Why do we hold hands, have guitars, etc. in mass?

[Walking_Home]

Have you read about what nculturization run amok is doing to the Church?.

And yes–the Church has chosen where to be less rigid --and notified where this applies. Like kneeling,sitting after Holy Communion. Clarified that standing was allowed with the stipulation that kneeling was not to be denied.

So since the Church is the supreme authority in matters liturgical —Her directives do not become a matter of ignoring the prescribed poster for Holy Communion —but of bringing the U.S and other countries where it would apply — into step with the Church.

So yes—the Church decides where, when, and how.

 

[John_Walsh]

The Pope has not spoken against holding hands during the Our Father at Masses he celebrated. If it’s good enough for him , it’s good enough for me. Catholic radio is a recent & wonderfull gift & this topic & others were discussed, at length over the summer with Pope Benedict’s visit & World Youth Day. Other traditions brought on by laity were discussed & if I’d known about CAF and such a question, I’d have recorded the details.

If we want tradition, how about 5,000, sitting in 50’s with sandals & robes. Let’s skip back before Latin & all learn Aramaic. No pipe organ either.

Loosen the tie, open the top button, inhale, now relax.

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

—Her directives do not become a matter of ignoring the prescribed poster for Holy Communion —but of bringing the U.S and other countries where it would apply — into step with the Church.

Whatever you call it, it is allowing norms for the laity to be ignored. Posture for the laity is rarely addressed. A good reason is that the most of the congregation has never read any instruction, so how could they know what is instructed?

Most claims given here refer to the celebrant. Laity may be disrespectful, or disruptive, etc, but cannot commit liturgical abuses, except in reception of Holy Communion.

Check RS. There are detailed discriptions of abuses. The only abuse by the laity mentioned is attempting to intinct the Host.

Lux

 

[Walking_Home]

Whatever you call it, it is allowing norms for the laity to be ignored. Posture for the laity is rarely addressed. A good reason is that the most of the congregation has never read any instruction, so how could they know what is instructed?

Most claims given here refer to the celebrant. Laity may be disrespectful, or disruptive, etc, but cannot commit liturgical abuses, except in reception of Holy Communion.

Check RS. There are detailed discriptions of abuses. The only abuse by the laity mentioned is attempting to intinct the Host.

Lux

---

The Church is correcting an injustice done to the laity. For to many years people have been kept in the dark and were subject to the whims of certain members of the Clergy.

I have read RS --the document does not address itself to only abuses commited by the clergy.

 

[ASimpleSinner]

Why do we hold hands, have guitars, etc. in mass?

The triumph of bad taste.

 

[Walking_Home]

Most claims given here refer to the celebrant. Laity may be disrespectful, or disruptive, etc, but cannot commit liturgical abuses, except in reception of Holy Communion.

Check RS. There are detailed discriptions of abuses. The only abuse by the laity mentioned is attempting to intinct the Host.

---

The following is from Pope John Paul II --Ecclesia de Eucharistia.
Since you are pretty big on “community” pay attention to what he says:

adoremus.org/EcclesiaDeEucharistia.html#anchor566973

1. All of this makes clear the great responsibility which belongs to priests in particular for the celebration of the Eucharist. It is their responsibility to preside at the Eucharist in persona Christi and to provide a witness to and a service of communion not only for the community directly taking part in the celebration, but also for the universal Church, which is a part of every Eucharist. It must be lamented that, especially in the years following the post-conciliar liturgical reform, as a result of a misguided sense of creativity and adaptation there have been a number of abuses which have been a source of suffering for many. A certain reaction against “formalism” has led some, especially in certain regions, to consider the “forms” chosen by the Church’s great liturgical tradition and her Magisterium as non-binding and to introduce unauthorized innovations which are often completely inappropriate.

I consider it my duty, therefore to appeal urgently that the liturgical norms for the celebration of the Eucharist be observed with great fidelity. These norms are a concrete expression of the authentically ecclesial nature of the Eucharist; this is their deepest meaning. **Liturgy is never anyone’s private property, be it of the celebrant or of the community in which the mysteries are celebrated. ****The Apostle Paul had to address fiery words to the community of Corinth because of grave shortcomings in their celebration of the Eucharist resulting in divisions (schismata) and the emergence of factions (haireseis) **(cf. I Cor 11:17-34). Our time, too, calls for a renewed awareness and appreciation of liturgical norms as a reflection of, and a witness to, the one universal Church made present in every celebration of the Eucharist. **Priests who faithfully celebrate Mass according to the liturgical norms, and communities which conform to those norms, quietly but eloquently demonstrate their love for the Church. **Precisely to bring out more clearly this deeper meaning of liturgical norms, I have asked the competent offices of the Roman Curia to prepare a more specific document, including prescriptions of a juridical nature, on this very important subject. No one is permitted to undervalue the mystery entrusted to our hands: it is too great for anyone to feel free to treat it lightly and with disregard for its sacredness and its universality.

