How do you feel about the Sign of Peace?

[BenedictFTW]

You know what? You are going to die anyway. Do you prefer to die after having established a good habit of being close to your brothers and sisters or after having established an habit of avoiding their proximity? Do you know that until several decades ago priest used to have a high mortality rate at young ages because they did take care of everybody and they did not avoid sick people? What is truly necessary for our salvation?

Just because you are happy to shake the hands of your neighbour at Mass and I have problems with it, does not allow the presumption that I do not love my neighbour. There are many ways to show this. Many shake hands at Mass and hate their neighbour; they are merely following protocol.

Of course, we are all going to die!! Your point???

 

[Cristiano]

I think it interrupts the movement from Consecration to Holy Communion. Perhaps it should be done right at the beginning of Mass.

I am not sure about moving it to the beginning of the Mass but probably at the very beginning of the liturgy of the Eucharist would not be a bad idea. IANALE (I am not a liturgical expert )

 

[BenedictFTW]

I think it interrupts the movement from Consecration to Holy Communion. Perhaps it should be done right at the beginning of Mass.

Absolutely!! Or even at the end of Mass. Anywhere, but where it is!!! God bless.

 

[TimothyH]

I agree that it is a health hazard to shake people’s hands. However, this is something we are required to do in the Novos Ordo Mass. Therefore, why not receive on the tongue, which is the preferred practice in the Vatican whenever the Pope says Mass?

It is also worrying that the priest saying Mass shakes hands with altar servers after he has consecrated his hands before the Transubstantiation. What is the point of washing his hands if he is going to soil them again with human contact?

Purification is for the consecration, not for distribution. Deacons and extraordinary ministers are not required to purify their hands for distribution.

Maybe there is some confusion, but transubstantiation takes place at the consecration. The priest calls down the Holy Spirit at the epiclisis, then Jesus is made present when the priest consecrates, and then we have the sign of peace and he shakes hands. Jesus is already present and transubstantiation has already taken place by the time we make the sign of peace and the priest shakes hands.

It’s funny to me how people will recieve on the tounge from a person’s hands but won’t shake hands with that person. It’s like wiping down the grocery cart with antibacterial wipes and then handling money at the checkout counter - I don’t think people realize how filthy money is. They found that a percentage of it was contaminated with cocaine.

-Tim-

 

[Cristiano]

Just because you are happy to shake the hands of your neighbour at Mass and I have problems with it, does not allow the presumption that I do not love my neighbour. There are many ways to show this. Many shake hands at Mass and hate their neighbour; they are merely following protocol.

Of course, we are all going to die!! Your point???

I did not say anything about me being happy and I did not accuse you of hating your neighbor. I am talking about developing good habits, and the fact that people shake hands while hating their neighbor is similar to people receiving communion in a state of sin, it is false worship not true liturgy.

My point is that we should focus on the proper priorities, our health and life could take take second place after other things that might be more important for our eternal life. Health and life have often taken second place in the life of saints, maybe there was a reason to it.

 

[BenedictFTW]

Purification is for the consecration, not for distribution. Deacons and extraordinary ministers are not required to purify their hands for distribution.

Maybe there is some confusion, but transubstantiation takes place at the consecration. The priest calls down the Holy Spirit at the epiclisis, then Jesus is made present when the priest consecrates, and then we have the sign of peace and he shakes hands. Jesus is already present and transubstantiation has already taken place by the time we make the sign of peace and the priest shakes hands.

It’s funny to me how people will recieve on the tounge from a person’s hands but won’t shake hands with that person. It’s like wiping down the grocery cart with antibacterial wipes and then handling money at the checkout counter - I don’t think people realize how filthy money is. They found that a percentage of it was contaminated with cocaine.

-Tim-

Deacons are required to consecrate his hands, as is the priest. Eucharistic Ministers should not exist, imo.

To receive on the tongue from a priest who has consecrated his hands is a far different thing than to shake hands with your neighbour. I am at a loss as to what point you are making here. I never receive from EMs, always from a priest, if that helps to clarify my point.

 

[TimothyH]

I think that it might help reading about the historical development of the liturgy to better understand the symbolism associated with the different steps in the forms of the Mass. The liturgy is not about individual personal feelings but it is about an universal public worship. I am not trying to call you ignorant, I am just trying to share the fact that reading about the developments of western and eastern liturgies it helped me a lot in having a deeper appreciation of the liturgy.

