Unnerving Our Father (hand holding) experience

[Armor_of_Light]

Oh the irony in this statement just knows no bounds… Opinions are NOT doctrine - and it is personal opinion alone that has caused the hand holding at Mass. It wasn’t there until someone started it on their own, or some priest made it up. It was their OPINION that the Mass needed something else, something more. How horribly insulting to the greatest Sacrifice of all eternity – that the Holy Mass is somehow lacking if we aren’t holding hands. Surely the angels weep. ~Liza

Thank You Liza.

 

[clem456]

Oh the irony in this statement just knows no bounds…

**Opinions are NOT doctrine **- and it is personal opinion alone that has caused the hand holding at Mass. It wasn’t there until someone started it on their own, or some priest made it up. It was their OPINION that the Mass needed something else, something more. How horribly insulting to the greatest Sacrifice of all eternity – that the Holy Mass is somehow lacking if we aren’t holding hands.

Surely the angels weep.

~Liza

Maybe they are, I wouldn’t know. If they are weeping, I would bet my life it is not over the joining of hands at the Our Father.
Your first statement expresses it well. Your opinions about another’s reverence or spiritual dispositions are not doctrine, as well as notions about whether or not they are suffering because of it. We cannot read people’s minds or hearts. We definitely cannot read God’s intentions, as to who He would like to punish for joining hands (we have truly entered the absurd here).

You are lumping the majority of American Catholics into a big ball of “need to be corrected”. When you are the bishop, this will be within your sphere of influence. Good luck and have at it, you will have my support in speaking about this issues… when you are the bishop.

Serious question…To what lengths are you willing to go in defense of your notions of “liturgical correctness”. Eye movements? Standing on one leg out of boredom? Raising of hands is surely out of bounds if joining them is forbidden. Guitars and upright basses, modern musical settings? Where does your personal monitoring of errant Catholic practices end?

 

[sedonaman]

I think you’re taking the motivation in the worst way possible, when there is much more realistic one that could be assumed: that holding hands was not to INCREASE unity and solidarity, but rather to increase the EXPRESSION of unity and solidarity (since the outward expression of reverence established in the norms of the mass are, as described by the GIRM, instituted as means of expressing unity of worship).

Why would you possibly assume that someone tried instituting this as a nefarious means to gain power? That’s simply a ludicrous assertion to make, especially since there’s not even a clear origin of WHO introduced the practice in the first place. If attempting to institute the practice was a move to gain power or influence, the person responsible for it was a massive failure because they failed to attach their name to the practice at all.

I think I’m going to grab some popcorn, because when conspiracy theories about shadow organizations gaining power by introducing hand holding arise, that’s when a thread gets interesting…

A conspiracy theory is not so far-fetched when you consider that holding hands DECREASES solidarity/unity by making non-hand-holders feel uncomfortable. A conspiracy theory is also not so far-fetched when you consider the number of dissident groups ourladyswarriors.org/dissent/dissorg.htm who are trying to remake the Catholic Church after their own image.

 

[Armor_of_Light]

Maybe they are, I wouldn’t know. If they are weeping, I would bet my life it is not over the joining of hands at the Our Father. Your first statement expresses it well. Your opinions about another’s reverence or spiritual dispositions are not doctrine, as well as notions about whether or not they are suffering because of it. We cannot read people’s minds or hearts. We definitely cannot read God’s intentions, as to who He would like to punish for joining hands (we have truly entered the absurd here). You are lumping the majority of American Catholics into a big ball of “need to be corrected”. When you are the bishop, this will be within your sphere of influence. Good luck and have at it, you will have my support in speaking about this issues… when you are the bishop. Serious question…To what lengths are you willing to go in defense of your notions of “liturgical correctness”. Eye movements? Standing on one leg out of boredom? Raising of hands is surely out of bounds if joining them is forbidden. Guitars and upright basses, modern musical settings? Where does your personal monitoring of errant Catholic practices end?