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

communities which conform to those norms

The only norms for the laity refer to reception of Holy Communion, and the laity is allowed to ignore the posture norm in the US.

What you quote has no bearing on the posture of the faithful for the Lord’s Prayer. If you wish to put restrictions on the laity in this area, you would need to be universal in this instruction, and would be therefore violating your own quoted document.

Lux

 

[Walking_Home]

Again – when it comes to the posture for Holy Communion --the laity are not ignoring the norms. They are following the norms set by the Church. You seem to be having a great problem understanding this concept. The Church is — the supreme authority to authorize, interpret, issue, clarify etc. liturgical matters. The Church is bringing the U.S. into step with Her laws.

Now as to “communities”. That would be your congregation right. Just as my congregation is my community. As our late Pope stated–the Mass does not belong to your community to do as you will —just as the Mass does not belong to my community to do as we will. It comes down to that. No matter how you try to swing it, slide around it, etc. The Mass is not ours to manipulate in any shape or form.

 

[Aramis]

Again – when it comes to the posture for Holy Communion --the laity are not ignoring the norms. They are following the norms set by the Church. You seem to be having a great problem understanding this concept. The Church is — the supreme authority to authorize, interpret, issue, clarify etc. liturgical matters. The Church is bringing the U.S. into step with Her laws.

Now as to “communities”. That would be your congregation right. Just as my congregation is my community. As our late Pope stated–the Mass does not belong to your community to do as you will —just as the Mass does not belong to my community to do as we will. It comes down to that. No matter how you try to swing it, slide around it, etc. The Mass is not ours to manipulate in any shape or form.

Except that NO NORM HAS BEEN SET. One paradigm evolved, and another several paradigms now challenge it. Neither has the force of norms as the term is used in canon law. (If they had, the dubium over the orans would have had a stronger response than (I’m paraphrasing) the church has no habit of regulating the posture of the laity.

Simply put, Rome has refused to settle the issue in either direction.

The USCCB has made an equally vague answer at usccb.org/liturgy/q%26a/mass/orans.shtml

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

Again – when it comes to the posture for Holy Communion --the laity are not ignoring the norms. They are following the norms set by the Church. You seem to be having a great problem understanding this concept.

No, it is you who are not understanding. A dispensation from the norm has been granted. The norm in the US is to stand.

The Church is — the supreme authority to authorize, interpret, issue, clarify etc. liturgical matters. The Church is bringing the U.S. into step with Her laws.

Correct, and she has chosen NOT to regulate the posture of the laity. You certainly have the right to object to whatever you choose, but the Church does not support your claims of abuse.

Lux

 

[Lisa44]

And therein lies the problem. “Feel” is about emotions, and emotions tend to run their own course without recourse to logic. The facts - not the feelings - are that hand holding came from Catholic Charismatics. Not New Age, but people seeking the Holy Spirit. But people who don’t know the facts get feelings (from who knows where) and go off down their own path, all too often with a sense of self-righteousness (and I do not presume youi are; I am simply reflecting on the last 40 years of dispute) that some people simply will not slow down and deal with the facts. We don’t like something, so we find a way to smear the intentions and the characters of those we don’t like, without ever bothering to find out why they do what they do.

So do families. I held my daughters hands many times. So do husbands and wives; so do friends, when one of them is having a rough patch. So do Vietnamese men who are friends, in Vet Nam (and that is a cultural thing that has absolutely nothing to do with homosexuality).

I know a fair number of pagans, given that Oregon is one of the most unchurched states in the Union; and they don’t all hold hands. I don’t persoanlly know any Wiccans, so I can’t speak to them. But to imply that people holding hands are doing so because there is some Wiccan background to this is flat out a smear and not acknowledging the facts of where this started - in other words, not based in truth…

Holding hands is a sign of unity, and has nothing to do with being Wiccan, or coming from that as a source.

Holding hands is a long established tradition in pagan and wiccan (and before wicca, aka witches). It has to do with “closing the circle” (the five elements…etc).
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wicca

I really don’t care if people hold hands walking down the street. We are talking about the Catholic Mass.
ewtn.com/expert/answers/holding_hands_at_mass.htm

zenit.org/article-8728?l=english

This is a real stretch. Are pegans & wiccans your companions?

Scouts and children also stand in circles—are they also pagans & wiccans?

Which is it? You say you are only speaking of the liturgy, yet you make wild accusations against charismatic style worship. Did you read my post #186?

(excerpt)

Charismatic is a legitimate movement of the Catholic Church. The preacher to the Papal household is very strong in this movement. It is a very serious matter to speak against this worship, and equate it to new age or pagan practices.
Lux

Pagans preceeded the Charismatic movement. So did witches. And the subject here is how ‘hand holding’ got incorporated into the Catholic Mass.

I’m trying to visualize, 18th century France or England, and people getting up and forming continuous lines holding hands, and the people on the ends of the pews, holding hands, to make a continuous circle (pagan practice) during the Our Father.