What sources did you use?

I’m >this< close to ordering The Mass Of The Roman Rite : Its Origins and Development by Joseph A. Jungmann. The price is holding me back but it is a college level textbook which is used in seminaries.

I would love links to or recommendations on any sources you may have used. I would also like to learn about the development of art, architecutre (Romanesque vs Gothic, etc) and such things which surround the liturgy.

-Tim-

 

[BenedictFTW]

I did not say anything about me being happy and I did not accuse you of hating your neighbor. I am talking about developing good habits, and the fact that people shake hands while hating their neighbor is similar to people receiving communion in a state of sin, it is false worship not true liturgy.

My point is that we should focus on the proper priorities, our health and life could take take second place after other things that might be more important for our eternal life. Health and life have often taken second place in the life of saints, maybe there was a reason to it.

My point is that shaking the hands of a neighbour is no proof of good habits or love of neighbour. Because it is a requirement in the Novos Ordo Mass, it is not voluntary as such. To say that someone who does not think it is sensible to shake hands with a neighbour at Mass is guilty of lack of love of neighbour is a false judgement. This discussion is about the sense or reasonableness of this requirement at Mass. Imo, it is an irrelevance and it is dangerous for health. When there was a recent Bird-flu scare in Spain and France, the priests refused to put Communion on the tongue of recipients. If they can acknowledge dangers to their health in this way, why can’t we be truthful about risks to our health by shaking hands with complete strangers??? A little honesty, please!

 

[Cristiano]

What sources did you use?

I’m >this< close to ordering The Mass Of The Roman Rite : Its Origins and Development by Joseph A. Jungmann. The price is holding me back but it is a college level textbook which is used in seminaries.

I would love links to or recommendations on any sources you may have used. I would also like to learn about the development of art, architecutre (Romanesque vs Gothic, etc) and such things which surround the liturgy.

-Tim-

Personally I would start with “A Short History of the Western Liturgy” by Theodor Klauser and with “The Byzantine Rite: A Short History” by Robert F. Taft. In parallel I would read “The Spirit of the Liturgy” by Romano Guardini and then “The Spirit of the Liturgy” by Joseph Ratzinger. Jungmann two-volume book is heavy one and not for beginners. I bought it before the other four books that I mentioned and it was a mistake, I need to learn how to walk before I know how to run. I am just a catechist sharing my experience and not a liturgical nerd.

 

[TimothyH]

Deacons are required to consecrate his hands, as is the priest. Eucharistic Ministers should not exist, imo.

To receive on the tongue from a priest who has consecrated his hands is a far different thing than to shake hands with your neighbour. I am at a loss as to what point you are making here. I never receive from EMs, always from a priest, if that helps to clarify my point.

I think we are talking about two different things.

Only a priest’s hands are consecrated. A priest’s hands are consecrated to God at his ordaination so that the priest can confect the Eucharist. A deacon’s hands are not consecrated to God for confecting the Eucharist. Consecration of hands is something that happens at the priest’s ordination. That is my understanding.

Purification is something else. The priest purifies his hands at the ablution, when he rinses them with water during the Mass before saying the words of institution and confecting the Eucharist.

This ablution isn’t the same as consecration. Consecration happens at the priest’s ordination. Purifiation (ablution) happens at the Mass. Again, the priest’s hands are consecrated (and purified) for confecting the Eucharist, not for distribution. The priests hands are consecrated and purified so that only consecrated and purified hands touch the host at the moment it becomes the body and blood of Jesus Christ.

The deacon is an ordinary minister of the Eucharist and his hands are not consecrated at his ordination, nor is he required to purify his hands at Mass, at least not at the Ordinary Form.

So, does the deacon purify his hands in the Extraordinary Form? Is that purification called consecration in the EF? I’m asking out of ignorance. Maybe we are just using the same words with different meanings.

