otm:
You are right, I do reject it; because of posters such as yourself making it eminently clear that the Pauline rite is subject to more alternatives, specifically allowed or not, there is no way that I would apply the analogy to it.
And, as posters such as yourself have repeatedly made known, one of the things that they like and respect about the Tridentine Mass is its consistency and repeatablity.
So I guess the only thing that puzzels me is why you would find that funny, as you are the one who makes the analogy so clear.
I mean, everyone who has eaten there and in any of its competitors knows that McDonalds fries are the standeard in the industry; they got to be the standard not only because of how they are done, but also because they are so exact, so consistent, with no variations. And a Big Mac is a Big Mac no matter where you eat.
In other words, you opened the door. Why are you surprised I walked through it?
Or did I miss something?
But let’s take this McD’s analogy farther. The truth is that McD DOES have an increasingly wide menu to respond to growing demand for food besides burgers and fries. Moreover, McD tests new menu items in specific locations, to see what works. The menu options also vary (somewhat) from country to country, in accordance with local tastes, laws, and customs. (For example, in Quebec McD serves poutine–I bet you don’t find that many other places). So, if we examine the McD analogy deeper we find that its success and worlwide reach is due in part to its flexibility and innovation, not only its standardization.
And as silly as it may sound, we can relate the McD analogy more specifically to the practice of hand-holding at the our Father. McD DOES care a great deal how its employees behave–this might be analogous to the church and the clergy. No doubt about it, both organizations would frown on innovations in their behavior that violate company (church) philosophy (theology) and codes (rubrics). BUT, McD does not care what the customers (laity) do–they can drink with a straw or directly from the cup, use their fingers, a fork, or chopsticks, eat standing or sitting, dine-in or carry-out, etc. So too, the GIRM appears pretty open as to what the laity does during mass, with a few very specific prescribed postures (no shirt, no shoes, no service).
Now, being a little more serious, I think a number of posters have confused the variation allowed in the Pauline mass (which I assume refers to flexibility the rubrics allow for choice of eucharistic prayes, form of penitential rite, etc), with the variation in posture by the laity during the mass. I don’t know whether the Tridentine mass was celebrated more unifromly by the clergy in the old days (I wasn’t there). But I have been led to believe that the laity did not always adopt uniform postures–some stood, sat, knelt, prayed the rosary, listened intently, looked at the stain glass, etc). The few Tridentine masses I have been to lately confrm this, though admittedly the lack of uniformity may because many in attendance (like myself) were not sure what they were supposed to do. It is not clear to me that hand-holding by the laity during the our father would have been forbidden by any existing church documents–we will simply have to guess as to how the church would have responded if the practice had become widespread before the introduction of the Novus Ordo mass.
And it is not enough to say that hand-holding would never have intruded into the Tridentine Mass and that this practice is somehow caused by the N.O. mass. That the practice occured after the introduction of the N.O. and therefore must be caused by it is a fallacious Post Hoc Ergo Hoc argument.
I am strongly opposed to innovations in the liturgy that DO contradict stated rubrics, and especially when these are imposed by the priest (with or without the help of his liturgy committee). I don’t like when the words of prayers are changed to be more inclusive, or when unapproved individuals are allowed to give the homily. I would not agree if a priest ORDERED everyone to hold hands during the our father.
However, I am not going to get worked up about individuals or groups who hold hands during the our father, until the church specifically forbids or endorses the posture. The church wisely says little about the SPECIFIC posture of the laity because such matters are best left to the local community to deal with. Someone else posted that, by this logic, someone God forbid could shout Hallelujah and do a somersault before receiving the eucharist. Well, I am not sure about the somersault (this would likely interfere with others in line for communion), but why not shout Hallelujah? Once again, it’s not my cup of tea, but I am not going to get down on someone because of their exuberance in praising the Lord.
My name & post # match 
