Orans vs. Handholding

  • Thread starter Thread starter Mot_Juste
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Basically, from the sites I have read. There is nothing either saying it’s OK or it’s wrong to hold hands during the Lord’s Prayer. However, I go along with one site that says the people who want to hold hands should be able to do so but the people who do want to hold hands should understand that those who don’t want to hold hands are just going by current norms and don’t have “something against” them.

Personally, I don’t see anything wrong with holding hands during the Lord’s Prayer. I don’t do it but I don’t look down upon the people who want to do this practice. I just think more education is needed on both sides so people that don’t know about this controversy will know why some people don’t hold hands and won’t hold hands.
 
40.png
Exporter:
You are ASSUMING that a nonhandholder feels pressure if they do not hold hands. You are wrong.
Click to expand...
I was inspired to post this poll based on the conversations in another thread about the topic. There were several people in that thread who described being very uncomfortable when the people around them start holding hands. One person described their family’s relief at avoiding it when they were able to have a whole pew to themselves. Another person said that “every mass is stressful” because of not wanting to hold hands and also not wanting to be the “odd one out”.

I did not mean my original post to say that all non-handholders feel that sort of pressure. I’m sorry that it came across that way.

–Bill
 
Mot Juste,

Thank You. I understand. I sit on the very BACK ROW to avoid this imposition.
 
Recently, while away on a camping trip, we attended Mass in a small rural parish (actually, it was a Mission Church). They had folding chairs with no kneelers, so we knew we were in trouble long before Mass started! Everyone was busily chatting away prior to Mass beginning, that drives me nuts! Then, everyone was invited to stand and greet each other, another practice I detest! Anyway, because there were no kneelers, everyone stood during the Consecration, except my husband and I, we knelt on the floor. During the Lord’s Prayer, they spanned the aisles to hold hands with each other (except our aisle, we stood with heads bowed and hands folded). I expect there were a number of people staring or glaring at us, but I didn’t worry about it. We did what we know is proper and correct. The ony one we have to please is the Lord.
 
Using folding chairs does not automatically mean you are in trouble. Although I have serious problems with what you described the Church I went to in Massachusetts was closed for almost a year due to asbestos removal. They had the mass in the gymnasium of the parish center. Of course there were no kneelers so people stood during the consecration. It’s better to have mass in this situation then having no masses for almost a year.

We had a priest friend of ours say a mass at our house one time and it was a wonderful experience for all of us. The bottom line is it doesn’t matter where a Mass is celebrated, if you give the Mass the reverence it deserves then there is no problem. Again, the real abuses are the liturgical dancers and priests adding their own words to the consecration and things like that. The other stuff is minor and if you let it take away the reverence of the Mass then I think’s it you that has the problem.

Liturgical dancers takes the reverence away from the mass for everyone. Orans and hand holding doesn’t take the reverence away from anyone unless you let it.
 
40.png
SleepyGuy:
I’ve seen this in Italy and Mexico, not exactly Protestant strong holds.
Click to expand...
As an aside:

Protestant Missionaries have made simply TREMENDOUS inroads into Mexico. Many of the Catholic Churches there are having trouble much as we are here in the States. The Protestants introduce all the bells and whistles, handholding, community songs, hand clappping, healings, speaking in tongues the whole bit, along with hearty doses of anti Catholic tehology. All in all a very emotional experience. The people basically confused at the direction the Catholic Church is going, and desperately searcing for spirituality, convert and turn their energy and vast devotion to them, most of whom are fundamentalist Pentacostals. In some states such as Chiapas, Oaxaca and Tabasco, there is often open warfare between the Catholics and Prtiestants in the various towns.

It is of no small coincidence that these missionary efforts were mostly unsuccessful until the mid-seventies to early eighties when liberation theology took hold among most Latin American Priests and the Orthodox Catholic beliefs were held up to ridicule and derision. Another big problem in Mexico is a tremendous shortage of Priests and other religious. When you factor in that most of the Priests there are of a very liberal nature to begin with, the problems can be almost insurmountable.