Can you see it in the 4th century? How about the 12th century?

No, you can’t see it because it NEVER happened before.

Why? Because those people knew what it meant to be a Catholic. As opposed to a witch or a pagan…etc…

 

[Walking_Home]

Except that NO NORM HAS BEEN SET. One paradigm evolved, and another several paradigms now challenge it. Neither has the force of norms as the term is used in canon law. (If they had, the dubium over the orans would have had a stronger response than (I’m paraphrasing) the church has no habit of regulating the posture of the laity.

Simply put, Rome has refused to settle the issue in either direction.

The USCCB has made an equally vague answer at usccb.org/liturgy/q%26a/mass/orans.shtml

---

I believe that is where the discussion about the weaknesses of the liturgical books comes in. Weaknesses that allow loopholes now being misused by both clergy and laity. I guess it comes down to our own human weaknesses. We tend to focus in on ourselves and take as much as we can get.

 

[Walking_Home]

No, it is you who are not understanding. A dispensation from the norm has been granted. The norm in the US is to stand.

Correct, and she has chosen NOT to regulate the posture of the laity. You certainly have the right to object to whatever you choose, but the Church does not support your claims of abuse.

Lux

---

No dispensation to ignore the US norm has been given —because Church law has been in effect since the time standing has been allowed. The Church corrected how the US was applying the law.

Seems you are using the correction in one area – to justify laity innovation in an other. Sad state of affairs.

 

[ethelzguy]

---

I believe that is where the discussion about the weaknesses of the liturgical books comes in. Weaknesses that allow loopholes now being misused by both clergy and laity. I guess it comes down to our own human weaknesses. We tend to focus in on ourselves and take as much as we can get.

What happened to your legs? :yawn:

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

---

I believe that is where the discussion about the weaknesses of the liturgical books comes in. Weaknesses that allow loopholes now being misused by both clergy and laity. I guess it comes down to our own human weaknesses. We tend to focus in on ourselves and take as much as we can get.

It is not weakness. It is about priorities, and how to encourage people to worship.

The Church does not see a need in regulating the posture of the laity, except for the few times mentioned, and even those are open to variations. I agree that handholding does get out of hand (we had one of those conga lines at Mass this am), but in the many years this has been happening, the Church has chosen to stay out of it, even when asked.

Lux

 

[Walking_Home]

What happened to your legs? :yawn:

---

My legs are just fine ethelzguy. It is sad --about yours.

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

Pagans preceeded the Charismatic movement. So did witches. And the subject here is how ‘hand holding’ got incorporated into the Catholic Mass.

Pagans and witches also preceeded Christianity. Shall we also ban altars? What about chant?

I’m trying to visualize, 18th century France or England, and people getting up and forming continuous lines holding hands, and the people on the ends of the pews, holding hands, to make a continuous circle (pagan practice) during the Our Father.

Can you see it in the 4th century? How about the 12th century?

No, you can’t see it because it NEVER happened before.

Why? Because those people knew what it meant to be a Catholic. As opposed to a witch or a pagan…etc…

The Mass was totally different then. The altar was turned, and the Mass was in Latin.

Again Charismatic is an approved ecclesial movement of the Catholic Church. It is optional, so you do not need to like it, but it is very wrong to disparage legitimate worship soley on your preference, with no official support.

“Ecclesial movements, inspired by a desire to live the Gospel more intensively and to announce it to others, have always been manifest in the midst of the People of God. … In our day and particularly during recent decades, new movements have appeared that are more independent of the structures and style of the religious life than in the past" (John Paul II, Directives on Formation in Religious Institutes, n. 92).

Lux

 

[Walking_Home]

It is not weakness. It is about priorities, and how to encourage people to worship.

The Church does not see a need in regulating the posture of the laity, except for the few times mentioned, and even those are open to variations. I agree that handholding does get out of hand (we had one of those conga lines at Mass this am), but in the many years this has been happening, the Church has chosen to stay out of it, even when asked.

Lux

---

So that is the name for it now. Priorities —people first —Church second.

 

[malphono]

Lux et Tenebrae:

The Mass was totally different then. The altar was turned, and the Mass was in Latin.

Neither statement is accurate. Mass was offered in Latin on an altar ad orientem until the modern post-conciliar period. Of course the EF is still done that way and there is nothing even in the OF missal that prohibits it even today. (Remember that the typical edition of the OF Missal is in Latin.) Restoring the use of Latin and ad orientem to the OF is a hallmark of the “reform of the reform” movement which exists in a growing number of parishes in the US and elsewhere.

 

[Lux_et_Tenebrae]

---

So that is the name for it now. Priorities —people first —Church second.

Priorities in establishing liturgical norms.

The Church (first) chooses not to regulate the posture of the laity during Mass. RS has pointed out the priorities in addressing abuses. Posture of the laity during the Lord’s prayer was not mentioned. The Church chooses not to regulate it.

Again you are in error for attempting to write your own norms.

Lux