The opinions expressed are not an indictment of personal holiness. They are a comment on the overall focus of the liturgies in our parishes.

Not ‘everything goes’ for the holy sacrifice of the Mass you know.
And yes…when the laity join in and raise hands with the priest during the ‘Our Father’, it is forbidden.

The fact that there is a huge variance of OPINION on this topic (hand holding), and there is a mish-mash of customs and protocols at the parish level regarding it emphasizes the point that the issue could use addressing by the Bishops.

 

[Actaeon]

A conspiracy theory is not so far-fetched when you consider that holding hands DECREASES solidarity/unity by making non-hand-holders feel uncomfortable.

The same thing could be said about how a minor bow is the norm before communion. It makes me uncomfortable to only offer a minor bow before communion, so I offer a genuflection instead. Nonetheless, the GIRM states that the norm is offered so as to serve as an outward expression of unity.

I don’t pretend, then, that offering a minor bow DECREASES unity simply because out of motivation for personal piety I offer more.

In the same way, whether you hold hands or not does not decrease unity (unless you jump to the radical conclusion that it’s a personal persecution on behalf of some conspiracy theory, but that problem is the fault of the interpretor, and not the hand holder). I disagree with holding hands during the our Father, so I don’t do it, done and done, no issue. I don’t feel any less united to my fellow parishoners as a result. I would hope that they don’t interpret my genuflection or lack of hand holding as some conspiracy to overthrow the unity of the church… but just like the situation of someone who has neurosis about holding hands, those issues are THEIR problem, not mine.

This is an aside, not to you, but spoken in general, but I’m going to air this greivance here: And as to the claim that so many make on here, I’m going to call those claims officially into question. There are people who DO have REAL psychological issues regarding human touch, and people who have REAL phsyical problems that make physical touch painful or otherwise proscriptive. Merely having an aversion to touching others because you think all others are sweaty, clammy, disease ridden lumps of flesh is NOT excused by falsely claiming some self-diagnosed psychological condition. The aversion is simply a mindset in the majority of people here… well, that or CAF has a huge problem with people suffering neurosis who need treatment and probably aren’t getting it.

A conspiracy theory is also not so far-fetched when you consider the number of dissident groups ourladyswarriors.org/dissent/dissorg.htm who are trying to remake the Catholic Church after their own image.

Sure, there are dissident groups which typically number in the tens or hundreds of people. Very few of those groups have anything resembling clout. And even so, when I peruse that list, I fail to see the group responsible for “promoting hand-holding during the mass”.

Either this is some shadow organization that’s trying to take the church down with COBRA like sneakiness, while the GI Joes of the vatican have failed to even notice their existance, or (more likely), it’s an innocent innovation which, while totally uneccessary, is not intended with evil or malicious ends in mind.

 

[Actaeon]

Not ‘everything goes’ for the holy sacrifice of the Mass you know.
And yes…when the laity join in and raise hands with the priest during the ‘Our Father’, it is forbidden.

Actually, I’m grossly opposed to the orans position, but the GIRM makes no prohibition whatsoever against it. The response from the holy see to the USCCB of making it a norm was that the orans position COULD NOT be established as a required norm for prayer, but they never expressly stated in any rubric what was to be done with one’s hands during the our father. In other words, folding ones hands is equally endorsed in the rubrics as the orans position or holding hands with others… insofar as NONE are mentioned.

The fact that there is a huge variance of OPINION on this topic (hand holding), and there is a mish-mash of customs and protocols at the parish level regarding it emphasizes the point that the issue could use addressing by the Bishops.

And here we can certainly agree on that matter! Although, with respect to the bishops many of them are aware of such things as holding hands and have done nothing to suppress it… and as my driving instructor was so fond of saying “Choosing not to act is still a choice”. Tacit approval of hand-holding? Eh, without them speaking out against it, it CAN come accross that way, and while I personally would like to see the practice abolished, until the bishops do so, it is a bit extreme to say that it has been banned or is a curse to the liturgy… especially the latter, since that, I think, is a pronouncement that can only be made with the authority of the Bishop.

