Should hand holding at the Our Father be a cause for division among the Faithful?

  • Thread starter Thread starter ChristianVet
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Walking_Home said:
I once was listening to a radio talk given by a Buddhist monk in Sri Lanka who ridiculed Christians for allowing local drum beating in their churches without knowing that those **beats in fact were chants of praise for the Buddha. **This could be just one instance of unstudied absorption of local traditions that are per se incompatible with what we celebrate.
Click to expand...
When Mother Angelica first put the rosary on shortwave radio, she got letters from overseas thanking her for the “Buddist Prayer.” Perhaps she ought to have studied this more to see if the rosary is inconsitant with what we celebrate?
 
chicago said:
When Mother Angelica first put the rosary on shortwave radio, she got letters from overseas thanking her for the “Buddist Prayer.” Perhaps she ought to have studied this more to see if the rosary is inconsitant with what we celebrate?
Click to expand...
Nice try—but the Mass in which the Arch. presided–is just inculturation run amok—a method of de-conversion.
 
Apryl said:
This is a topic that I happen to be very interested in myself, as I was told from someone in another diocese years ago, ‘we aren’t supposed to hold hands during the Our Father’, and have waited to hear something in my own diocese.

IMO, what you describe is a really good illustration of why holding hands during the Our Father (or any other part of the mass) should be avoided.

Consider this: You and your mother were both distracted from the prayer over ‘should I hold hands or not’ and ‘now she’s mad at me’.

There is no way I will believe you weren’t distracted on some level at this point. When you and your mother should have been closest, you had this whole ‘oh, no’ running through your mind.
Click to expand...
Well, you’re exactly right, we were distracted.

All of this would be so unnecessary if the bishops, either on a national or international level, would just set the record straight – and say directly, what we should be doing and saying at Mass.

If not it seems we still have three groups of people at Mass – those who make things happen, those who watch things happen, and those who wonder what happened!

(okay… I borrowed that old joke…😛 )
 
adrift said:
I disagree with your assessment. The GIRM is a positive document that is a fact. It is not a matter of interpretation. It states what can be done.
Click to expand...
I’ve seen this misstatement so many times on these threads that one would have thought it was cleared up by now. The GIRM is a positive document to the extent that if it says to do something, everybody is supposed to do it. It is silent on the issue of hand posture at this time, so any argument that one can’t hold hands because they aren’t told to also says that they cannot fold their hands, clasp their hands, put them in their pockets, or any other position since we aren’t told to.

What is true is that no one is allowed to *direct *a parish to hold hands–or to NOT hold hands for that matter. That includes the priest or the liturgical director or anyone else. It is a matter of personal initiative that those adjacent to a person can choose to ignore or participate in. I will grant that it has become the “norm” in many parishes, but that does not make it a requirement, nor does it allow anyone to impose it on someone who does not wish to do it.

To rehash hopefully for the last time, there is ample evidence that it is permitted. First by the famous 11 Noticiae 1975 in which the question was asked about holding hands in lieu of the sign of peace. The answer was that holding hands could not be substituted, but there was specifically NOT any prohibition against the holding hands itself. To the best of my knowledge, that is the only formal Vatican communication on the issue. At least I have not seen anyone produce anything else, however hard they have tried to twist some documents that had nothing to do with the topic.

The USCCB was asked about hand postures and replied that no position is prescribed for the hands during the Our Father. Had there been a rule against a specific posture, or had there been a requirement for a specific posture, they would have noted it rather than saying that there isn’t one.

Redemptionis Sacramentum was issued to deal with ltiturgical abuses, big and small. There was conspicuously no mention of this in that document. One would go far beyond the bounds of credibility to try to say that maybe the Vatican just wasn’t aware of the issue and inadvertently “skipped over” what is probably the most discussed item out there.

In the end, based on Canon Law (I believe Canon 23), the practice meets the requirements to be considered a legitimate “custom” in the Church, having been around unabated and in widespread use for the required length of time.

I fully agree that it should never be imposed on anyone, nor should anyone’s piety or devotion be questioned based on that decision. But the reverse is also true, and one’s piety and devotion should not be questioned for finding valuein it. Archbishop Chaput is quite right when he says that it is permissible but that people should act with charity in remembering that those around us may not share our preferences and values on the issue.

The Church has made clear on numerous occasions that they do not wish to impose rigidity on minor items of preference. We really need to just start acting charitably with each other and stop creating rigidity where the Church says it is not intended.

Peace,
 
We all hold hands during the Our Father at my parish. The only exception to this are the two families from England.

I have heard and read all the arguments for and against this practice, but still feel in my heart that hand holding is the Right thing to do. God created us to be a family, and in my mind, what better way of showing family love then to be holding hands during the Our Father.
 
adrift said:
Provide evidence that this is a misstatement.
Click to expand...
Just provided a whole post full.

In return, please provide a single statement from someone in authority that supports your position. Not some apologist that agrees with you, but someone in authority.

Those to whom the authority was delegated specifically say there is no prescribed position. No one in authority in the Vatican has contradicted that.

I truly do sympathize with those who have been imposed upon. That is wrong and uncharitable. But it is a permissible act at this time for those who wish to do so.
 
chicago said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walking_Home
Nice try—but the Mass in which the Arch. presided–is just inculturation run amok—a method of de-conversion.

