Is it bad that I don't take part in the sign of peace?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Thomasbradley312
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Listen I have a priest who openly changed the words to EP 4 the other day.
If he doesn’t care about being obedient to the missal why should I?
 
Sacrosanctum concilium #30 & #31:-
  1. To promote active participation, the people should be encouraged to take part by means of acclamations, responses, psalmody, antiphons, and songs, as well as by actions, gestures, and bodily attitudes. And at the proper times all should observe a reverent silence.
  2. The revision of the liturgical books must carefully attend to the provision of rubrics also for the people’s parts."
Sacramentum Caritatis - Actuosa participatio #52 onwards. If a search using the term ‘gestures’ is made, the importance of the gestures is mentioned in #40, 64, 64B, and #65. So whilst the SOP isn’t specifically mentioned, it does indicate the importance of signs and gestures made.

Sacred signs and active participation in Mass by Rev. Cassian Folsom, OSB

Sacred Signs by Peter Kwasniewski & Romano Guardini on Amazon

or the original book by Romano Guardini 1955 is available to read as a pdf here.

Then there is the GIRM for the USA - Chapter IV The Different Forms of Celebrating Mass #154 “…According to what is decided by the Conference of Bishops, all express to one another peace, communion, and charity. While the Sign of Peace is being given, it is permissible to say, The peace of the Lord be with you always, to which the reply is Amen. …” (Bold emphasis is mine).
 
CRV said:
Sacrosanctum concilium #30 & #31:-
  1. To promote active participation, the people should be encouraged to take part by means of acclamations, responses, psalmody, antiphons, and songs, as well as by actions, gestures, and bodily attitudes. And at the proper times all should observe a reverent silence.
  2. The revision of the liturgical books must carefully attend to the provision of rubrics also for the people’s parts."
Sacramentum Caritatis - Actuosa participatio #52 onwards. If a search using the term ‘gestures’ is made, the importance of the gestures is mentioned in #40, 64, 64B, and #65. So whilst the SOP isn’t specifically mentioned, it does indicate the importance of signs and gestures made.

Sacred signs and active participation in Mass by Rev. Cassian Folsom, OSB

Sacred Signs by Peter Kwasniewski & Romano Guardini on Amazon

or the original book by Romano Guardini 1955 is available to read as a pdf here.

Then there is the GIRM for the USA - Chapter IV The Different Forms of Celebrating Mass #154 “…According to what is decided by the Conference of Bishops, all express to one another peace, communion, and charity. While the Sign of Peace is being given, it is permissible to say, The peace of the Lord be with you always, to which the reply is Amen. …” (Bold emphasis is mine).
Click to expand...
Yes, the people are encouraged to do thus, but not required.

…and saying that all do something doesn’t mean that all are bound to do something. It’s a statement of what is, not what must be.
 
Yes, SC does state it as ‘encourage’ and not commanded. That is true.

But my reading of GIRM as decided by the Bishops Conference, it clearly states all. But then again, I am one of these people who bow my head at the name of Jesus, the Holy Trinity and the Saint of the day.
 
PeterT said:
You can keep trying to fool yourself thinking that you’re doing nothing wrong, but you can’t fool God. He truly knows your warmness or coldness of heart in
regards to the other members of the mystical Body of Christ.
Click to expand...
Sounds like He could just ask you. Lololol
 
It is my understanding that the GIRM contains rubrics for the Mass - liturgical law. There is also the valid liturgical legislation of Bishops’ Conferences.

In the document for the GIRM for the USA , #154 states "According to what is decided by the Conference of Bishops…

Yes it is a statement of what we are to do, but it is also an instruction.

I prefer to obey liturgical law.

As others have pointed out there are many ways of offering the sign of peace.

And I’m saying this as one who prefers to attend the EF Mass.
 
You’re fine not to participate. Don’t be rude, as others have already said, but a nod or smile will suffice. Certainly don’t feel forced to travel all around the Church finding people as I’ve seen so many do at my NO parish and back when I was a Baptist.

The sign of peace, IMO, can contribute to both a decrease in reverence for the blessed Sacrament—it’s placed right before the Consecration, arguably the highest point of the mass and the introduction of the source and summit of the Christian life into the chapel. Trust me, as a former Baptist, I feel like I’m right back in the shag carpets and bare-walled chapel of my days of old when the Sign of Peace comes around.

It’s a fine thing, in and of itself, but it is not fit for the place in the liturgy it currently holds. Maybe at the end of mass, or beforehand. In either case, before or after mass, IMO, that would contribute more to a sense of fraternity than pulling one out of the ordinary liturgy for a general meet and greet.