 

[sedonaman]

…The fact that there is a huge variance of OPINION on this topic (hand holding), and there is a mish-mash of customs and protocols at the parish level regarding it emphasizes the point that the issue could use addressing by the Bishops.

I am tempted to agree with this, but what can they say besides, “It’s voluntary” which would get us nowhere because that is the stated position now. If they were to say no hand-holding, that would make the hand-holders feel there is less solidarity/unity. So there you have it. It would have been better never to have had hand-holding at all. … :sad_yes:

I’m not sure if someone else has mentioned this, but there is enough non-solidarity/non-unity going around to make the hand-holding a big fat fib as far as an indication of solidarity/unity goes. As an example, just look at how many pro-abortion candidate bumper stickers there are in your parish parking lot on Sunday mornings. I personally witnessed an angry eruption by a parishioner who objected to the KofC collecting signatures for a ballot initiative defining marriage as a man and a woman. On another occasion, there was a sign in our social hall that said, “Vote life”. Someone forced its removal. I would wager these are generally the same as the militant hand-holders. Which gets us back to someone wishing to force his will on the rest, not that it is the same in each case.

 

[lizaanne]

Serious question…**To what lengths are you willing to go in defense of your notions of “liturgical correctness”. **Eye movements? Standing on one leg out of boredom? Raising of hands is surely out of bounds if joining them is forbidden. Guitars and upright basses, modern musical settings? Where does your personal monitoring of errant Catholic practices end?

Now you are being ridiculous and excessive in an attempt to derail the discussion.

My “personal monitoring of errant Catholic practices” ends at the altar. If what’s happening in the parish is not entirely focused on what is happening on the altar, then there are serious issues.

I’m not the Liturgy Police - but I know what’s just down right unnecessary. And holding hands is one of those things. It lends absolutely nothing to the Mass (as if the Mass even NEEDED adding to).

~Liza

 

[Actaeon]

My “personal monitoring of errant Catholic practices” ends at the altar. If what’s happening in the parish is not entirely focused on what is happening on the altar, then there are serious issues.

Dear God, please let me never sneeze while at mass with Lizaanne, as I would not want my momentary lapse to cause a loss of focus on the altar and thus to scandalize! Amen

 

[lizaanne]

Dear God, please let me never sneeze while at mass with Lizaanne, as I would not want my momentary lapse to cause a loss of focus on the altar and thus to scandalize! Amen

And so now we see where this has become a vast joke.

I’m not joking about this - going to Mass is not a social event for me - it is the method by which we all try to become holy, or die trying.

But, if folks want to joke about it and make fun, have at it.

I’m out.

~Liza

 

[austenbosten]

Ugh the hand-holding experience. I’m sorry I’m not The Beatles and no I don’t want to hold your hand.

I can’t tell you how many times a prayer for me was ruined because I was too discombobulated by the fact that someone forcibly grabbed my hand for a prayer. Hand-holders if you need someone to hold your hand while you pray, fine…but please respect those who wish not to.

 

[Actaeon]

And so now we see where this has become a vast joke.

I’m not joking about this - going to Mass is not a social event for me - it is the method by which we all try to become holy, or die trying.

But, if folks want to joke about it and make fun, have at it.

I’m out.

~Liza

Please don’t take CAF so utterly seriously, after all, if we were all to go around taking the allegations of shadow conspiracies to overthrow the church by hand holding, or the assertions that people who hold hands are some sort of curse to God, then we’d all go mad.

Sometimes you have to realize that CAF is a discussion forum, and not a tool to divide the church… don’t let discussions here become a matter of life and death for you, you’ll enjoy your CAF experience much more if you don’t.