As a defense or perhaps in complete resignation or maybe in a sincere sense of ecumenical dialogue , the Catholic Church in Mexico has pretty much allowed almost ANY form of worship as long as it is conducted in a Catholic Church. This includes the worship of La Santissima Muerte in which death, depicted as a female skeleton is worshipped as the co-reedemer along with Jesus Christ.
 
It’s funny how so many of the rubrics aren’t taught, but everyone learns these.

I heard Cardinal Arinze from the Congregation for the Sacred Liturgy discuss this…he held that just because something isn’t in the GIRM doesn’t mean we are free to do it…I believe he sees that leading to chaos. He pointed out that the orans position is called for specifically for the priest, but never for the laity. And he stated handholding spontaneously by families, couples, etc. was appropriate if they wanted to, but should not become a common posture for the whole church.

I think the US Bishops were going to submit handholding to the Vatican, but changed their minds. In the mean time it spread widely in anticipation.

Standing during the consecration is the norm, but requires a bow when the priest genuflects. We in the US have an idult to kneel.
 
I think handholding is always inapporiate, but the orans position is highly traditional. Now it isn’t set out in the rubrics, so I don’t think the laymen should do it without permission from their bishop. If the ordinary gives permission, I see no problem with orans.
 
Both postures are bad ideas, but seeing as how the USCCB has explicitly asked that congregations use orans instead of handholding I would say that option is slightly better.
 
I’ve just got to say…We have hashed this issue out MANY times…To my way of thinking it is a waste of time…People and parishes will do what they want in re. this matter…What is the big deal? You guys need to get a life…
 
Andreas Hofer:
Both postures are bad ideas, but seeing as how the USCCB has explicitly asked that congregations use orans instead of handholding I would say that option is slightly better.
Click to expand...
I would just add, and perhaps someone has already said this, that in the Eastern Churches, we do use the orans posture for the Our Father. But that is something particular to the eastern rite. We also stand the entire liturgy and do not kneel except for some weekdays in Lent. But that is eastern tradition, not western. When I am in a Roman rite Church, I follow the customs of the Roman rite.
 
40.png
Flounder:
It’s funny how so many of the rubrics aren’t taught, but everyone learns these.

I heard Cardinal Arinze from the Congregation for the Sacred Liturgy discuss this…he held that just because something isn’t in the GIRM doesn’t mean we are free to do it…I believe he sees that leading to chaos. He pointed out that the orans position is called for specifically for the priest, but never for the laity. And he stated handholding spontaneously by families, couples, etc. was appropriate if they wanted to, but should not become a common posture for the whole church.

I think the US Bishops were going to submit handholding to the Vatican, but changed their minds. In the mean time it spread widely in anticipation.

Standing during the consecration is the norm, but requires a bow when the priest genuflects. We in the US have an idult to kneel.
Click to expand...
I may be wrong, but I believe that worldwide, the norm is that people kneel during the consecration, and that the indult in the United States is that we kneel for a longer period of time before and after the consecration.

And as an aside, hand holding goes back to the mid to late 1960s; it was subsequent to the wide practice that the bishops considered submitting the issue and decided not to.
 
40.png
otm:
I may be wrong, but I believe that worldwide, the norm is that people kneel during the consecration, and that the indult in the United States is that we kneel for a longer period of time before and after the consecration.
Click to expand...
You are quite correct. Despite being off-subject, the universal norm is to kneel (but) for (only) the Consecration itself. This is true even in the absence of kneelers (as in some of the great European Cathedrals).

To the other point addressed by flounder, prior to the issuance of the new GIRM, the U.S. Bishops did submit a request to specifically allow the orans (to prevent hand holding) but as I understand it there was no response from the Holy See. That is, until Cardinal Arinze clarified things in that now-famous interview.

In my opinion, to allow the orans in order to prevent hand-holding (as the USCCB was proposing) makes absolutely no sense. The faithful will be sticking their hands out to either side, overlapping, only eventually to realize that it is more efficient just to hold hands anyway!

I think they should both be explicitly discouraged.
 