EDIT: Not completely relevant, but neither should one hold hands and/or raise them during the Pater Noster/Our Father. This is liturgical innovation, and the Orans posture—hands raised—is reserved for the priest, as he is praying for the laity present. Before anyone balks at me, universal priesthood by virtue of baptism is different from sacramentally ordained priesthood. We don’t imitate the priest in every action.
 
Last edited:
CRV said:
Yes, SC does state it as ‘encourage’ and not commanded. That is true.

But my reading of GIRM as decided by the Bishops Conference, it clearly states all.
Click to expand...
“All” is not the only word stated. The operative part of the statement from the GIRM is that “all do” something, not “all must do” something. Even the CDW document released in 2014 and approved by Pope Francis does not require that the laity participate in the Sign of Peace as it is manifested in their parishes.

Potential statements of fact cannot be twisted into binding commands upon anyone.

The Church does have every right to bind us to liturgical laws, but the nature of a law is in its promulgation, and a doubtful law does not bind. My proposition is that there is no law to be found in this regard whatsoever.
 
Last edited:
CRV said:
40.png
Nikolaite:
a doubtful law does not bind.
Click to expand...
I agree with you there.

I don’t agree that the instruction to offer each other the sign of peace is doubtful.
Click to expand...
There is nothing in the GIRM except a potential statement of fact regarding the Sign of Peace, a permission extended to the priest, and then the supplied appropriate response. There is nothing there which requires any sort of outward sign of one lay person to another during Holy Mass.

Repeated: there is no instruction to the laity as far as outward sign except to the priest when the “Amen” is uttered in response to his “The peace of the Lord be with you always.”

There is no law proposed, therefore there is no room for doubt.
 
Nikolaite said:
There is nothing there which requires any sort of outward sign of one lay person to another during Holy Mass.
Click to expand...
It says " all express to one another peace, communion, and charity. " So how does one “express” this to another if not by some outward sign?

Yet in #181 " After the Priest has said the prayer for the Rite of Peace and … the Deacon,… says the invitation to the Sign of Peace. With hands joined, he faces the people and says, Let us offer each other the sign of peace. Then he himself receives the Sign of Peace from the Priest and may offer it to those other ministers who are nearest to him.

I note here the Deacon receives this sign of peace - so if it isn’t a concrete outward sign, how would this happen? And considering it occurs within the same liturgical context - ie the point in the Mass, then the Deacons instruction to us to offer each other the sign of peace, must therefore also be assumed to be an outward sign.

It falls within the Mass. The Mass is governed by laws. The sign of peace is but one part within a larger part - all under the law.

The SOP is an optional choice for the priest - whether he includes it or not - “After this, if appropriate, the Priest adds, Let us offer each other the sign of peace.”

We are being instructed to offer each other the sign of peace. It does not say “Let us offer each other the sign of peace, if appropriate…” Therefore it isn’t optional.

I see no doubt about what we are being instructed to do.
 
Last edited:
If I offer a fist bump (far less chance of contagion) instead of a handshake, is that an infraction (Unsportsmanlike conduct, 15 yards, etc.)?
 
Last edited:
CRV said:
40.png
Nikolaite:
There is nothing there which requires any sort of outward sign of one lay person to another during Holy Mass.
Click to expand...
It says " all express to one another peace, communion, and charity. " So how does one “express” this to another if not by some outward sign?

Yet in #181 " After the Priest has said the prayer for the Rite of Peace and … the Deacon,… says the invitation to the Sign of Peace. With hands joined, he faces the people and says, Let us offer each other the sign of peace. Then he himself receives the Sign of Peace from the Priest and may offer it to those other ministers who are nearest to him.
…
It falls within the Mass. The Mass is governed by laws. The sign of peace is but one part within a larger part - all under the law.

The SOP is an optional choice for the priest - whether he includes it or not - “After this, if appropriate, the Priest adds, Let us offer each other the sign of peace.”

We are being instructed to offer each other the sign of peace. It does not say “Let us offer each other the sign of peace, if appropriate…” Therefore it isn’t optional.

I see no doubt about what we are being instructed to do.
Click to expand...
" all express to one another peace, communion, and charity. " Indeed. This is a potential statement of fact, not an instruction. You can see by human logic this is not an instruction because the necessary “how” is not answered.

#181 also contains no instruction for the laity, only for the priest and deacon. Once again, the necessary “how” is not answered in any regard to the laity. The deacon faces the people and makes an utterance. No utterance, gesture, expression or exchange is suggested or instructed for the laity. The deacon receives the Sign of Peace from the priest and may offer it to other ministers nearest to him. That is all the instruction.

The changes to dialogue Masses which began in the early 1960’s, really obscured what the Holy Mass is. It is a sacrifice. People can assist at the Mass, but there is no place for “lay participation” in the Mass per se. That is for the priest and his ministers. All that is required of the laity is to hear and assist at Holy Mass. How do the laity assist? By enjoining their private prayers and devotions to the action of the priest.

