Open hearts and sweaty palms
Today I would like to discuss briefly a liturgical question of our time: should the congregation hold hands during the Our Father? In 1963, the Beatles sang “I wanna hold your hand”. Well, that’s all fine and good, but there’s a time and place for everything…
A couple of weeks ago a friend of mine sent me a link to an article which argues why the congregation should not hold hands during the Our Father. Broadly speaking, I agree with the arguments made in the article. However, when people bring up this subject, I often take a different tack to the explanation presented in the article…
A slightly different approach
For the sake argument, let’s assume that there are no liturgical objections to holding hands at the Our Father. I actually don’t think this is the case, but let’s just say that it is. On this basis, should we do it? I would argue that the answer should still be “no”. Why? Because the Church does not direct us to do so…
I think that there’s a real problem if I take it upon myself to adjust the liturgy as I see fit. It sets the precedent for placing my own opinion over and above that of the Church. If every person in the pew is an armchair liturgist who decides what he is going to do based on what he feels then I would suggest we’re heading for trouble.
I have attended Mass at some very orthodox parishes which nevertheless departed from the rubrics. To pick an example other than the Our Father, I recall one parish which prayed the “St. Michael the Archangel” prayer together after Communion. One could argue that this is a good addition to the Sunday Mass. I have to say, personally, I did rather like it, reminding me of the post-Mass prayers in the Extraordinary Form. I have also been at Masses where the priest has not followed the words of the Missal and has, instead, extemporized. The words have often been rather beautiful. However, if we would allow for this change, then on what grounds would we be able to reject other changes to the liturgy?
If you really want to hold the hands of the people around you during the Our Father and they’re okay with it, who am I to say otherwise? However, I would suggest that the solution to a lot of difficulties is simply to pray the liturgy given to us by the Church. In the Roman Missal, the words to be spoken are in black and the actions to be performed are in red. If we all simply “Say the black and do the red” we can know we’re on firm ground and we can avoid so many different problems. When we depart from that, things get much more dicey…
If that is the case, what does the absence of instructions indicate is the proper placement of hands during the our father? Isn’t it just as speculative to have our hands raised or at our side as to have them joined with someone else? It’s one thing to change something that’s specifically prescribed, I think it’s something different to do something that the missal is silent on. In a related note, is the congregation instructed to cross our foreheads, lips and hearts before the gospel? I thought that was only instructed for the clergy…
That’s kind of weak since it’s an argument from silence. It doesn’t specify that the congregation stay still either, but it’d be very disruptive for everyone to talk a walk during the Our Father.
I’d say no, because hands by your side is their default position.
Agreed, I wouldn’t put those two things in the same category.
I’m not sure, but it’s an ancient liturgical practice, dating from about the 9th Century.
“hands by your side is the default position” Is that expressly stated? You say in the original blog that holding hands during the Lord’s Prayer is “placing my own opinion over and above that of the Church,” but I don’t think that’s accurate if the Church (in the missal) is silent on the issue. The Church has expressed no opinion for me to place my own above.
The missal is quite clear that, “42. The gestures and bodily posture of both the Priest, the Deacon, and the ministers, and also of the people, must be conducive to making the entire celebration resplendent with beauty and noble simplicity, to making clear the true and full meaning of its different parts, and to fostering the participation of all.”
Holding hands is a physical way to express the unity that Christ intended for us in reciting the Lord’s prayer. I agree that we should defer to the instructions of the GIRM and the bishops and priests, but I don’t think that it’s inappropriate to perform gestures that increase our experience of the Mass where church authority is silent on the matter.
As to the pre gospel crosses, I guess we should just keep holding hands for a few hundred more years and then it will be acceptable too 😉
No, but where are your hands for 99% of mass? This, therefore, seems like a very reasonable default to me.
(Allowances made for spouses!)
Not quite. I said it sets the precedent for it. It’s the precedent that I think is most problematic.
The thing is that this would demand the Church to specify the position of every body part throughout the Mass: “Well, they didn’t tell us that we can’t tap dance during the Creed. It says we should stand, but not that we should stand still!” 😉
Wouldn’t a group hug express it even better? 😉
When the missal talks about “The gestures and bodily posture…”, it’s talking about the gestures and bodily posture as described within the missal itself. It’s not included here to be a guideline for lay or parish liturgical development.
Also, one could argue that holding hands would shift too much emphasis on the “horizontal” aspect of the Our Father rather than the “vertical” dimension which is definitely the focus of the Catechism’s treatment of that prayer (CCC #2777-2865). But this is really the point of the post – different arguments can be made, each with relative merit. However, if that’s our standard it makes managing these non-uniform liturgical developments much harder to manage. In contrast, the “Read the black, do the red” mindset provides a solid safeguard.
The thing that’s particularly difficult about this specific issue is that it’s not the most unobtrusive of actions. It can be rather uncomfortable and distracting for those who don’t wish to participate.
The real problem arises when the entire congregation is expected or obliged to do this. I’ve been to parishes where people go to great lengths to keep the “chain” going and where participation in the holding of hands has not been an optional activity.
Yup, but it’ll also have to be universal practice with Papal endorsements and practice.
I don’t think you can set a precedent for something you aren’t doing. It sets a precedent only for using ones own judgement to enhance Mass experience in the ABSENCE of definitive church guidance, which I believe is a good precedent.
I can definitely see your point about some parishioners becoming uncomfortable by overzealous neighbors and a lack of uniformity which the Mass generally benefits from, but I think it can be done in a healthy/ respectful way. Tap dancing, walking, talking etc. would certainly be distracting and would not ADD anything to the experience for anyone and certainly not for the community. I think one could argue that standing before God hand-in-hand with our neighbor and calling him “Our Father” does offer a physical sign of the spiritual reality that we are expressing verbally in that prayer. I think it does so more effectively and less logistically challenging than a group hug. Of course, if USCCB, the local bishop (or a priest for his Masses) dictate otherwise, then I will certainly honor that guidance.
Talking with a Melkite priest, I learned that the practice of holding hands has been in his community for a very long time and practically from antiquity, with the early church in the first dew centuries having done this during services. I don’t know much about this subject to comment one way or the other though. Can you fill in the possible historical blanks here?
I haven’t seen it at a Melkite liturgy, although I have only been to two (one in London and one in Seattle). Even if that is the case, it only has limited application to a Roman-Rite parish.
I find this a bit hard to believe. I can’t think of any ancient document which attests to this.
Hi again! I believe that the early church had the practice of actually embracing one another and giving a “Holy kiss” (?) Perhaps I was wrong in tying this to hand shaking, but I believe the gestures are equivalent. I read about the kiss and early communities in a book about Christianity at Prince of Peace Abby a year ago. I don’t have title of book nor citation, so I concede I hank you as always for your kind response.
Sorry! meant to say that I concede that I cannot discuss this matter further with you without proper evidence. Then I wanted to say thank you.
That refers to what we’d today call The Sign of Peace and Justin Martyr speaks about it. That’s definitely an ancient practice, but it’s not the same as holding hands during the Our Father.
I saw Dave Armstrong includes a similar kind of argument in his (far more thorough) article