Or, perhaps, simply de-Romanization.
Click to expand...
De-christianization more likely.
 
ncjohn said:
Just provided a whole post full.

In return, please provide a single statement from someone in authority that supports your position. Not some apologist that agrees with you, but someone in authority.

Those to whom the authority was delegated specifically say there is no prescribed position. No one in authority in the Vatican has contradicted that.

I truly do sympathize with those who have been imposed upon. That is wrong and uncharitable. But it is a permissible act at this time for those who wish to do so.
Click to expand...
Then everyone should be holding hands with themselves–since once a person extends the hand to another —this very act is an imposition.
 
love4mary said:
We all hold hands during the Our Father at my parish. The only exception to this are the two families from England.

I have heard and read all the arguments for and against this practice, but still feel in my heart that hand holding is the Right thing to do. God created us to be a family, and in my mind, what better way of showing family love then to be holding hands during the Our Father.
Click to expand...
Hi Love4Mary,
Please don’t take this the wrong way but… does your family really hold hands? You want to show that we’re all a family at church… when does your family hold hands like that?

I’m just asking because my family doesn’t hold hands other than with children. Maybe my family is really weird, but I can’t even imagine, say, my father and an uncle holding hands. Shaking hands, yes, but holding hands? Isn’t that something couples do?
 
ncjohn said:
Just provided a whole post full.

In return, please provide a single statement from someone in authority that supports your position. Not some apologist that agrees with you, but someone in authority.

Those to whom the authority was delegated specifically say there is no prescribed position. No one in authority in the Vatican has contradicted that.

I truly do sympathize with those who have been imposed upon. That is wrong and uncharitable. But it is a permissible act at this time for those who wish to do so.
Click to expand...
Originally Posted by adrift View Post
I disagree with your assessment. The GIRM is a positive document that is a fact. It is not a matter of interpretation. It states what can be done.
Click to expand...
Nothing in your post addressed the issue of this statement being a misstatement. You quote many documents but none dispute that GIRM tells you what you may do not what you can’t do.
 
chicago said:
All things objectively good can be taken up and perfected in Christ.
Click to expand...
Those who see the disintegration of the Mass as beneficial would also see its manipulation as good.

katobs.se/art_intew_ranjith.htm

VATICAN CITY (UCAN) – Archbishop Albert Malcolm Ranjith Patabendige Don, secretary of the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Discipline of the Sacraments, …

Adaptations to local cultural practices have also been tried, though not always with good results. The use of the vernacular has at times helped in generating a theological vocabulary in the local idiom that eventually could be helpful to evangelization and the presentation of the message of the Gospel to those of non-Christian religious traditions, which constitute the overwhelming majority of the people of Asia.

Some negative aspects have been the quasi total abandonment of the Latin language, tradition and chant; a far too facile interpretation of what could be absorbed from local cultures into the Liturgy; a sense of misunderstanding of the true nature, content and meaning of the Roman rite and its norms and rubrics, which led to an attitude of free experimentation; a certain anti-Roman “feeling,” and an uncritical acceptance of all kinds of “novelties” resulting from a secularizing and humanistic theological and liturgical mindset overtaking the West.
 
chicago said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walking_Home
Then everyone should be holding hands with themselves–since once a person extends the hand to another —this very act is an imposition.

Or an invitation.
Click to expand...
An invitation to manipulation and free reign to our own inclinations.
 
Walking_Home said:
Adaptations to local cultural practices have also been tried, though not always with good results. The use of the vernacular has at times helped in generating a theological vocabulary in the local idiom that eventually could be helpful to evangelization and the presentation of the message of the Gospel to those of non-Christian religious traditions, which constitute the overwhelming majority of the people of Asia.

Some negative aspects have been the quasi total abandonment of the Latin language, tradition and chant; a far too facile interpretation of what could be absorbed from local cultures into the Liturgy; a sense of misunderstanding of the true nature, content and meaning of the Roman rite and its norms and rubrics, which led to an attitude of free experimentation; a certain anti-Roman “feeling,” and an uncritical acceptance of all kinds of “novelties” resulting from a secularizing and humanistic theological and liturgical mindset overtaking the West.
Click to expand...
In all things moderation.
 
Walking_Home said:
An invitation to manipulation and free reign to our own inclinations.
Click to expand...
You may have hit upon something here, actually, which gets us back to the original question as to “why” it is a cause of division. As long as it is viewed in this way (by both sides), the clash is inevitible.
 
chicago said:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Walking_Home
Adaptations to local cultural practices have also been tried, though not always with good results. The use of the vernacular has at times helped in generating a theological vocabulary in the local idiom that eventually could be helpful to evangelization and the presentation of the message of the Gospel to those of non-Christian religious traditions, which constitute the overwhelming majority of the people of Asia.

Some negative aspects have been the quasi total abandonment of the Latin language, tradition and chant; a far too facile interpretation of what could be absorbed from local cultures into the Liturgy; a sense of misunderstanding of the true nature, content and meaning of the Roman rite and its norms and rubrics, which led to an attitude of free experimentation; a certain anti-Roman “feeling,” and an uncritical acceptance of all kinds of “novelties” resulting from a secularizing and humanistic theological and liturgical mindset overtaking the West.

In all things moderation.
Click to expand...
Of course moderation. A little change here — a little change there----get it introduced a bit at a time—and eventually a Mass derived from a secularized and humanistic theological mindset.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top