My local parish stops sign of peace

[Stephentlig]

Thank you everyone for your advice, I now understand that its an optional part of mass. for me the sign of peace is important.I can see though that there are a lot of mixed emotions about it on the forum. anyhow your all in my prayers and I pray for all of you this evening that perhaps you will learn to like it in the future.

God bless and take care
Stephen <3

 

[SonofMonica]

Why on earth would offering the Peace of Christ to a fellow Christian seem meaningless? If one does not profoundly wish peace upon every other member of the Body of Christ, one has to ask why. That seems a rather serious deficit in understanding and/or attitude.

I mean, you do want to spend eternity with these people don’t you? You do thirst for their total conversion to Christ as much as you thirst for your own conversion right? Or you at least want to want that, no? None of us has all of our desires in the right place, after all. Still, we ought to at least want to desire that God’s will be done, to desire what God desires. We have to start by recognizing that the other people in the pews are the stuff that saints are made of, and the only stuff that saints are made of. We are made of the same stuff, and probably in a less developed state. Humility demands us to recognize this.

Maybe you think of it merely as a pleasantry, and maybe that is the problem. That isn’t what the Sign of Peace is for. It is meant to be a solemn recognition of Christ’s life in and Christ’s deep desire for the other person. We approach Holy Communion in the recogntion that it is the means of nourishing your mutually-held life in Christ. It is a recognition of that you share the only life you have that means anything with that other person, even though you don’t know them. You know enough: that Jesus thirsts to have them be one with you, as He is one with the Father. That is enough. You don’t have to even like them. You only have to desire to completely love them, to have them entirely won to Christ. After all: the Christian life is nothing if not a communal life!

The love of God, after all, only becomes difficult when it starts to involve the real people that we actually have to live with. That is also when it becomes real.

Still, one does not have to like the various parts of the Mass, either. It helps, but it isn’t a necessity. One just has to do one’s best to cooperate fully with what the Mass is meant to accomplish. To find enjoyment in what obedience demands is icing on the cake.

Thanks, EJ, I do admit that the problem is with me–some of it may be the fact that I don’t even know most of the people that I’m smiling at while I shake their hand. I will do my best to take this to heart and see if it helps my attitude toward this practice.

 

[Brooklyn]

I remember way back when the Sign of Peace was first introduced into the Mass in the 1960’s. We were told to just shake the hands of the people next to us. It was very uncomfortable for all of us back then because we were so use to just being quiet and non-disruptive, and it was very forced at first.

I was gone from the Church for many years, and when my husband and I came back, we were kind of taken aback at how people were practically running up and down the aisles shaking hands and giving each other hugs and kisses.

In Ecclesiastes it says there is a time and place for everything. There is a time for us to meet and greet each other. I don’t feel that time is during Mass, when we are present at Calvary. I think that is a time to give our full attention to our Saviour.

Just my opinion.

Mary

 

[Timothysis]

It’s not just a disruption, it’s an evil.

Please rethink your words. I am going to assume that you, as a well intentioned cathloic, do not truly consider an act in the liturgy of the Eucharist as “evil.”

Let’s face it: the “Sign of Peace” injects anarchy into the Mass before the Blessed Sacrament. That one’s attention should be diverted from Christ in order to socialize, even for a moment, is scandalous in the extreme. Any pastor who gets rid of it is doing the work of God.

How is it “socializing” to wish peace upon your fellow catholics before being sanctified by the Body of Christ? When Christ appeared to the the faithful after His resurrection, what was the first thing that the gospels record Him as saying to them? “Peace be with you.” Do you think that some objected to Him, saying “this isn’t the time for socializing?” As was mentioned before, Mass is when the Church militant gathers together for worship; others present are not a necessary evil who must be put up with. Christ told us to love our neighbors as ourselves. Do you honestly think you are living up to that with such an attitude?

 

[rpp]

I would like to add that I, and many others who have expressed a preference that the Sign of Peace be excluded, are not taking this position because we do not like it or do not desire to be at peace with others or any of the other reasons cited by those advocating the inclusion of this option in the liturgy or expressing consternation of those who do not favor it.

Rather what motivates people like me is when it takes place. I would have no problem if the sign of peace were moved to another part of the Mass either before the consecration or after communion. That is because for many like me, we are focusing our minds and on the miracle that just took place on the altar; focusing on the vertical; to God. When the sign of peace comes, that distracts us from vertical orientation and causes of to focus on those around us, however briefly that may be, it breaks the chain of thought and meditation and it is difficult for many to pick up that thread afterwards.

Unlike any other activity, Mass, while public and member of the community are gathered in one place, is a thoroughly private experience. It is not entertainment, it is not a community event, it is not a performance, It is worship. Nothing is more private and personal than worship. Thus, unlike any other activity people engage in, Mass is utterly unique. Many have lost sight of this in recent decades and hence we see “innovations” and misplaced “creativity”.

The above is also why it is important that Mass be celegrated in a consistent manner. There are few things more distracting that someone doing something differently. Frequent changes to how Mass is celebrated often causes the mind to wander for many people. When my mind wanders, I do not get as much out of the Mass.