 

[sedonaman]

Ugh the hand-holding experience. I’m sorry I’m not The Beatles and no I don’t want to hold your hand.

I can’t tell you how many times a prayer for me was ruined because I was too discombobulated by the fact that someone forcibly grabbed my hand for a prayer. Hand-holders if you need someone to hold your hand while you pray, fine…but please respect those who wish not to.

Forced solidarity/unity seems like a conflict of terms.

 

[clem456]

The opinions expressed are not an indictment of personal holiness. They are a comment on the overall focus of the liturgies in our parishes.

No, of course not
None of these posts question holiness or reverence…

It was their OPINION that the Mass needed something else, something more. How horribly insulting to the greatest Sacrifice of all eternity – that the Holy Mass is somehow lacking if we aren’t holding hands.

Surely the angels weep.

~Liza

Yea, ok, the hand joiners make the angels weep now.

That someone saw it as an opportunity to force his/her personal preference on the rest of us. This increased that person’s power, which was the goal all along. Whether it actually increased solidarity and/or unity is an open question, judging from the responses here. One thing is sure: someone’s power lust was satisfied.

No questioning of motives or holiness there!!

I’m not at Mass to hold hands. I’m at Mass to worship the Creator of the Universe.

If someone wants to hold hands they can build a campfire in their back yard and have at it.

So very very blessed we don’t do this at our parish. What a silly and disruptive exercise.

~Liza

Surely that’s not questioning anyone’s holiness or reverence. The hand joiners Mass is like a campfire! Wow, thanks for that beautiful simile.

I truly don’t have a natural inclination to join hands at the Pater Noster, but if the people are, I participate and am glad I did, but either way, no problem. If you’re not joining hands NP with me whatsoever. My mother doesn’t do it and I don’t question her motives. I have been Catholic for 52 years and have never one time seen anyone “forced” or “disturbed” who didn’t want to join hands. I’ve been to Mass many places and never seen that happen.
But for those of you who had your peace disturbed at the Our Father and sign of peace? let me apologize that you were offended and disturbed.

 

[maltmom]

Since holding hands is not required, where does my option to not hold hands ends with the other person’s option to hold hands? As I stand I have my head down, my eyes closed and my hands together in a prayerful manner (not a death grip). If I’m not required to hold hands, my choice is not to do so. I respect the right of those who want to hold hands to do so with someone who also wants to hold hands. I do not have an aversion to touching others or being touched. I do not worry about catching anything.

 

[Actaeon]

Since holding hands is not required, where does my option to not hold hands ends with the other person’s option to hold hands? As I stand I have my head down, my eyes closed and my hands together in a prayerful manner (not a death grip). If I’m not required to hold hands, my choice is not to do so. I respect the right of those who want to hold hands to do so with someone who also wants to hold hands. I do not have an aversion to touching others or being touched. I do not worry about catching anything.

Now see, there is an honest post I can truly get behind… no claims of self-diagnosed neurosis about touching others, and no case of germophobia (a real disease, albeit overly self-diagnosed) cited as an excuse.

As to the question you started your post with, the right of the person in question to hold or not hold hands lies with the person who does not wish to hold hands… in other words, if someone isn’t putting their hands out to be held, then they should not face pressure or be forced to do so. At the same time, while they have every right to not hold hands, they should also be aware that SOME few people who are not aware that holding hands is not in the rubrics of the GIRM might be off-put by such a decision and might make an effort to charitably explain their reasoning to the person (after mass, of course)… this would serve a double benefit: it would put to rest any hurt feelings of not holding hands AND would be a teachable moment to catechize catholics on what IS or IS NOT in the GIRM, or even to explain that such a thing as the GIRM exists (I’m fairly certain there are a great many catholics who would give you a blank stare if you asked them to define what the GIRM is)

 

