Orans vs. Handholding

[ncjohn]

fix:

Authentic unity is thinking and acting with the mind of the Church. We are not congregationalists.

Very true, but that in no way means we must minimize what is correct.

Unity within the Church still recognizes that people are different, and we must recognize and respect that. “Authentic unity” is thinking with the mind of God.

We are not talking about something that is “correct” or “not correct” here. As numerous posts have pointed out in the thread, while specific priests, bishops, and cardinals have had their views, the Church has specifcally decliined to take an actual position on this issue. It is not a matter of heterodox or orthodox, and again, portraying someone as heterodox for preferring to hold hands (that may not have been your intention and I’m not implying that it was, but many here have suggested exactly that) gets right back to the point of imputing motives and judging people’s devotion, which leads to divisiveness, a lack of respect, and a lack of unity.

Peace,
John

 

[netmilsmom]

ncjohn:

Unity within the Church still recognizes that people are different, and we must recognize and respect that. “Authentic unity” is thinking with the mind of God.

We are not talking about something that is “correct” or “not correct” here. As numerous posts have pointed out in the thread, while specific priests, bishops, and cardinals have had their views, the Church has specifcally decliined to take an actual position on this issue. It is not a matter of heterodox or orthodox, and again, portraying someone as heterodox for preferring to hold hands (that may not have been your intention and I’m not implying that it was, but many here have suggested exactly that) gets right back to the point of imputing motives and judging people’s devotion, which leads to divisiveness, a lack of respect, and a lack of unity.

Peace,
John

The church has never taken an official position on BBQing in the choir loft.
So that’s okay?? I know a whole lot of unity that goes on when we all BBQ in His name.
Somethings go without saying and YOUR Bishop has the final word on it.
Nothing is to be added to the liturgy.

 

[netmilsmom]

ncjohn:

We are not talking about something that is “correct” or “not correct” here. As numerous posts have pointed out in the thread, while specific priests, bishops, and cardinals have had their views, the Church has specifcally decliined to take an actual position on this issue.

And per the Vatican, the norms of a diocese are set by it’s Bishop. If you choose not to obey your Bishop, stating that “The Church” has not taken an official position while your Bishop has , you are in disobedience to that Bishop. You do not live in Vatican City and therefore have a Bishop in charge of your See.

 

[system]

ncjohn:

Unity within the Church still recognizes that people are different, and we must recognize and respect that. “Authentic unity” is thinking with the mind of God.

We are not talking about something that is “correct” or “not correct” here. As numerous posts have pointed out in the thread, while specific priests, bishops, and cardinals have had their views, the Church has specifcally decliined to take an actual position on this issue. It is not a matter of heterodox or orthodox, and again, portraying someone as heterodox for preferring to hold hands (that may not have been your intention and I’m not implying that it was, but many here have suggested exactly that) gets right back to the point of imputing motives and judging people’s devotion, which leads to divisiveness, a lack of respect, and a lack of unity.

Peace,
John

Actually, we are. The Ruberix? does not call for holding hands or orands. We are not supposed to add anything that is not in the ruberix. This is also considered as an attack against priests because they are the ones that are supposed to have gestuures, not us. Also, this holding hands is supposed to symbolize communion, unity. This is wrong in the simple fact that when we receive Holy Communion, we are more in unity then we could ever be with holding hands. It takes away from Holy Mass.

Vicia

 

[netmilsmom]

vicia3:

. This is wrong in the simple fact that when we receive Holy Communion, we are more in unity then we could ever be with holding hands. It takes away from Holy Mass.

Vicia

You are amazing!!
There is a spiritual plane in Our Lord that is bigger than physical touch. If we accept that the host is Our Lord, then why would we need physical touch to feel the Unity of our souls.

He touches us but not with His hands. Why must we touch each other?

Spot On!

 

[otm]

fix:

I have a few observations about this post. Many who oppose this innovation do so because they believe they are compelled to participate. This is very true in my parish. It is no longer one’s private “option”, but almost mandated by the people and the priest. In my parish everyone up on the altar holds hands, too.

These novelties beget other novelties, once we start thinking the mass is our private property we begin to add more and more.