Forgive me for going off topic, but since I have your guys attention…

I am insterested, does the priest purify his hands with wine? Does he rinse his hands with wine and water? I altar serve at the OF and had to pour water over a Franciscan priest’s fingers as he held them over the chalice. I didn’t know he was Franciscan until after the Mass because he had vestments on. He held his fingers over the chalice and just looked at me. I was like, “What?” and the concelebrating priest nodded and whispered, “Go ahead, pour a little water over his fingers.” It was scary, but one of the coolest moments in my life. I heard that priests in the OF purify their hands with wine. Is that true?

-Tim-

 

[BenedictFTW]

I think we are talking about two different things.

Only a priest’s hands are consecrated. A priest’s hands are consecrated to God at his ordaination so that the priest can confect the Eucharist. A deacon’s hands are not consecrated to God for confecting the Eucharist. Consecration of hands is something that happens at the priest’s ordination. That is my understanding.

Purification is something else. The priest purifies his handsat the ablution, when he rinses them with water during the Mass before saying the words of institution and confecting the Eucharist at Mass.

This ablution isn’t the same as consecration. Consecration happens at the priest’s ordination. Purifiation (ablution) happens at the Mass. Again, the priest’s hands are consecrated (and purified) for confecting the Eucharist, not for distribution. The priests hands are consecrated and purified so that only consecrated and purified hands touch the host at the moment it becomes the body and blood of Jesus Christ.

The deacon is an ordinary minister of the Eucharist and his hands are not consecrated at his ordination, nor is he required to purify his hands at Mass, at least not at the Ordinary Form.

So, does the deacon purify his hands in the Extraordinary Form? Is that purification called consecration in the EF? I’m asking out of ignorance. Maybe we are just using the same words with different meanings.

-Tim-

I think you are right, we are!! My bad. I mean purification and our Deacon purifies his hands after the priest before the Transubstantiation.

 

[TimothyH]

Personally I would start with “A Short History of the Western Liturgy” by Theodor Klauser and with “The Byzantine Rite: A Short History” by Robert F. Taft. In parallel I would read “The Spirit of the Liturgy” by Romano Guardini and then “The Spirit of the Liturgy” by Joseph Ratzinger. Jungmann two-volume book is heavy one and not for beginners. I bought it before the other four books that I mentioned and it was a mistake, I need to learn how to walk before I know how to run. I am just a catechist sharing my experience and not a liturgical nerd.

Thanks a bunch!

Do you have experience with either of theses?

“The Eucharistic Liturgies: Their Evolution and Interpretation”
Paul F Bradsaw and Maxwell E Johnson
Liturgical Press

“On the Historical Development of the Liturgy”
Anton Baumstark
Translated by Fritz West

-Tim-

 

[TimothyH]

I think you are right, we are!! My bad. I mean purification and our Deacon purifies his hands after the priest before the Transubstantiation.

Funny how people can get all bent out of shape just not understanding how the other guy is using a certain word. I think wars have started that way, and then the two kings were like, “What? I though you meant something else!” and they stopped fighting. LOL.

It is interesting to me that the deacon in the EF purifies. My experience is that the deacon in the OF does not do that. I really should go look at an EF Mass.

I qualify my remarks by stating that I suspect it is done for consecration, and not distribution. I am not aware of a priest or deacon purifying their hands before distribution outside of Mass, like at a hospital bedside. I could be wrong.

I think consecration, purification, etc. has no bearing on shaking hands. I’d shake your hands, if you were willing to die for me, or at least pray for me. I’d even buy you a cup of coffee or McDonalds or something.

I’m going to deposit my income tax checks now. Chat whith you all later. Cao. Pax.

-Tim-

-Tim-

 

[BenedictFTW]

Funny how people can get all bent out of shape just not understanding how the other guy is using a certain word. I think wars have started that way, and then the two kings were like, “What? I though you meant something else!” and they stopped fighting. LOL.

It is interesting to me that the deacon in the EF purifies. My experience is that the deacon in the OF does not do that. I really should go look at an EF Mass.

I qualify my remarks by stating that I suspect it is done for consecration, and not distribution. I am not aware of a priest or deacon purifying their hands before distribution outside of Mass, like at a hospital bedside. I could be wrong.

I think consecration, purification, etc. has no bearing on shaking hands. I’d shake your hands, if you were willing to die for me, or at least pray for me. I’d even buy you a cup of coffee or McDonalds or something.

I’m going to deposit my income tax checks now. Chat whith you all later. Cao. Pax.

