
Here is what it says on the Diocese of Manilla website…
There’s is no prohibition on the holding of hands during the singing of the Our Father during the Mass. This is the clarification being made by Fr. Anscar Chupungco, OSB, executive secretary of the Commission on Liturgy of the Catholic Bishops Conference of the Philippines.
Fr. Chupungco said that there has been no directive from the bishops that bans this practice among priests and laypeople during the celebration of the Mass. The statement coming out of the 20 th National Meeting of Diocesan Directors of Liturgy made no mention of such prohibition. While it suggested that certain “indecorous movements” must be "eliminated” these did not refer to “holding hands” during the singing of the “Our Father.”
Fr. Chupungco issued the clarification on behalf of Bishop Romulo Valles, chairman of the Episcopal Commission on Liturgy.#
Code:
[right]** Pls. refer: Fr. Anscar Chupungco OSB, 8423511
Peachy E. Yamsuan/ 09178355363[/right]
R
Rebecca_New
Guest
What gets to me is the secret little squeeze people will give when the Our Father is completed.I particularly love the double whammy of having someone grab your hand and then hold it up in the air in a kind of group-orans, Riverdance mega love-fest. I makes me go all squishy inside.
As Nancy Reagan would say, “Just say no”.
- Status