Z
zab
Guest
And I believe that a sign of peace without love is in vain. Even "looking into one’s eyes and saying “Peace be with you” is a show of affection.
- Status
M
Michelle_Arnold
Guest
How is it exactly “a sign” of “peace, communion, and charity” with all present (which is the point of the sign of peace) to hug your husband, kiss your kids, and then turn and nod or shake hands with acquaintances and strangers? Although I do not agree that I gave a “thou shalt not,” I do believe I gave an appropriate application of the norms indicated by the GIRM.
The liturgical gesture signifies the objective common communion we have as brothers and sisters in Christ; it is not supposed to signify the subjective feeling we have for family and friends. Once again, what you feel does not matter at this point during the Mass; what is the point is theological acknowledgment signified by the liturgical action of what we are before God.
I agree that the Church has not specified one particular gesture that all congregants should perform. That is indeed open to the discernment of local bishops of what is appropriate in their culture as a greeting for all regardless of personal relationship. As I noted in my answer, in the Far East it might be bowing since bowing is a standard means of greeting acquaintances in that part of the world. But whatever that common gesture is, that and that gesture only should be used for the sign of peace at Mass. If you want to hug your husband and kiss your kids, you have plenty of other opportunities to do so outside of Mass.
M
Michelle_Arnold
Guest
Again, demonstrating as I said that too many today seem to think that liturgical rituals are meaningless unless they happen to feel emotion during the performance of it. I would imagine that Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat did not feel much “love” for each other when they shook hands in 1993 after the successful conclusion of the peace agreement between Israelis and Arabs. But that does not mean that their secular sign of peace was “in vain” or “meaningless” (even if the peace they brokered at that time did not last forever).
Z
zab
Guest
If you thought that I was saying that the Sign of Peace was “meaningless unless (I) feel emotion during the performance of it”, you are mistaken.
R
revert_jen
Guest
I have to agree with this. My problem with the “let’s hug and kiss each other in our own family” is that it doesn’t leave much time for expressing peace to one’s other brothers and sisters in Christ. So the husband and wife hug and kiss each other, and then each parent hugs and kisses each child, and then basically the time is up. Meanwhile, those of us who have attended Mass alone, stand looking around awkwardly and smiling at the backs of people’s heads, waiting to see if anyone will offer the sign of peace to us as well. Frequently, the sign passes, and nobody has as much as noticed us. (This is obviously when I am at the OF, and not singing in the choir.)
There is all week to work on ensuring peace within your family. It might be a really good idea to establish a daily peace ritual in your home or something. However, in Heaven, “they do not marry nor are they given in marriage.” One poster said that he or she is not in communion with his or her spouse in the same way as with others in the pew. But in the Mass, we are in the presence of heaven, and for that one time a week, we are supposed to aim at being in communion with each other in a way that doesn’t deny, but transcends earthly relationships.
It doesn’t matter what the sign is; it’s true that different places have different standards. But I heartily agree that the sign, whatever it is, should be the same for all of our brothers and sisters in Christ. Special Masses, like nuptiual and funeral Masses, are different, as it’s not expected that anyone would be there who didn’t know anyone. But the point of the normal Sunday Mass is not to split us up into separate close-knit family units, but to bring us together as a single congregation, united in our worship of Christ.
–Jen
M
mick321
Guest
Your pastor has provided a perfect solution for all the right reasons.
That someone appreciates his wisdom proves that all is not lost.
Married?
.
J
jmvbxx
Guest
I am glad to see that this forum attracted so much attention and spirited replies. This is the first I’ve been able to connect to the internet since posting it so my response will be sort of a potpourri.
GIRM states “a sign” and as mentioned earlier this sign is the be determined by local bishops. Who would know better, if not them, what local customs and behaviours best describe “a sign” to offer peace. I find it odd that someone from a different archdiocese, or a different continent for that matter, would presume to tell another what behaviours they should be permitted to use for this gesture.
I think it is important to remember that we attend mass to be in communion with God and the participate in the Eucharist. If we perhaps focused a little more time and effort on prayer and on our own relationship with God and not on what other people are doing then we all may be a little better off.
In my opinion, it is too easy to say that – given the current state of affairs – that priests should not have physical contact with children. Our priest kisses all children that approach him on the head and I encourage my son to go up and offer him the sign of peace. There is nothing inappropriate about it at all and does extend outside GIRM’s “sign”.
Lastly, outside of church we greet people differently depending on how, who or where the greeting takes place. The fact that you greet two people different does not mean that your greeting was more or less genuine. This logic extends to mass. The fact that I kiss my wife on the cheek (in a purely non-sexual manner) in no way means that my desire of peace for her is greater or lesser than that of the parishioner whose hand I just shook!
Ultimately what matters here is what is in our hearts. Do we genuinely wish peace for those around us or not? If so, does it matter if I kiss, smile, hug, wave, etc?
GIRM states “a sign” and as mentioned earlier this sign is the be determined by local bishops. Who would know better, if not them, what local customs and behaviours best describe “a sign” to offer peace. I find it odd that someone from a different archdiocese, or a different continent for that matter, would presume to tell another what behaviours they should be permitted to use for this gesture.