There should be a spirit of obedience and unity in the Latin rite, but for too long in many places it has become an experiment and those who want to be faithful are called mean spirited.

All many ask for is authentic unity and obedience to the mind of the Church.

I would agree with you that there are some who insist that others hold hands during the Our Father, and some parishes can be overwhelming in an apparent insistence on holding hands. I say apparent, as factually it may not be that there is any insistence, but simply the coercion (or perhaps we could agree on the term "peer pressure) of almost everyone appearing to do it. Charity does need to work both ways.

However, I am in an orthodx parish in shich the majority hold hands, and we are not begetting any novelties nor are we going around thinking the Mass is private property.

I don’t disagree about the need for a spirit of obedience; however, the insistence by the vocal objectors that this is an “abuse” or a “violation of the rubrics” is beyond tiresome. If they want to practice Canon Law, they need to get a degree. There are more who do not find this to be a problem (layity, priests, bishops, and the Vatican itself) than there are those who do find it a problem.

And if you disagree about the Vatican not finding it a problem, I would reiterate that the practice has existed for between 35 and 40 years now, through two issues of the GIRM, both issues approved by the Vatican, and both issues soundly ignoring the practice. To anyone who understands Church law, that should be sufficient.

Is it the best possible liturgical act? No. Not because of some perceived law, or lack thereof, but because it disrupts the flow or process of liturgical pattern. The disruption is nowhere near as bad as the complainers would have it. The complaints really resolve more down to a personal issue; or better put, personal space; and that in general is more culturally conditioned than anything. But at the very end of it all, it is not as big a deal as some want to make out of it.

I have yet to hear anyone complain that people won’t hold hands. I only hear complaints that people will hold hands.

 

[robertaf]

Greetings

I get the biggest kick out of the posts on this topic. I never get bored.

One thing is fun is to go back and count how many folks say, “I think” this or that as if it was greatly important. Or “I don’t like” or “it makes ME uncomfortable”. And the big one is the folks who KNOW that God doesn’t like it, either. Wow! That is really knowing the Mind of Christ.

I remember someone once made a comment something like “In the beginning, God created man in His image and ever since, man has tried to return the favor”.

How true.

I like holding hands and very much like the orans position. I also like and respect those who don’t like it. If you sit next to me, I promise not to grab your hand unless you show me you would like me to and will do my best not to hit you in the ear when I raise my hands to pray.

 

[netmilsmom]

otm:

However, I am in an orthodx parish in shich the majority hold hands, and we are not begetting any novelties nor are we going around thinking the Mass is private property.

Define orthodox.

I don’t disagree about the need for a spirit of obedience; however, the insistence by the vocal objectors that this is an “abuse” or a “violation of the rubrics” is beyond tiresome. If they want to practice Canon Law, they need to get a degree.

How about this for degrees…
Education:
St. Philip Neri Elementary, Cleveland; Cathedral Latin High School, Cleveland; John Carroll University, Cleveland; St. Mary Seminary, Cleveland (Master of Divinity); The Ohio Consortium of Seminaries (Doctor of Ministry); Honorary Doctorate: Wheeling Jesuit College and Franciscan University of Steubenville.

This is my reference, how about yours?

There are more who do not find this to be a problem (layity, priests, bishops, and the Vatican itself) than there are those who do find it a problem.

I think you need to do some research into what the Bishops are saying about hand holding. As for the priests and laity, they must answer to the Bishops.

And if you disagree about the Vatican not finding it a problem, I would reiterate that the practice has existed for between 35 and 40 years now, through two issues of the GIRM, both issues approved by the Vatican, and both issues soundly ignoring the practice. To anyone who understands Church law, that should be sufficient.

Things move slowly. And things are changing. With Pope Paul it was an anything goes attitude, JPI, well you know and JPII was a great spiritual man but far from a great disciplinarian.
It hasn’t been touched Yet.
And you are talking about 40 years out of our 2000 year history. 40 years is a blink.

The complaints really resolve more down to a personal issue; or better put, personal space; and that in general is more culturally conditioned than anything. But at the very end of it all, it is not as big a deal as some want to make out of it.

I have yet to hear anyone complain that people won’t hold hands. I only hear complaints that people will hold hands.

