MERGED: Forced to sing/hold hands during the Our Father

  • Thread starter Thread starter VBibleSociety
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
In my parish (St Hallvard church in Oslo - Norway) we have no such thing. There are a lot of kneelers here too (yes, i am one of them).

The only physical contact we have is when we wish each other: peace be with you before Agnus Dei.
What is going on in the US? No kneelbenches? Holding hands? What is this? Please explain me.

:confused:
 
ByzCath said:
I am sorry, but now my choosing not to participate in hand holding is a legalism?

Normally I totally agree with you but in this case you are way off base.
Click to expand...
I can not be off base. That is why I said “for me.” What I said applied specifically for me and is a standard and opinion I would hold to no one. I believe that if the absence in the GIRM needs to be pointed out, that is a legalistic point. That does not make it bad. Points of protocol are good and necessary. However, I see the balance of what is best to tip in favor of holding someone’s hand rather than standing firm on my rights and offending someone. While arguments from the GIRM persuade me as to what is ideal, we seldom live in an ideal world and not all are at the same spiritual level.

Put another way, I think the pastoral overides the letter.
 
pnewton said:
I can not be off base. That is why I said “for me.” What I said applied specifically for me and is a standard and opinion I would hold to no one. I believe that if the absence in the GIRM needs to be pointed out, that is a legalistic point. That does not make it bad. Points of protocol are good and necessary. However, I see the balance of what is best to tip in favor of holding someone’s hand rather than standing firm on my rights and offending someone. While arguments from the GIRM persuade me as to what is ideal, we seldom live in an ideal world and not all are at the same spiritual level.

Put another way, I think the pastoral overides the letter.
Click to expand...
Again, I am sorry, but stating that this is your opinion and you hold no one to it other than yourself but then using loaded words such as “legalism”, “legalistic”,“pastoral”, and “right” says otherwise.

Since you bring rights into it I will quote the Associate Judge of the Supreme Court, Oliver Wendell Holmes, Jr., “The right to swing my fist ends where the other man’s nose begins.”

I think it is in very bad taste to take someone’s hand who is holding them in a prayerful position. I do not notice if someone extends their hand to me at the Our Father as my focus is on the altar and on the prayer, not on the person standing next to me.

To imply that I am legalistic is wrong.
 
I have stopped the practice. I began to realize that my attention wasn’t where it belonged, but on whether the person next to me was or wasn’t reaching for my hand. I wonder how many people are holding hands not because they want to, but because they don’t want to offend the person next to them.
 
ByzCath said:
Again, I am sorry, but stating that this is your opinion and you hold no one to it other than yourself but then using loaded words such as “legalism”, “legalistic”,“pastoral”, and “right” says otherwise.
Click to expand...
The words are not loaded. They are words. I implied nothing. When in this situation, everyone must choose for themselves what they should do, and no one’s choice is good or bad. I agree with the quote you give by O. W. Holmes. I understand my rights. Sometimes, I will choose not to excercise my rights out of deference to another.

Just like you do not want it implied that you are legalistic (which I did not do) there may also be some that need to be affirmed in their choice of deviation from the GIRM. There are good justifications either action, which is why I only gave my own reasons. I am sorry if it seems personal. It is not.
 
I see nothing wrong with holding hands, and do realise that it is a personal choice, that cannot be forced. Do you mean actually forced or “forced” by an invitaion?

What annoys me, though, is they continue to spread their arms until “Through him, with him and in him…”. I thought the practice is suppose to symbolise God given freedom?

As a note, when the celebrant (and co-celebrants) does opens his arms, it certainly does not mean unity. Rather, it symbolises the sacrifce of our lord, like the gesture how he is cruxificed. Basically the preist looks like the cruxified Christ.
 
PLAT said:
I see nothing wrong with holding hands, and do realise that it is a personal choice, that cannot be forced. Do you mean actually forced or “forced” by an invitaion?

What annoys me, though, is they continue to spread their arms until “Through him, with him and in him…”. I thought the practice is suppose to symbolise God given freedom?