-Tim-

-Tim-

Btw, Priests do purify their hands before giving Communion at the bedside in hospitals, at least, our priest does.

I probably would die for you, but as for shaking hands…?

 

[Cristiano]

My point is that shaking the hands of a neighbour is no proof of good habits or love of neighbour. Because it is a requirement in the Novos Ordo Mass, it is not voluntary as such. To say that someone who does not think it is sensible to shake hands with a neighbour at Mass is guilty of lack of love of neighbour is a false judgement. This discussion is about the sense or reasonableness of this requirement at Mass. Imo, it is an irrelevance and it is dangerous for health. When there was a recent Bird-flu scare in Spain and France, the priests refused to put Communion on the tongue of recipients. If they can acknowledge dangers to their health in this way, why can’t we be truthful about risks to our health by shaking hands with complete strangers??? A little honesty, please!

I think that we have very diverging opinions in regards to the reason for liturgical acts and in regards to what we accept as reasonable when risking our health. I never stated that not shaking hands is lack of love, you brought that opinion up for discussion. I am not criticizing you, I have a different view of how things should be done and I am trying to share the reason why I have such a view. I also trying to get you to look at things from that perspective while I try to look at them from your perspective, I am not asking you to change your mind, just to give it a look from a different angle.

 

[Cristiano]

Thanks a bunch!

Do you have experience with either of theses?

“The Eucharistic Liturgies: Their Evolution and Interpretation”
Paul F Bradsaw and Maxwell E Johnson
Liturgical Press

“On the Historical Development of the Liturgy”
Anton Baumstark
Translated by Fritz West

-Tim-

No, and I am not going to buy them now, even if I would really like to.
I have two books on the dogmas of the Church and one on the development of doctrines that are waiting to be read. My wife is going to kill me if she sees more books in the mail.

 

[TimothyH]

No, and I am not going to buy them now, even if I would really like to.
I have two books on the dogmas of the Church and one on the development of doctrines that are waiting to be read. My wife is going to kill me if she sees more books in the mail.

Someone should start a CAF book swap thread.

-Tim-

 

[englishredrose]

Without reading anyones reply first so I do not know if this has been said/aksed

Sign of the peace is quite important in that we are supposedly to receive communion without bearing ill of our neighbour…

if we are avoiding someone when we are giving the peace

then should we receive communion?

Besides which that sign of peace can make someone’s day if they are in a fairly dark place. A warm handshake and hopefully a smile. Can and does make a world of difference to a person that day.

Its symbolic yes but it too can tell on us.

 

[BenedictFTW]

I think that we have very diverging opinions in regards to the reason for liturgical acts and in regards to what we accept as reasonable when risking our health. I never stated that not shaking hands is lack of love, you brought that opinion up for discussion. I am not criticizing you, I have a different view of how things should be done and I am trying to share the reason why I have such a view. I also trying to get you to look at things from that perspective while I try to look at them from your perspective, I am not asking you to change your mind, just to give it a look from a different angle.

It is not such a deep theological discussion that I cannot ‘look from a different angle’. You either think it is unhygienic and unnecessary, as well as inappropriate considering where it is placed in the Novus Ordo Mass, or you do not. I happen to hold the opposite opinion to your good self. Simples!

 

[BenedictFTW]

Without reading anyones reply first so I do not know if this has been said/aksed

Sign of the peace is quite important in that we are supposedly to receive communion without bearing ill of our neighbour…

if we are avoiding someone when we are giving the peace

then should we receive communion?

Besides which that sign of peace can make someone’s day if they are in a fairly dark place. A warm handshake and hopefully a smile. Can and does make a world of difference to a person that day.

Its symbolic yes but it too can tell on us.

Nice sentiment. However, the Mass is not about making your neighbour feel good, however laudable you may think this. The Mass is about Jesus’ Sacrifice on the Cross and us obeying Our Blessed Lord when He said “Do this in remembrance of Me”. The Graces flow from the Holy Eucharist. The ‘feel good’ sentiment that is meant to spring from a shaking of the hand of the stranger is not appropriate within the setting of the Holy Mass, as it is a distraction from the Sacrifice of Our Blessed Saviour. Anything that detracts from that is not good. In my opinion, of course.