[Seeker1961]

first of all I am not belittling anyone and I am not thinking or implying that someone is praying better or harder than someone else. Hand holding is rather common in a number of parishes in the US. It’s more or less a give or take. My family always holds hands during Our Father and from what i’ve seen in 25 years as a Catholic, most people do and seemly don’t have a problem with it whether it is just between family and friends or including others. My parish starts Mass out with “please rise and greet your neighbor”, there is hand holding during Our Father and people again shake hands at the kiss of peace which is a part of Mass. To go to Mass and think it is just me and Jesus, don’t bother or touch or look at me sounds more isolated and sad than anything. We are called to be the body of Christ and a body is not a bunch or disconnected cells. My parish is friendly, vibrant and very involved and alive. One of the other poster implied that parish with hand holding are cursed. Nothing could be further from the truth. Again I have never seen anyone forced to hold hands and do something they don’t want to do but to imply that holding hands during Our Father is not reverent or real prayer and that something that is fairly common in a number of parishes is wrong is a bit of an over reach.

Now those of us who don’t like hand holding, greeting the neighbor and all that are “selfish” and non-community minded. Not to mention unfriendly, uninvolved,sad and “dead”? Please…I don’t think hand holding is a “curse”, but I don’t think that parishes and people who choose NOT to do it must be categorized as you have.

Oh please, it’s too humorous that people have to invent hyperbole when there are others who go so far as to call hand holding during the our father a curse to the Mass… the latter is actually offensive, and probably meant to be so, while this is just you inventing a reason to be offended.

Thank you so much for your courteous response.

 

[pnewton]

That’s another thing that baffles me, by the way – that the same people who are utter sticklers for this illicit gesture have no interest in expressing reverence in the way the Church actually requires them to do!

While I respect the disagreement over this issue, I have heard different canon lawyers form different opinions as to whether it is illicit. Now as there takes some explanation and logic to expain why it is illicit, I think that this must be no more than an opinion. When I combine that the Church has never stated this practice is illicit, it is used in so parishes and that those that hold it illicit do not like this practice, I am inclined to think that the desire that it be illicit might color the opinion that it is illicit.

 

[maltmom]

Now see, there is an honest post I can truly get behind… no claims of self-diagnosed neurosis about touching others, and no case of germophobia (a real disease, albeit overly self-diagnosed) cited as an excuse.

As to the question you started your post with, the right of the person in question to hold or not hold hands lies with the person who does not wish to hold hands… in other words, if someone isn’t putting their hands out to be held, then they should not face pressure or be forced to do so. At the same time, while they have every right to not hold hands, they should also be aware that SOME few people who are not aware that holding hands is not in the rubrics of the GIRM might be off-put by such a decision and might make an effort to charitably explain their reasoning to the person (after mass, of course)… this would serve a double benefit: it would put to rest any hurt feelings of not holding hands AND would be a teachable moment to catechize catholics on what IS or IS NOT in the GIRM, or even to explain that such a thing as the GIRM exists (I’m fairly certain there are a great many catholics who would give you a blank stare if you asked them to define what the GIRM is)

I attend Mass alone and rarely have anyone sitting next to me. When I have though I’ve never had anyone try to grab my hand. There have been a few instances where someone extended their hand and I saw it. In those cases I smile and hold their hand during the Our Father. I wouldn’t want to hurt their feelings. OTOH, if someone gets their feelings hurt because they turned to someone to hold their hand and found that person’s head bowed and their eyes closed in prayer, well that’s an odd reaction to me. During the Sign of Peace I offer my hand and a big smile to those in my area.

 

[WingsOfEagles]

I don’t particularly love hand holding, but if in a Parish where it is to the extent you describe, I will hold hands. I would say the woman who was “rude” to you has not encountered a parish that doesn’t hold hands. If I were someone who had only ever known the Our Father to be recited with held hands, I would think that you were being rude. Her behavior afterwards was probably due to her believing you had shunned her in an un-Christian manner.

I think the other issue is you’d taken your mother’s hand, but wouldn’t take this woman’s on the other side.