Hugging or kisses spouses during mass

  • Thread starter Thread starter jmvbxx
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
zab said:
Personally, I think this gesture is a perfect solution. And it is a gesture that would not disrupt the sign of unity during the flu season like ommitting the handshake during that time. The bow is also more reverent than a handshake or a wave. All we would then need is for instruction coming from the USCCB explaining the meaning of the Sign of Peace and giving us the sign that we are to use.

What do the rest of you think? Just a simple Agree or Disagree.
Click to expand...
Sorry. I have to disagree, not with your intent, but because I know that different cultures bow in different ways. It’s complicated and something that has to be experienced.

Right now I wish whoever decides these things would get their message through to all the priests and the priests could get it through to us, and whatever they would say would be it. Right now I’m so confused about what to do that I want to head for the hills, screaming all the way. I can’t figure out if it’s just the priest and the altar or if it’s even OK for us to give the Sign of Peace to each other (except that it’s really the Kiss of Peace) or whether we should cross the aisle to give the Sign to a person who is alone (which I have to admit I am going to do if I’m lucky enough to make to Mass, which is very rare), if it’s OK for spouses to kiss or hug…

I AM CONFUSED!!!
 
Annabelle_Marie said:
FrDavid,

Do you think it is because people have sometimes lost sight about the meaning of the Mass in general? I know in my general search/path back to the Catholic Church I have found people, even my relatives, that don’t know that much about it?

Having said that, you might have converted me. I will try to explain it to my husband.

God Bless!
Click to expand...
I am a cradle Catholic who left the Church and then reverted. When I was growing up I had absolutely no idea what the Mass was except that we had to go every Sunday because if we didn’t, there was that mortal sin thing. Maybe I wasn’t listening in the Catholic school I attended (BTW, that Catholic school is associated with the church that was recently ransacked, a large cross inverted, “666” painted, a knife shoved into the head part of a painting of Our Lady of Guadalupe, and feces left behind - that is the Church I attended and I still feel a great deal of love for it).

When I came back to the Church I started learning about the Mass. I guess it just didn’t concern me before. It was something I had to do even though I didn’t want to do it. Now I’m still learning and have a long way to go. But I do know that the joy I feel during Mass transcends anything I felt when I didn’t understand.

I think to a lot of people it’s a habit, or something they do twice a year at Christmas and Easter. I hope I’m wrong. But I remember my Dad going to Mass and then yelling at us for the rest of the day. I don’t think the message got through to him (it did later, though, thank God).
 
LittleSoldier said:
“Others lament that they’re not getting their fair share of the action”??? I haven’t seen any lamenting and this implies that those participating in this thread who go to Mass alone are grieving and crying. I care about the Mass. After reading your post I thought that I’ll just stay at the back now, where I won’t bother anyone. After all, why do they need me? I don’t want to lament. I don’t want to be a wet rag and insist on getting my share. It implies selfishness. I don’t think anyone in this thread who goes to Mass alone has implied or indicated in any way that they are being selfish by wishing to be included in a part of the Mass in which they should be included.

This isn’t a high school boys’ locker room we’re discussing here. This is church, during Mass. There is a big difference. I really feel insulted by your post. “Fair share of the action”? That is not a nice thing to say. Really.

Then you say “we have a duty to be sensitive to the feelings of these folks too” but I don’t see any sensitivity to those who you say are lamenting about not getting their fair share of the action!
Click to expand...
I need to come to Nick’s defense here. I think he was merely giving exaggerated examples of both extremes, simply as a literary device.
 
Believe it or not, this thread came up in a homily today. The celebrant preached about the Trinity and how we are made in the image and likeness of God. He noted that we all come from one body, Adam, because Adam was the first person created. Even Eve came from Adam’s body. He said that we are many persons, but, one substance. He said that we were made to love and to recognize ourselves in all mankind. In heaven, we will all be one family. He said that in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, we experience this foretaste of heaven when we give each other the sign of peace. The celebrant noted that the sign of peace is not the time to tell our spouses and children that we love them. It is a time to wish them peace, to wish them well-being. Peace, in this case, is not the absence of war, but of being whole, of being well.
 
benedictgal said:
Believe it or not, this thread came up in a homily today. The celebrant preached about the Trinity and how we are made in the image and likeness of God. He noted that we all come from one body, Adam, because Adam was the first person created. Even Eve came from Adam’s body. He said that we are many persons, but, one substance. He said that we were made to love and to recognize ourselves in all mankind. In heaven, we will all be one family. He said that in the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass, we experience this foretaste of heaven when we give each other the sign of peace. The celebrant noted that the sign of peace is not the time to tell our spouses and children that we love them. It is a time to wish them peace, to wish them well-being. Peace, in this case, is not the absence of war, but of being whole, of being well.
Click to expand...
There is a need for instruction and clarification on the ritual of giving the Sign of Peace, especially in regards to it being done with “Ecclesiastical unity.” We all need some instruction and clarification on that matter and it would be a big help if the bishops would give us a common gesture that we should use. But in listening to instruction on this matter about what is and is not proper, one should be careful not to judge the intentions of others. Spouses and parents who give a quick hug or kiss to family members are not using that time to tell each other that they love them, rather they do so with the intent of offering the Peace of Christ and mutual charity to their family as well as to their neighbor.
 