Please reread what the Bishop in St. Louis says. He is saying that hand holding is not allowed because of our “personal space”.

 

[robertaf]

Hey

We need a whole new thread where we can compare references.

Wouldn’t that be fun?

Mmmm bet I could really impress some folks with my hubbys degrees. But then, who would know if it was true or not? After all, this is the internet.

I am impressed by education.

 

[netmilsmom]

robertaf:

Hey

We need a whole new thread where we can compare references.

Wouldn’t that be fun?

Mmmm bet I could really impress some folks with my hubbys degrees. But then, who would know if it was true or not? After all, this is the internet.

I am impressed by education.

Wow! Your husband is a Bishop?!?

My Uncle is. I don’t get to see him much, being that he is in Steubenville and I am in Detroit, but you are more than welcome to write the Diocese and ask. Private mail me and I will get you the information to verify.

Tsk, tsk Roberta, it’s not nice to accuse people of lying. This a Catholic forum, lying on it would be like a mortal sin! Accusing someone of making up tales is like passing wind, the first to yell is normally the one doing it. What are you hiding?

 

[palmas85]

ncjohn:

First, as to following the Spirit or the rules, IMHO, our primary responsibility in life is to discern the workings of the Spirit and follow them faithfully. Rules, no matter how well intentioned, or how much thought and prayer was given to them, are still man-made and cannot overrule what our consciences tell us, as our conscience is considered to be God talking to us through the Spirit. In a perfect world there would be no conflict between rules and “movement of the Spirit” as the rules would be perfectly thought out and our discernment of the Spirit would never be in errror. Unfortunately, we were not created with perfect knowledge and can only do our best to discern the Spirit. While we are to give great weight to the “rules” in our discernment, we are still obligated at the end to act within the dictates of our conscience, always aware that it can be improperly formed and that we must be ready to repent if we find it in error. Slavishness to the rules without concern for the forming of the heart is also dangerous, as both Jesus and Paul made clear in numerous places, as we are saved by our love, not by the rules and “works of the law.”

As to Mom of 5’s husband and his reasons for converting, I agree that some may intellectually come to a conclusion of where they believe God is truly to be found. I believe though that many or most come to a change of faith tradition (or the stirrings of a call to faith) based on what they see in a faith community. I would tend to disagree about that necessarily being a bad thing. I recently left our home parish because it has been totally transformed by the priest, who is part of the new breed of young priests coming out of the seminary glorifying the “old Church” and totally rejecting Vatican 2. We now travel 45 minutes over the mountains to another parish where the call to gospel life as a result of prayer and discernment of God’s will is abundantly reflected in the community.

The highest praise we can give God is to love Him through His creation. The “final exam” is the parable of the sheep and goats, where Jesus makes clear that it is not those who are praying “Lord, Lord” who will enter the kingdom, but those who are feeding the hungry, housing the homeless, etc. In other words, we will enter the kingdom if we praise him by tending to his presence in each other. It is seeing his presence in a loving and welcoming community that will draw people to the Catholic faith. Without that loving community, I would suggest that the Catholic faith is not truly present.

While I agree that joining, or changing parishes, for the “warm, fuzzy” boost to our self-esteem cannot be the goal or the purpose, nor can doing so for coercive reasons such as a future spouse’s demands, God works slowly and patiently however in bringing us to Himself. I know I was a “pew potato” for years after coming back to the Church as God slowly put people in my path to model the life I was being called to. You have to get them to the table before you can feed them, and if the table isn’t attractive, who is going to come? It’s God’s work to “set the hook” when it’s time. It’s our job to “throw out the bait” by being the loving, welcoming people He made us to be. As John said, “you cannot claim to love the God you cannot see if you don’t love the neighbor you can see.” James makes it even clearer that it isn’t faith unless it’s taking action. People are converted and transformed by the loving example of God’s people, so it is only natural that they will be drawn to those who display that. Over time, transformation deepens as we learn to live that love ourselves.

As OTM commented, I think there is a long and still devloping story here and we can safely leave these two people in God’s loving hands.

Peace,
John

Well then I guess that the Church was wrong over the majority of the past 2,000 years or so except for the time after Vativan II. I recall that the Church always required that we follow rules, some of which didn’t make a lot of sense then or now. I also thought or was taught that yes we were to use our own minds but I never knew that I could pick and choose which beliefs I would keep and which I could ignore because I felt the Spirit moved me.