As a note, when the celebrant (and co-celebrants) does opens his arms, it certainly does not mean unity. Rather, it symbolises the sacrifce of our lord, like the gesture how he is cruxificed. Basically the preist looks like the cruxified Christ.
Click to expand...
This is off the statement of “forced to hold hands” but to answer your remark on the priest’s statement of “through Him…” This is the priest offering to the Father the Body and Blood of Christ now present in the sacrifice in the priest’s HANDS held aloft in the unity of the Holy Spirit and in that moment Heaven meets earth. If the people raise their hands as well toward the hands of the priest holding the sacrament and sacrifice,I guess that would be something to look up in the GIRM. To me personally such an action by the congregation is not necessary and could take away the focus of the Mass which is on the altar of sacrifice and sacrament of which we are offerers and partakers with the priest.
 
PLAT said:
Do you mean actually forced or “forced” by an invitaion?
Click to expand...
Both. I’ve had my hand taken out of my other hand, or, my hand taken off the back of the pew in front of us. I’ve also had people offer me their hand to hold.

Yes, I’m an adult! However, I don’t have it within me to hurt their feelings, or make a scene by refusing.
 
I live in Dioc. of Allentown. We haven’t been forced or even asked. I won’t do it. Some do. The popular opinion is it is mostly people from NJ. I lived in NJ for a short while myself and yes, a lot of people over there do it. They also didn’t kneel in the one church I went to. When I left mass at that church I actually went outside to make sure the initials R.C. were on the front of the church.
 
PattiDay said:
I have stopped the practice. I began to realize that my attention wasn’t where it belonged, but on whether the person next to me was or wasn’t reaching for my hand. I wonder how many people are holding hands not because they want to, but because they don’t want to offend the person next to them.
Click to expand...
So are you suggesting that they just go ahead and offend them?

Jim
 
I clicked yes but it wasn’t a physical cohersion. One can be forced through other means as well.

I ended up holding hands because I didn’t want to offend anyone, not because I had any desire to do so. I don’t feel terribly offended or upset about it though. 🤷 I mean, it’s not my preference but I’d rather take the hand that’s extended to me then inadvertantly hurt someone’s feelings.
 
pnewton said:
I
Put another way, I think the pastoral overides the letter.
Click to expand...
The ‘letter’ is the ‘pastoral’ made manifest. It would be a mistake to claim that following the letter is somehow not excersing the greatest pastoral care.

After all, we would be following the instructions set forth by the leader of our universal flock.’
 
I have no issues with holding hands during the “Our Father”.

In fact, I grew up with that practice at the church I attended growing up, and they still do so to this day. Most of the time, the “Our Father” is spoken, and rare sung. Although, it was sung from time to time when I was younger.

Not all churches I visit during my travels do the hand holding thing. If someone extends their hand before the prayer, then I accept it. If it is not the practice, then most people hold out their hands in some way - I do so in a way that does not aggravate my carpal tunnel condition in my wrists.
 
Brendan said:
The ‘letter’ is the ‘pastoral’ made manifest. It would be a mistake to claim that following the letter is somehow not excersing the greatest pastoral care.
Click to expand...
Oh, I totally agree. Thank you for clarifying that this is not a dichotomy. Yes, the instructions we receive, in all things, are for the pastoral best of the Church. When I said I choose the pastoral over the letter, I mean that what is best in a specific situation, as opposed to what is generally best for the Church. There are many things that a national conference, a bishop or a priest may act on in the best interest of that specific nation, diocese or parish. When I spoke of acting pastorally, I was speaking of me, specifically, acting in what I would see as the most charitable manner. I personally, do not know that the “letter of the law” even applies, as there are not letters in the law addressing this specifically.
 
I’m certainly not a big fan of holding hands during the Our Father. My wife and I stopped doing it about 2 yrs ago. The OP should feel no obligation to hold hands if they prefer not to, and it should never be encouraged by the priest.

I personally find it distracting and that it takes away from the focus of receiving communion. We are also not there to show a unity with each other, but to worship God. For me, it lacks reverence and has the feel of a protestant revival service. Even though the practice has been done for over 20 yrs, it is still a recent manmade tradition. It’s just one more thing that seems to have crept into the Mass and changed established traditions, little by little.
 
I brought several Church documents to the said priest… no more holding hands during the mass. 😃
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top