FrDavid96 said:
I need to come to Nick’s defense here. I think he was merely giving exaggerated examples of both extremes, simply as a literary device.
Click to expand...
I hope you’re right and if I read his post incorrectly I will apologize. I’m not out to start any arguments or fights (that really goes against any wishes of peace and unity).

But in defense of the people here who attend Mass alone and have been ignored, I want to say that everyone should be involved during the Sign of Peace and that it is entirely appropriate to note that this practice of ignoring people is going on.

BTW, his name is Mick, not Nick.
 
catharina said:
Fr. David - I completely agree with you about this.
Click to expand...
Again, as I stated in my last post, if I read his post incorrectly I will apologize. And, as stated in my last post, I feel that the people who have been ignored and have posted in this thread, have every right to bring up that issue.

I do apologize if I offended anyone. That was not my intent. I sometimes over-react when I see what I believe is an attack, however small, on other people.
 
zab said:
There is a need for instruction and clarification on the ritual of giving the Sign of Peace, especially in regards to it being done with “Ecclesiastical unity.” We all need some instruction and clarification on that matter and it would be a big help if the bishops would give us a common gesture that we should use. But in listening to instruction on this matter about what is and is not proper, one should be careful not to judge the intentions of others. Spouses and parents who give a quick hug or kiss to family members are not using that time to tell each other that they love them, rather they do so with the intent of offering the Peace of Christ and mutual charity to their family as well as to their neighbor.
Click to expand...
Just so. Thank you for saying this. IMO this whole issue hasn’t been so much about what was said as the manner of expressing it. I don’t believe anyone was arguing that this was a time to express “love,” but just that many feel expressing “peace” via a spousal handshake was inappropriate.
 
Hide it in a handshake or not, people will still shake thier own families hand first. That is life! If a person is at church and feels alone during the sign of peace there is a bigger issue goiong on. Perhaps the sign of peace is supposed to represent all of us in heaven, but should that not mean also that pettiness and people looking for reasons to feel slighted should not be going on as well? OIr in heaven will I have to read your minds to make sure you don’t get your feelings hurt?
Though I don’t doubt some posters on here that have been slighted at some point, I find it very hard to believe this is commonplace in many churches.
 
I haven’t read the thread, sorry, but I wanted to comment.

A hung or kiss is fine, as long as it isn’t “too much”. I think we can judge what too much might be. A light kiss or hug is fine. My grandmother always gives me a hug.🙂

However I wouldn’t do it with a stranger…But I do try to give a smile/nod/handshake to those alone after my family. Normally you find people alone during the weekday/early masses. Sunday mass usually doesn’t have people alone (and if there are, its hard to tell sometimes who is alone.)
 
Flame4 said:
I haven’t read the thread, sorry, but I wanted to comment.

A hung or kiss is fine, as long as it isn’t “too much”. I think we can judge what too much might be. A light kiss or hug is fine. My grandmother always gives me a hug.🙂

However I wouldn’t do it with a stranger…But I do try to give a smile/nod/handshake to those alone after my family. Normally you find people alone during the weekday/early masses. Sunday mass usually doesn’t have people alone (and if there are, its hard to tell sometimes who is alone.)
Click to expand...
The main concern in this thread is that people are using more than one gesture for the Sign of Peace. And that gets spun into accusations that spouses who kiss and/or hug family members are just engaging in expressions of family endearment and are not giving the Sign of Peace. That claim is refuted by others. The bishops of the United States have not designated a particular gesture for the people to use. So this presents a big problem when it comes to showing “Ecclesiatical unity” as well as “mutual charity” which are supposed to be symbolized in the gesture.
 
Catholicpotato said:
Perhaps the sign of peace is supposed to represent all of us in heaven, but should that not mean also that pettiness and people looking for reasons to feel slighted should not be going on as well? OIr in heaven will I have to read your minds to make sure you don’t get your feelings hurt?
Click to expand...
That wasn’t very kind.

Nobody is being petty and looking for reasons to feel slighted. But you must admit that if you’re standing there alone with nothing to do while everyone around you is hugging their families, it is awkward and unpleasant.

Of course the people aren’t ignoring me on purpose. But the fact is that you are alone in church–either because you are alone in the world, or because your family is not Catholic, or because your family is Catholic but doesn’t go to Mass. All of these situations are naturally isolating, and the sign of peace where nobody takes the trouble to notice you, just underscores the natural isolation of the situation. Without getting my feelings hurt in the sense of being offended at someone else’s behavior, it can still be painful.
Catholicpotato said:
I find it very hard to believe this is commonplace in many churches.
Click to expand...
It’s happened to me more than once during Sunday Mass in two of the three parishes that I have attended more than a few times since returning to the Church. I’m not capable of judging how likely it is in churches I’ve not attended.