I guess Martin Luther could have said the Spirit moved him. And probably Calvin and Wycliff and Huss as well. I truly believe one of the main reasons the Church has rules is to keep us from doing exactly what the Protestant Churches do, namely, everybody interpreting Scripture the way they feel. Accepting and rejecting at will. Everybody believing what they want to, and everybody feeling warm and happy and satisfied with themselves because of it.

I don’t really believe that the purpose of religion is to make me feel good or self satisfied. It is to praise honor and worship God. He created us, not the other way around.

 

[fix]

ncjohn:

Unity within the Church still recognizes that people are different, and we must recognize and respect that. “Authentic unity” is thinking with the mind of God.

Thinking with the mind of the Church is being faithful to the will of Christ. Do you disagree?

 

[fix]

otm:

I don’t disagree about the need for a spirit of obedience; however, the insistence by the vocal objectors that this is an “abuse” or a “violation of the rubrics” is beyond tiresome. If they want to practice Canon Law, they need to get a degree. There are more who do not find this to be a problem (layity, priests, bishops, and the Vatican itself) than there are those who do find it a problem.

That argument does not prove that it is not an abuse. The Church allows many abuses for certain reasons. That each abuse is not corrected does not mean it is not an abuse. BTW, as you know canon law says the faithful have a right to make their needs known to the authorities.

And if you disagree about the Vatican not finding it a problem, I would reiterate that the practice has existed for between 35 and 40 years now, through two issues of the GIRM, both issues approved by the Vatican, and both issues soundly ignoring the practice. To anyone who understands Church law, that should be sufficient.

It is controversial and the American bishops choose to ignore it. Again, that does not mean it is right, only that they choose to ignore it for a perceived greater good.

The disruption is nowhere near as bad as the complainers would have it.

Why is your opinion superior to those who complain about it?

The complaints really resolve more down to a personal issue; or better put, personal space; and that in general is more culturally conditioned than anything. But at the very end of it all, it is not as big a deal as some want to make out of it.

Among other points those that reject the practice maintain it was introduced under a private initiative which is illicit. The mass is not our private property.

I have yet to hear anyone complain that people won’t hold hands. I only hear complaints that people will hold hands.

That is correct. Why would someone who is doing something they should not be doing have the temerity to impose it on others?

 

[fix]

robertaf:

Greetings

I get the biggest kick out of the posts on this topic. I never get bored.

One thing is fun is to go back and count how many folks say, “I think” this or that as if it was greatly important. Or “I don’t like” or “it makes ME uncomfortable”. And the big one is the folks who KNOW that God doesn’t like it, either. Wow! That is really knowing the Mind of Christ.

I remember someone once made a comment something like “In the beginning, God created man in His image and ever since, man has tried to return the favor”.

How true.

I like holding hands and very much like the orans position. I also like and respect those who don’t like it. If you sit next to me, I promise not to grab your hand unless you show me you would like me to and will do my best not to hit you in the ear when I raise my hands to pray.

What else would you introduce into the mass by your personal initiative?

 

[ncjohn]

palmas85:

I also thought or was taught that yes we were to use our own minds but I never knew that I could pick and choose which beliefs I would keep and which I could ignore because I felt the Spirit moved me.

You might want to spend some time with the CCC. It clearly states that we are obligated to follow our consciences even if they lead us against the “rules.” It acknowledges that we can be misinformed, as I noted, and that we must be ready to repent if we find that to be so, but we cannot ignore our conscience as it is considered the voice of God speaking to us.

Even the CCC acknowledges that it is not a “one size fits all” and that it is not absolutely applicable to all situations and cultures at all times.

I am not addressing dogmatic or doctinal beliefs here. Those are “set in stone” and if one doesn’t believe them they should not claim to be Catholic. There are many other teachings in the church however, this topic included, that do not fall into that category and are open to questioning. The church has made many grave errors in its teachings through its history, and has been responsible for great pain to many people through those errors. They have only overcome them because people were willing to prayerfully step forward and question them. Questioning does not make one a “cafeteria Catholic”; it makes one a seeker of truth.

