Raising hands during Our Father?

[otjm]

At one parish here, the faithful were told not to fold their hands in prayer but to raise them . The reason given: “That’s what they did in the Old Church”. I personally found this ironic as the priest told us in modern English using an electronic device under electric lighting while standing on synthetic fiber carpeting in a room heated from a gas-fired boiler.

I recall the crew of Catholic Answers Radio telling listeners a litany of postures and gestures not required of Mass attendees. Many continue out of a herd mentality or a family member or spouse is pushing this ‘tradition’.

Holding of hands during The Lord’s Prayer is another phony ‘tradition’ many get goaded into. A boon for stalkers as I know individuals who have found themselves in uncomfortable situations with strangers flanking them and doing a bit more than just holding hands.

I was given a backhand across the mid-section by a woman who sat in the pew before me, to prompt me to join hands with her. *It’s not in the Rubrics *I muttered, but she would not accept that. She became rather cross with me.

When is a “tradition” no longer phony, but real?

 

[otjm]

Only the Priest should be raising his hands during the Our Father in the orans posture. The laity are not at all to do this, nor are the Deacons. Yet, disobedience (mostly out of ignorance) has led to this being a very common practice in Novus Ordo Masses. After having attended the Tridentine Mass several times I am afraid I cannot bring myself to attend Novus Ordo Masses anymore. Not because there is anything wrong with the Mass itself. It’s just that the way the Masses are being done is atrocious. Reverence is all but dead in this new Mass. From the Priests to the laity it has become so watered down it takes me back to my protestant days. And that is a very unfortunate thing to have to say about the Divine Liturgy.

You can’t disobey a non existing law.

I don’t know here you go to Mass - diocese or parish - but I have been to Mass in multiple parishes in 6 states and found the vast majority of them to be reverent and very well done. As to watered down, you might want to read Sacrosanctum Concilium.

 

[otjm]

I have a picture that dates back to somewhere between late 1964 and early 1966, and everyone is holding hands while saying the Our Father.Whether it is true or not, I have heard that in general, it takes something like 40 to 50 years for something to become a tradition in the Church, and that picture indicates that holding hands during the Our Father fits within that span of time.

As to it not being allowed, I have no doubt that Rome got wind of this not long after it happened; it is not as if bishops, priests and various laity have been unknown to take issues to the Vatican.

The GIRM has been redone repeatedly; 1969, 1980, 1972, 1975, 2002, and 2011 (I don’t think I missed any), and it is at best specious to argue that with that long a history of holding hands, and that many revisions, that Rome is incapable of addressing the issue. Add to that various documents which have come out over those years concerning the Mass and abuses, and it appears that this is not an issue that Rome chooses to address.

And it continues to be an issue with people, with some, an issue of undue and unnecessary vehemence. To which we can add that the USCCB at one point appeared ready to address the issue of the Orans position - supposedly to ask Rome for specific permission on the matter. It finally was not pursued, and so the issue remains unregulated.

All sorts of answers are about (including one from Dr. Peters, whom I really like - but this ultimately is a personal opinion). But the most resounding answer is the silence from Rome.

It also seems to be one of the more popular topics for a thread; at least this thread exhibits more charitable responses than some in the past, where people became downright nasty.

There is no more a rule to prohibit holding hands, or raising them in the Orans position, than there is prohibiting one from palms together, fingers interlaced, or fingers straight out, or hands in pockets, or arms folded across one’s chest. There simply is no rubric, so those who say it is not allowed are expressing a purely personal opinion.

What bothers me is not what the person next to me does or doesn’t do; it is rather the lack of charity - on both the part of the hand holders (prior post - woman thumps poster for not holding hands) and on the part of those who refuse to do so when the person next to them extends their hand. Charity is lacking on the part of both.

For those who want to hold hands - if the person next to you does not appear to want to, let it go.

For those who don’t want to: if the person next to you reached out, and you looked up and suddenly saw that it was Christ - would you hold hands? Considering that we are told that we are to see Christ in one another, think before you answer.

 

[Catholic4Christ]

comparing two completely different things does not contribute to the discussion, as well as being a logical fallacy.

Obviously the Macarena is an ad extremum example. Honestly I used it as an example because it made me laugh the most to imagine it happening. I personally don’t care that much what slightly unusual things people do at Mass as long as it isn’t distracting or required of me. I was just using a silly example to make the point that a lot of things aren’t specified in the rubrics for the laity, since we’re the laity. Sometimes I discretely strike my chest at “forgive us our trespasses.” Works for me, so if someone else wants to do something else (like the orans position), that’s fine by me. I think the best argument against it is because it is a priestly position in liturgy, so it may for some be a blurring of roles.

To be honest I don’t think this would be a big discussion back in the days when most of the “physical” functions of the liturgy were taken up by the celebrant, servers, and choir. If I wanted to kneel or sit for the whole Mass, or pray the rosary, or lift my palms, I wouldn’t be going against the liturgy because my participation in the liturgy didn’t have specific actions to take. Masses are in dialogue now, so we worry too much I think about whether we (or more likely others) are doing the “right” thing.

Basically, I’m not in favor of the laity using the orans position in a liturgical setting because there’s not a clear reason as to why it is done; but if it helps them pray, power to the people!

 

[otjm]

Obviously the Macarena is an ad extremum example. Honestly I used it as an example because it made me laugh the most to imagine it happening. I personally don’t care that much what slightly unusual things people do at Mass as long as it isn’t distracting or required of me. I was just using a silly example to make the point that a lot of things aren’t specified in the rubrics for the laity, since we’re the laity. Sometimes I discretely strike my chest at “forgive us our trespasses.” Works for me, so if someone else wants to do something else (like the orans position), that’s fine by me. I think the best argument against it is because it is a priestly position in liturgy, so it may for some be a blurring of roles.

To be honest I don’t think this would be a big discussion back in the days when most of the “physical” functions of the liturgy were taken up by the celebrant, servers, and choir. If I wanted to kneel or sit for the whole Mass, or pray the rosary, or lift my palms, I wouldn’t be going against the liturgy because my participation in the liturgy didn’t have specific actions to take. Masses are in dialogue now, so we worry too much I think about whether we (or more likely others) are doing the “right” thing.

Basically, I’m not in favor of the laity using the orans position in a liturgical setting because there’s not a clear reason as to why it is done; but if it helps them pray, power to the people!

The Macarena is an irrelevant example because it has nothing to do with prayer.

Holding hands is a sign of unity - “Our” Father, not “My” Father.

The orans position is a prayer posture that goes back to the Old Testament.

Frankly, I don’t have a dog in the fight; if the dicastery for the Liturgy comes out tomorrow and bans it, that is fine with me; if they come in and suggest it, or recommend it, or require it, I will willingly go along. It is such a minor issue that it doesn’t get on my radar.

What does get on my radar is people saying it isn’t allowed (there is no liturgical posture for hands at this point in the Mass) as that is a false statement.

There have been others who come back about doing cartwheels down the isle - which also is irrelevant, and the comments came across as an angry response rather than a thoughtful one.

I don’t have a problem with someone saying they don’t like it. That is perfectly fine. If they want it banned, that is fine too, although after 50 years, that is not real likely.

It appears your comment was in jest; not all other similar comments have been, and it is hard enough to have a conversation about things people don’t like without it spinning out of civil discourse.

People have strong feelings about liturgy, usually based on intense likes or dislikes. and when a conversation starts down a road of emotional pokes, it adds to the frustration and conveys a lack of willingness to discuss. Which is another way of saying “my way or the highway”.