I like handholding during the Lords Prayer. I also like the “sign of peace”. I grew up in the old church, 50’s. It was reverent and beautiful. However, it is my opinion that turning and smiling is a nice gesture of welcome. Holding hands is a beautiful sign of unity. Our priest had something to say last Sunday that I think made a lot of sense. “Piety should be in the heart and soul, not on the face”, not exact quote, but the same meaning. He said that as christians we should show friendship and happy faces.

If you don’t want to hold hands, don’t, but don’t take it away from those of us who love it. I still think that God does not care, “orans”, “no orans”, “hand holding” or no “hand holding”. He has to be amused at these posts. What He really cares about is what is in our hearts, not whether or not we “worship correctly”. He is probably wondering why we waste our time discussing these things when He has told us to “visit the sick”, “feed the hungary” etc. , but then, He must have an enormous sense of humor, and so should we!

Love and peace
 
But we also show our faith through our actions. One form is for false unity and the other is to minimize the role of the priest. Both are equally wrong and quazi-protestant.

The real unity is for people to conversate and perform duties to the parish together. Mass shouldnt be a 40 min jamboree in wich we try to cram in unity, pleasure, worship, solemenity, sacrifice, converstaions ect. Mass is for sacrifice and solemn worship, coffe and cake can come afterwards.
 
Mom of 5:
. I still think that God does not care, “orans”, “no orans”, “hand holding” or no “hand holding”. He has to be amused at these posts. What He really cares about is what is in our hearts, not whether or not we “worship correctly”. He is probably wondering why we waste our time discussing these things when He has told us to “visit the sick”, “feed the hungary” etc. , but then, He must have an enormous sense of humor, and so should we!
Click to expand...
How do you know what God cares about? Just because you feel that way? How do you know that He doesn’t care whether or not we concentrate on the community over Him? If God doesn’t care at all about how we worship, why is it right to be Catholic over any other Christian religion?
And why do you think that those who want to concentrate on Him during His words are any less concerned with visiting the sick or feeding the hungry as He directed?
God may have a sense of humor, but He may also be like a good father who pays for a child to go off to college. The child gets into the community there and forgets to call home. It doesn’t mean that the father thinks it’s funny. Nor that he is happy with the situation, just accepting.
If Jesus himself were standing on that altar, would you be looking to hold someone’s hand? Who knows, maybe you would, but I would be on my face knowing I am unworthy to meet His glance. He IS there. We all need to realize that.
 
40.png
A.Pelliccio:
But we also show our faith through our actions. One form is for false unity and the other is to minimize the role of the priest. Both are equally wrong and quazi-protestant.

The real unity is for people to conversate and perform duties to the parish together. Mass shouldnt be a 40 min jamboree in wich we try to cram in unity, pleasure, worship, solemenity, sacrifice, converstaions ect. Mass is for sacrifice and solemn worship, coffe and cake can come afterwards.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you have a different experience than I do, but I have not met anyone who says the Our Father with their hands in the orans position who is trying to minimize the role of the priest. I will grant that there are liberals who take that track, but we have few of them out here; most of the people out here are really intent on praying and praising God. the orand position comes from ancient times; it is prevelent in many icons of the Eastern rites, and it is also a familiar prayer position for some charismatics, none of whom were or are trying to minimize the functions and status of the priest. Whether or not it is the best of liturgical form in the Roamn rite may be a different question, but the fact that some liberals are bent on desacramentalizing the priesthood is not reason to condemn its use as such by the many who have no such agenda.

And as to false unity: it seems to me I read something in St Paul about the unity we have in Christ; in fact, I seem to recall that the Church has an offial teaching about it - something about being the Body of Christ. Doesn’t sound like false unity to me. The phrase “false unity” sounds to me a little bit like comments I have heard in other threads by some Catholics who refer to others in the pew as “strangers”. I have never in my life (and that’s a bit of time, mind you) gone into a Catholic church and found a stranger there. I have found others who are members of the Body of Christ, with whom I did not yet have a personal acquaintence; but strangers? Never found one yet. False unity? what exactly, then, is your idea of real unity? Are we not united in prayer? Does not the word Communion mean unity? Or am I missing something?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top