I don’t blame the people, but I was certainly happier when we just didn’t have the sign of peace for a while for H1N1. Because after a while, even if it doesn’t happen this week, there is the worry beforehand that it will happen. It’s just human nature.

This question is of course just a practical matter, only tangentially related to the real doctrinal question of the unity of the sign of peace as a liturgical gesture, and not the main point of this thread.

–Jen
 
revert_jen,

No one offers you the sign of peace because they’re too busy with their own families? That would indeed be a problem, a very big one at that if you ask me. It’s a sign that these families might be a little too closed in on them selves to notice other people around them to offer at least a hand shake. I’ve spent many years going to Mass alone, and sure I spent a lot of those masses wishing I had a family there with me. But durring the sign of peace I was never “slighted” (even accidently in this context) by people not offering a handshake at all. Actually the sign of peace in that sense was somewhat comforting, it was a reminder that I wasn’t really and truely all alone.
 
crazzeto said:
No one offers you the sign of peace because they’re too busy with their own families?
Click to expand...
Yep. That was my initial problem with the hugging and kissing of spouses and children, is that it takes a lot longer than a simple handshake, so people don’t have time to offer the sign of peace outside their own family.

OTOH it’s good in a way, because it results from bigger families–lots of kids to hug and kiss. 😃

Maybe we just have the sign of peace for a shorter time here, or we’re slow huggers?
crazzeto said:
Actually the sign of peace in that sense was somewhat comforting, it was a reminder that I wasn’t really and truely all alone.
Click to expand...
Or it can be a reminder that you are… :rolleyes: So I mostly don’t go to the OF any more unless I am singing in the choir (where the problem doesn’t come up as you can imagine).

–Jen
 
My husband and I both kiss our daughter on the head while we shake her hand, she’s 14 in case that matters. And my husband kisses my cheek or my head depending on how far he has to stretch (if we’re with other family). I attend a pretty conservative parish. Some people prefer not to shake hands at all and I respect that. Since there is not a church teaching saying what we do as a family is wrong we will continue to do so.
 
I hate the sign of the peace with the handshake. My parish doesn’t do it - the priest, deacon, sub-deacon and servers exchange, in order, the kiss of peace - a ceremonial embrace where they hold shoulders and almost touch cheeks. Then the server bows to exchange it with the congregation, and they bow back.

Much better in so many ways. It is truly corporate, beautiful, and no crazy old ladies running around the nave trying to squeeze everyone’s elbows.
 
revert_jen said:
I don’t blame the people, but I was certainly happier when we just didn’t have the sign of peace for a while for H1N1.

–Jen
Click to expand...
Sorry, but I find this comment to be incredible. Is what you’re saying that you were happier with the threat of a major flu outbreak and the actions we took to avoid contagion? We didn’t take such precautions lightly. There was a real threat of illness and no one knew what would happen with H1N1. Take a look around at your fellow parishioners and ask yourself if you would really be happier in another situation similar to the H1N1 precautions again.
 
tinalewis said:
Sorry, but I find this comment to be incredible. Is what you’re saying that you were happier with the threat of a major flu outbreak and the actions we took to avoid contagion? We didn’t take such precautions lightly. There was a real threat of illness and no one knew what would happen with H1N1. Take a look around at your fellow parishioners and ask yourself if you would really be happier in another situation similar to the H1N1 precautions again.
Click to expand...
I don’t think that revert_jen was happy about the H1N1 outbreak. Just happy not to have to deal with the Sign of Peace. I wasn’t happy about H1N1, but I was happy that it got the Bishop of my diocese to ban intiction.
 
tinalewis said:
Sorry, but I find this comment to be incredible. Is what you’re saying that you were happier with the threat of a major flu outbreak and the actions we took to avoid contagion? We didn’t take such precautions lightly. There was a real threat of illness and no one knew what would happen with H1N1. Take a look around at your fellow parishioners and ask yourself if you would really be happier in another situation similar to the H1N1 precautions again.
Click to expand...
Of course I didn’t mean I was happy because of the threat of serious illness. It didn’t touch me very much (because I didn’t personally know a single person who came down with it) but of course I was very sad to hear of the terrible troubles elsewhere, especially in Mexico.

I suppose I should have punctuated it differently:

I was certainly happier when we just didn’t have the sign of peace for a while (for H1N1).

instead of:

I was certainly happier when we just didn’t have the sign of peace for a while for H1N1.

It makes it clearer that the phrase “for H1N1” is only there to explain why my parish stopped the sign of peace, and that it was the stoppage I was happy about, not the flu. Because I would be just as happy personally if we never had it again. I don’t mean that I think it should be removed. I know that it is a useful symbol for many people, and for their sake I can see why it is retained. I just mean that, for the reasons mentioned in my other posts and because under the best of circumstances I find it distracting, I don’t like it. Since it is optional (for the priest to decide at any Mass whether it will be done or not), I don’t feel that I’m being disloyal to the Church by not happening to care for it, as long as I participate it warm-heartedly when we do have it.

Sorry, I thought the context of my post made it clear that it was the temporary stopping of the sign of peace that I was happier about, not the flu, but I can see that it didn’t.

–Jen
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top