How do you feel about the Sign of Peace?

[jmcrae]

There was never a sign of peace where I grew up in Catholic Ireland. It is part of the Novus Ordo Mass and not as traditional as you are making it out to be. There must be fashions in this, as in other things.

Yes, there was. There was also a Chalice at every Mass you attended. The lay people did not partake of the Peace, nor of the Chalice, but both were certainly present at every Mass, or else it was not valid.

 

[EcceAgnusDei]

Yes, there was. There was also a Chalice at every Mass you attended. The lay people did not partake of the Peace, nor of the Chalice, but both were certainly present at every Mass, or else it was not valid.

In the EF, the sign of peace does not occur in Low Masses.

• PAX

 

[Big_Feet]

Okay, so the Sign of Peace is definitely a nice sentiment. But I really don’t enjoy shaking people’s hands. Especially in the winter with cold and flu season. It would be one thing if it was AFTER taking the Eucharist, but it’s not. So you watch someone sneeze, then s/he shakes your hand, and then you go up, get the Eucharist in your hands, and in goes the Body of Christ and all of your fellow parishioners’ germs.

Does anyone else feel this way?

I am at peace with it.

 

[jmcrae]

In the EF, the sign of peace does not occur in Low Masses.

• PAX

But for High Masses, yes.

This is analogous to how we see the Gloria, the Creed, and other elements of the Sunday Mass that don’t appear in weekday Masses. They are still essential elements of the Sunday Mass, even though they don’t appear on other days. Would you say, “Oh, get rid of the Gloria on Sundays; it must be optional because we don’t do it on weekdays.”

 

[EcceAgnusDei]

But for High Masses, yes.

This is analogous to how we see the Gloria, the Creed, and other elements of the Sunday Mass that don’t appear in weekday Masses. They are still essential elements of the Sunday Mass, even though they don’t appear on other days. Would you say, “Oh, get rid of the Gloria on Sundays; it must be optional because we don’t do it on weekdays.”

I was just clarifying your statement. You said that the Sign of Peace was present at every Mass that BenedictFTW attended pre-VII or that the Mass was invalid. I was just making the point that Low Masses (and Missa Cantatas for that matter) do not have the Sign of Peace.

Carry on.

• PAX

 

[jmcrae]

I was just clarifying your statement. You said that the Sign of Peace was present at every Mass that BenedictFTW attended pre-VII or that the Mass was invalid. I was just making the point that Low Masses (and Missa Cantatas for that matter) do not have the Sign of Peace.

Carry on.

• PAX

Thank you. My original point was that the Apostolic Tradition remains uninterrupted. Any suggestion that it is in some way “optional” should be discouraged, lest people think they can whimsically remove things from the Mass, simply because they don’t happen to suit their modern antiseptic tastes.

 

[TimothyH]

Sometimes exposure to lots of germs can make you strong. Lucky you! However, sometimes vulnerable people get quite sick from other people’s germs. It is a well proven scientific fact.

However, the main reason I dislike the sign of peace is where it is placed in the Mass. It is a total distraction at the most sacred part of the celebration of the Eucharist when our total focus should be on Our Lord. God first, neighbour second - just as Our Blessed Lord taught us.

God did not teach us “God first, neighbor second”. That is nowhere in the teaching of Jesus.

Therefore, if you bring your gift to the altar, and there recall that your brother has anything against you, leave your gift there at the altar, go first and be reconciled with your brother, and then come and offer your gift. (Matthew 5:23-24)

Christ actually told us that if we realize that someone had something against us, we were to leave our gift at the altar and go make it right between our brother and ourself first. To a Jew in the first century this would have been a shocking statement. Sacrificing at the temple was the most important thing a Jew would ever do in his life. Jesus however, tells us that if we have wronged anyone or treated anyone poorly, we are specifically not to worship, but are to go and make it right between ourselves and the person we have wronged first, and only then are we to worship God.

Christ is redefining holiness from how you worship to how you treat other human beings.

That’s exactly where the pharisees went wrong, and exactly why Jesus condemned them. They thought that personal piety was enough, and that it was OK to treat people like garbage as long as you wore the proper garments, went to the temple and put money in the treasury, and said the right prayers. Jesus specifically condemns this thinking and tells us that we will never get into heaven unless we treat each other correctly.

King David understood this.

For you do not desire sacrifice or I would give it;
a burnt offering you would not accept.
My sacrifice, O God, is a contrite spirit;
a contrite, humbled heart, O God, you will not scorn.
Then you will desire the sacrifices of the just,
burnt offering and whole offerings;
then they will offer up young bulls on your altar.
(Psalm 51:18-19, 21)

King David understood that if we treated someone like garbage that God would reject our worship until we make it right.

The clear teaching of Christ is that treating each other with compassion, dignity and respect as fellow Children of God is a prerequisite for proper worship. Even Catholicism teaches that if we sin against someone we should refrain from approaching the altar but should go to confession and try to right the wrong first.

The sign of peace is right where it needs to be, placed perfectly as a reminder that if you cannot look at the person next to you - your son or daughter, wife or husband, mother or father - if you cannot shake their hand and give them a kiss, and cannot truly be at peace with the way you have treated them, then you should sit down in the pew and not approach the altar.

How you treat other people is how you treat God, and how you love other people is how God knows that you love him - these are the most basic teachings of Jesus Christ. With Christ on the altar, if you cannot kiss your wife or shake the hand of your neighbor without your concience bothering you then you had better not dare to approach the altar and recieve Jesus Christ. The sign of peace is is a reminder of that, with Christ present on the altar, and is therefor perfectly placed in the Mass.

-Tim-

 

[Cristiano]

Read WHEN St Augustine suggests we greet each other - AFTER the Our Father! Not DURING the holiest part of the Mass! My point is made. Thank you!!!