I think it is important to remember that we attend mass to be in communion with God and the participate in the Eucharist. If we perhaps focused a little more time and effort on prayer and on our own relationship with God and not on what other people are doing then we all may be a little better off.
In my opinion, it is too easy to say that – given the current state of affairs – that priests should not have physical contact with children. Our priest kisses all children that approach him on the head and I encourage my son to go up and offer him the sign of peace. There is nothing inappropriate about it at all and does extend outside GIRM’s “sign”.
Lastly, outside of church we greet people differently depending on how, who or where the greeting takes place. The fact that you greet two people different does not mean that your greeting was more or less genuine. This logic extends to mass. The fact that I kiss my wife on the cheek (in a purely non-sexual manner) in no way means that my desire of peace for her is greater or lesser than that of the parishioner whose hand I just shook!
Ultimately what matters here is what is in our hearts. Do we genuinely wish peace for those around us or not? If so, does it matter if I kiss, smile, hug, wave, etc?
J
jmvbxx
Guest
Sorry, one last point …
I would be very saddened if there were to remove the sign of peace from the mass. I see it a perfect moment to express to those around us our desire for them to find peace in God. It requires us to look up from our missal and recognize that we are in community with God and with each other.
I would be very saddened if there were to remove the sign of peace from the mass. I see it a perfect moment to express to those around us our desire for them to find peace in God. It requires us to look up from our missal and recognize that we are in community with God and with each other.
That’s terrible!
I belong to a parish that tends to be rather demonstrative within groups of family and/or friends. But people still make the effort to share a sign of peace to those they don’t know.
F
FrDavid96
Guest
If someone exchanges the sign of peace any differently with a spouse than with a total stranger on the other side, then that is precisely what has happened: the meaning of the sign of peace has been lost. That is what I have been trying to explain.
When one kisses a spouse at the sign of peace, it is no longer the sign of peace, it has become a moment of personal affection. That is the problem we now find ourselves faced with here.
A
Annabelle_Marie
Guest
Well I personally give my husband a hug (quick) and everyone else around me a handshake…I don’t leave people out. My reason for doing this is my husband can’t receive communion yet…I want him to still feel in communion with the rest of us. It would seem a little odd to shake his hand…
F
FrDavid96
Guest
I can’t help but point-out the spirited discussion about the sign of peace is stil focusing (in some posts) on the relationship of the people exchanging it. This is precisely the wrong focus. This is exactly how the sign of peace is misunderstood.
This is not a time for personal affection (whether husband and wife or grandmother and granddaughter, or anything else). It is a time when we express our ecclesial communion and our brotherhood in Christ–it is the moment when we are to set aside all personal relationships (both good and bad) and focus ourselves on preparing corporately to receive the Body of Christ–in order to strengthen the one relationship that is of the utmost imporatnce at that moment.
The Holy Sacrament of Marriage has nothing to do with this topic–it is entirely irrelevant to the sign of peace. That’s what I was trying to express in my earlier post: when people discuss the sign of peace in such a way that they feel they either “need” or “should” or “may” exchange it with family members any differently than with any other person, the liturgical moment has been shattered. The sign of peace has become the opposite of a sign of unity and communion and instead has digressed into a form of excluding everyone who “isn’t my spouse/parent/brother/sister/girlfriend” etc. This is often not what people intend, but the result is still the same.
This is not a time for personal affection (whether husband and wife or grandmother and granddaughter, or anything else). It is a time when we express our ecclesial communion and our brotherhood in Christ–it is the moment when we are to set aside all personal relationships (both good and bad) and focus ourselves on preparing corporately to receive the Body of Christ–in order to strengthen the one relationship that is of the utmost imporatnce at that moment.
The Holy Sacrament of Marriage has nothing to do with this topic–it is entirely irrelevant to the sign of peace. That’s what I was trying to express in my earlier post: when people discuss the sign of peace in such a way that they feel they either “need” or “should” or “may” exchange it with family members any differently than with any other person, the liturgical moment has been shattered. The sign of peace has become the opposite of a sign of unity and communion and instead has digressed into a form of excluding everyone who “isn’t my spouse/parent/brother/sister/girlfriend” etc. This is often not what people intend, but the result is still the same.
Z
zab
Guest
Z
zab
Guest
The exclusion of giving the sign of peace to those other than family and loved ones is a totally different topic.
E
EEgirl
Guest
Absolutely. However, the key to this discussion is that the sign of peace you exchange with one person must be the same sign you exchange with others. Otherwise you are creating distinctions. Kisses, hugs, bows, handshakes, just make it the same for everyone. You can express affection for your spouse or children outside of the sign of peace. The sign of peace is an INAPPROPRIATE time for personal affectionate gestures.
Z
zab
Guest
And what might that sign of peace be according to you?
L
lizaanne
Guest
E
Elizium23
Guest
The sign of peace was abolished in my parents’ parish, ostensibly on fears of the H1N1 virus, and it makes things even worse, because people insist on exchanging a “sign of peace” even though they have not been directed to.
M
mick321
Guest
- Status