A lot of abuse has crept in to this Sign of Peace ceremony which we were cautioned against in the CDW document on the Sign of Peace from 2014. The deacon’s words to the laity sans instruction in the GIRM are inconclusive. There isn’t even tradition to fall back on here to fill in an understanding as the practice of lay participation in the Sign of Peace can only be traced back to the 1970’s.

Once again, this practice outside of liturgical law and regulation of some expression from the laity called the Sign of Peace is a novelty. There may be good reason for putting it on the laity, but it would be hard to point to a good fruit which comes from it.
 
CA - Peace Be With You. " In the United States, our national bishops conference indicates that “the people extend to those around them a sign of peace, typically by shaking hands.”

USCCB The Rite of Peace #82 "The Rite of Peace
  1. There follows the Rite of Peace, by which the Church entreats peace and unity for herself and for the whole human family, and the faithful express to each other their ecclesial communion and mutual charity before communicating in the Sacrament.
As for the actual sign of peace to be given, the manner is to be established by the Conferences of Bishops in accordance with the culture and customs of the peoples. However, it is appropriate that each person, in a sober manner, offer the sign of peace only to those who are nearest."

I believe here is stated that the expression is an outward sign.

I think you’re cherry picking from that document. “181. After the Priest has said the prayer for the Rite of Peace and the greeting The peace of the Lord be with you always and the people have replied, And with your spirit, the Deacon, if appropriate, says the invitation to the Sign of Peace. With hands joined, he faces the people and says, Let us offer each other the sign of peace. Then he himself receives the Sign of Peace from the Priest and may offer it to those other ministers who are nearest to him.” That seems like an instruction to the laity to me.

I’ve no interest in moving the goal posts. You stated there isn’t any instructions for the laity. I believe I have shown otherwise.

Any changes/abuses etc are another kettle of fish.

It wasn’t done by the laity prior to the OF because the servers response to the priest is made on behalf of the laity at the Mass.

Any fruit deriving from it is another matter.

Peace be with you.
 
Last edited:
You have shown the exact opposite to your conclusion.

Additionally, I have stated earlier in this thread that our Archbishop has prohibited us in this region of the USA from shaking hands whatsoever. …and It is not the USCCB that decides what goes in any given diocese, it’s ultimately up to the bishop.

My point is not cherry picking. The GIRM does not tell the laity how to express peace to one another. A statement that people do express it doesn’t tell you how to express it…and a statement that people express to each other their ecclesial communion and mutual charity before communicating in the sacrament (besides transgressing on the Council of Trent’s session on Justification) gives no instruction on how to express a Sign of Peace.

Communion and charity are not synonyms for peace:
Peace is tranquil order.
Charity is a supernatural virtue by which one loves God above all things and his neighbor as himself for God’s sake.
Communion is a one-ness in the Mystical Body of Christ.

My point is that there is no actual liturgical law which binds any lay person (besides those serving at the altar) to participate in the Sign of Peace. There are permissions, encouragements, novel customs and suggestions, but no actual laws.

Further proof is that there is no penalty in the legal sense for failing or refusing to offer the Sign of Peace.
 
Nikolaite said:
You have shown the exact opposite to your conclusion.
Click to expand...
I gave proof that we the laity are to offer each other the sign of peace. You insist we aren’t. I quoted the USCCB in addition to others, which clearly show it is expected of the laity to express to each other some sign of peace. I also quoted parts that state the manner is to be established by the Conferences of Bishops.

Redemptionis Sacramentum # 72 " It is appropriate “that each one give the sign of peace only to those who are nearest and in a sober manner”. “The Priest may give the sign of peace to the ministers but always remains within the sanctuary, so as not to disturb the celebration. He does likewise if for a just reason he wishes to extend the sign of peace to some few of the faithful”. “As regards the sign to be exchanged, the manner is to be established by the Conference of Bishops in accordance with the dispositions and customs of the people”, and their acts are subject to the recognitio of the Apostolic See."

At least now you are acknowledging that the laity are to give some sign of peace, earlier you said the laity are not bound to.

The manner of giving the sign of peace, has only arisen after I raised it in my quotes. You did not raise this issue before, yet do so now.
Nikolaite said:
My point is that there is no actual liturgical law which binds any lay person
Click to expand...
The Mass is governed by liturgical law. The SOP is part of this rite and is included. The Conference of Bishops have made a ruling. As I have said before.
So unless there is a canonical law or interdict or other just penalty, it is ok to flout ‘the law’?

Well, I guess you and I attend different Churches. So there’s no point in trying to discuss this further.

But as you disagree with the ruling of the Bishops Conference, I suggest you take up this matter with them.

Peace be with you.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top