This is bogus. You made statements to justify the lack for the sign of peace, then you flip flop things around to say that you do not like it at a specific point during the Mas. This is no intellectual honesty. The germs are germs independently of when you risk the exchange during the Mass. I say that we disagree and that is fine, everybody has a right to his own opinion; however, this is changing statements on the fly.

 

[BenedictFTW]

Yes, there was. There was also a Chalice at every Mass you attended. The lay people did not partake of the Peace, nor of the Chalice, but both were certainly present at every Mass, or else it was not valid.

The sign of peace, as we know it today, was not in the traditional Mass; it is not in the Tridentine Mass I attend either. I don’t know what point you are making about the Chalice. I was discussing the sign of peace only.

 

[jmcrae]

The sign of peace, as we know it today, was not in the traditional Mass; it is not in the Tridentine Mass I attend either. I don’t know what point you are making about the Chalice. I was discussing the sign of peace only.

Yes it is; it is exchanged between the priest, the subdeacon, and the Altar servers, who stand in for the congregation.

All that was changed with the Pauline Mass was that the congregation now takes the part of the congregation, instead of having the Altar servers stand in for them.

 

[BenedictFTW]

This is bogus. You made statements to justify the lack for the sign of peace, then you flip flop things around to say that you do not like it at a specific point during the Mas. This is no intellectual honesty. The germs are germs independently of when you risk the exchange during the Mass. I say that we disagree and that is fine, everybody has a right to his own opinion; however, this is changing statements on the fly.

Any seeming flip-flopping is an illusion. I made the point earlier that there were several reasons for why I do not feel at ease with the sign of peace - I do not wish to have to worry about germs; there have been several outbreaks of flu etc near me in recent times, which made my concern escalate; but I also do not like where the Sign of Peace comes in the Mass. Although, it does come after the Our Father - I was mistaken about that - saying the Our Father is still keeping our attention focused on Our Lord at that crucial time during the Mass. However, turning to our neighbour brings us back down to earth with a great thud, imo. As I said before, it is not a deep theological issue. I believe the SOP could be moved to the very end of Mass and we would all go off with a cheery smile to our neighbour. It would also be a natural continuation of the final blessing from the Priest to “Go and serve the Lord” in the world around us.

 

[BenedictFTW]

Yes it is; it is exchanged between the priest, the subdeacon, and the Altar servers, who stand in for the congregation.

All that was changed with the Pauline Mass was that the congregation now takes the part of the congregation, instead of having the Altar servers stand in for them.

But not between the congregation - this is my point. It is the sign of peace within the congregation that is the distraction. Some people make such a fuss! Perhaps if we were given some instruction to remember WHO is the focus of the Mass, there might be more decorum and less distraction.

 

[pismopal]

I love the sign of peace…looking brothers and sisters in the eye and making contact then is nice. What I do not like but I have to co-operate with is the annoying trend at my parish to hold hands during the Our Father. It is not called for and most of the places I visit don’t do it but someone got it started and now it has a life of its own. Ithe habit is so entrenched that most will even extend it across the aisles…alas…that is where I draw the line.

 

[BenedictFTW]

I love the sign of peace…looking brothers and sisters in the eye and making contact then is nice. What I do not like but I have to co-operate with is the annoying trend at my parish to hold hands during the Our Father. It is not called for and most of the places I visit don’t do it but someone got it started and now it has a life of its own. Ithe habit is so entrenched that most will even extend it across the aisles…alas…that is where I draw the line.

I think I read somewhere that this is actually liturgically incorrect. Whenever I am in a church that does this, I kneel down rather than take part in it. It just FEELS WRONG!!!

 

[Cristiano]

I think I read somewhere that this is actually liturgically incorrect. Whenever I am in a church that does this, I kneel down rather than take part in it. It just FEELS WRONG!!!

Does the General Instruction for the Roman Missal call for it? Yes! Thus it is liturgically correct, saying to the contrary is spreading falsity. You can choose to obey or disobey the instructions, that it is why we have been granted free will.

 

[BenedictFTW]

Does the General Instruction for the Roman Missal call for it? Yes! Thus it is liturgically correct, saying to the contrary is spreading falsity. You can choose to obey or disobey the instructions, that it is why we have been granted free will.

The answer to your question is ‘No!’ The Roman Missal does not ask us to hold hands during the Our Father or link across the aisle either. I am not spreading falsity. Please do not be so judgemental and, I think you did not read the post correctly. Just a hunch!

 

[Miriam1947]

almost 300 posts and no agreement. Sure can tell this is the internet. I would hate to think that some people ranting here treat others like this in real life.

Unsubscribing now.

 

[Cathryn]

It has taken me about the last 10 years to appreciate the sign of the peace of Christ at Mass. The thing about Catholics in the pew is that everyone is at different levels of spiritual growth. To expect everyone around us to understand and appreciate what it is about is not reasonable. The Church in her wisdom is gently teaching us to be Christ to our neighbor, and be willing to forgive them as Christ forgives us, as we have just prayed (not meet and greet). Show a sign of God’s love. How they respond to the little sign we give them is not in our control. Do non-Catholics have a better understanding of what the Church is trying to teach us? I don’t think so. Remember too the church rubrics asks only for a sober sign to our immediate neighbors in the pews, not a meet and greet.

 

[thequeen]

I don’t.

Neither do I.

 

[pnewton]

There is nothing wrong with asking how we *feel *about something, as that is part of who we are. Personally, I like it and always have. What I find odd though, since this is just about how we feel about it, is how many people will defend their feelings and aruge with others with different feelings.

If we were to address our thoughts on the subject, mine are simple. It is part of the Mass. Either way, such things are above my lay grade.