Peace,
John

 

[ncjohn]

fix:

Thinking with the mind of the Church is being faithful to the will of Christ. Do you disagree?

The Church is not infallible in all things and makes errors. God does not make errors.

 

[fix]

ncjohn:

The Church is not infallible in all things and makes errors. God does not make errors.

The issue is not infallibility, but authority. The Church speaks for God and acts in His authority on earth. Unless the command is unjust, it ought to be obeyed.

 

[fix]

ncjohn:

You might want to spend some time with the CCC. It clearly states that we are obligated to follow our consciences even if they lead us against the “rules.” It acknowledges that we can be misinformed, as I noted, and that we must be ready to repent if we find that to be so, but we cannot ignore our conscience as it is considered the voice of God speaking to us.

1785 In the formation of conscience the Word of God is the light for our path,54 we must assimilate it in faith and prayer and put it into practice. We must also examine our conscience before the Lord’s Cross. We are assisted by the gifts of the Holy Spirit, aided by the witness or advice of others and guided by the authoritative teaching of the Church.55

I am unsure of your point. In issues of faith and morals we are required to form our consciences correctly. Invlountarily poorly formed consciences I think would be very rare in this culture.

Even the CCC acknowledges that it is not a “one size fits all” and that it is not absolutely applicable to all situations and cultures at all times.

Please explain.

I am not addressing dogmatic or doctinal beliefs here. Those are “set in stone” and if one doesn’t believe them they should not claim to be Catholic. There are many other teachings in the church however, this topic included, that do not fall into that category and are open to questioning.

It is true we may question Church disciplines and liturgal “norms”, but that does not mean we are free to be obstinate.

The church has made many grave errors in its teachings through its history, and has been responsible for great pain to many people through those errors.

You mean some folks in the Church, because the Church is sinless.

 

[ncjohn]

fix:

The issue is not infallibility, but authority. The Church speaks for God and acts in His authority on earth. Unless the command is unjust, it ought to be obeyed.

My statement was that “Authentic unity is thinking with the mind of God.” The Church is a human institution and does not have, and cannot have, authentic unity since that would require omniscience. Human beings, as hard as we may try, cannot think with the mind of God, and thus there will always be uncertainties which will lead to lack of unity since not all will agree.

Beyond that, as has been said ad nauseum, the Church has specifically not made any command here. There is no dogma, there is no doctrine, there is not even “consistent teaching” or “definitive statement.” You are free to not want to hold hands and I am free to want to. I hold nothing against you for not wanting to nor do I consider you to be “wrong” or less devoted for that position. If you want to judge my devotion, my piety, or my Catholicity based on the way I hold my hands while I praise God, I guess that’s your prerogative. Since the subject has long since been beaten into the ground now however, I will move on to more important topics. I thank you though for challenging me to examine my beliefs and my reasons for them; that is always helpful to me in my journey.

Peace,
John

 

[robertaf]

netmil(name removed by moderator):

Wow! Your husband is a Bishop?!?

My Uncle is. I don’t get to see him much, being that he is in Steubenville and I am in Detroit, but you are more than welcome to write the Diocese and ask. Private mail me and I will get you the information to verify.

Tsk, tsk Roberta, it’s not nice to accuse people of lying. This a Catholic forum, lying on it would be like a mortal sin! Accusing someone of making up tales is like passing wind, the first to yell is normally the one doing it. What are you hiding?

Oh my Gosh!!! My husband was made Bishop and I didn’t know it?
Where did that come from? My husband isn’t even a Priest or Deacon. Degrees? Yes, but what does that make him. Made him good at his chosen Profession but didn’t make him a good man. He would have been that without the degrees. In fact, he rarely talks of his education or his business success. Just a nice, humble guy.
How nice for you that your Uncle is a Bishop. I am sorry but I missed the point you are making. Would you care to elaborate?

No, I did not call you a liar. I simply pointed out that we are on the Internet. I have been on the Internet for over a dozen years and know as a fact that you could introduce yourself as a zebra and if zebras could type, who could question you. Folks come on line claiming all sorts of things and sadly even do great harm on occaisions. I do not say this is one of them, I just say I don’t believe everything someone tells me.