By the way, the Congregation for Divine Worship is currently considering moving the sign of peace to some other point in the Mass. I pray that the Holy Spirit will give them the grace of wisdom to evaluate this and make a determination that will benefit the faithful.

 

[rpp]

Please rethink your words. I am going to assume that you, as a well intentioned cathloic, do not truly consider an act in the liturgy of the Eucharist as “evil.”

I agree. While I prefer it when the sign of peace is excluded, nothing in the Mass can be considered “evil”. That is simply an impossibility. However, I think the poster was probably referring to those Masses where the celebrant become, well, overly enthusiastic about it.

How is it “socializing” to wish peace upon your fellow catholics before being sanctified by the Body of Christ? When Christ appeared to the the faithful after His resurrection, what was the first thing that the gospels record Him as saying to them? “Peace be with you.” Do you think that some objected to Him, saying “this isn’t the time for socializing?” As was mentioned before, Mass is when the Church militant gathers together for worship; others present are not a necessary evil who must be put up with. Christ told us to love our neighbors as ourselves. Do you honestly think you are living up to that with such an attitude?

While travelling, I have been to parishes when the sign of peace lasted for more than 5 solid minutes, including the priest going up and down the aisles, from the front to the back of the Church and shaking everyone’s hands who were near the aisle in the pews. Meanwhile other people are leaving the pews and greeting friends and neighbors on the other side of the church. Some people actually began chatting while the priest finished his rounds. I would describe this as slightly chaotic and there most certainly was socializing going on. Perhaps this was the kind of thing that poster was referring to.

By the way, I may be wrong and perhaps someone can confirm or refute this, but I believe that it is an abuse for the priest to leave the area around the altar during the sign of peace.

 

[FrDavid96]

…

By the way, I may be wrong and perhaps someone can confirm or refute this, but I believe that it is an abuse for the priest to leave the area around the altar during the sign of peace.

In general, that’s true–it is not to be done. However, by way of concession, this is permitted under certain circumstances (like offering the sign of peace to the family members at a funeral, for example), if it’s not over-done.

 

[Timothysis]

While travelling, I have been to parishes when the sign of peace lasted for more than 5 solid minutes, including the priest going up and down the aisles, from the front to the back of the Church and shaking everyone’s hands who were near the aisle in the pews. Meanwhile other people are leaving the pews and greeting friends and neighbors on the other side of the church. Some people actually began chatting while the priest finished his rounds. I would describe this as slightly chaotic and there most certainly was socializing going on. Perhaps this was the kind of thing that poster was referring to.

I appreciate your experience and take you word for it. But in my travels I have honestly never seen the sign of peace get out of hand like some here maintain.

 

[rpp]

I appreciate your experience and take you word for it. But in my travels I have honestly never seen the sign of peace get out of hand like some here maintain.

I should add that in this particular Mass, they had a lay guitarist sitting in front of the altar on a chair, playing his guitar and singing the words of consecration while the priest appeared to remain silent but performed the actions. The priest took his cues for what action to perform based on what the guitarist was singing at that moment. The entire Mass was so odd that afterwards, I went outside and looked at the sign to see if it actually said Catholic, which it did.

It was a Saturday vigil Mass. I found another Mass in a different town the next day because I honestly did not feel that I had met my Sunday obligation.

 

[rpp]

In general, that’s true–it is not to be done. However, by way of concession, this is permitted under certain circumstances (like offering the sign of peace to the family members at a funeral, for example), if it’s not over-done.

Thank you for confirming this Father. That exception also makes perfect sense as the principal motivation would be to comfort the grieving.

 

[Timothysis]

I should add that in this particular Mass, they had a lay guitarist sitting in front of the altar on a chair, playing his guitar and singing the words of consecration while the priest appeared to remain silent but performed the actions. The priest took his cues for what action to perform based on what the guitarist was singing at that moment. The entire Mass was so odd that afterwards, I went outside and looked at the sign to see if it actually said Catholic, which it it.

Now, that is just too much and even the intent of the priest to consecrate the Body and Blood of Our Lord could be called into question. How very sad.

 

[Beachcomber]

I wish the sign of peace would get moved. At the parish I attend, it tends to go on for some time and people run all over. They hug, they chat, the priest is everywhere. And, as if that’s not enough, the music leader at the beginning of Mass, tells everyone to greet their neighbor.

If it were to be moved to the start of the Mass, it would seem less intrusive and it could be seen as welcoming everyone together for the celebration.

 

[rpp]

I wish the sign of peace would get moved. At the parish I attend, it tends to go on for some time and people run all over. They hug, they chat, the priest is everywhere. And, as if that’s not enough, the music leader at the beginning of Mass, tells everyone to greet their neighbor.

If it were to be moved to the start of the Mass, it would seem less intrusive and it could be seen as welcoming everyone together for the celebration.

Well, lets See what the Congregation does with it. I just hope that it is moved either sometime before the consecration or after communion. Your idea seems like a good one. I have been to Masses where the lector essentially calls the Mass to order before the precess and asks people to greet one another. That does seem a little redundant whan one considers how the sign of peace is often expressed.

 

[blackrobe]

I hope it isn’t inappropriate but I want to take this opportunity to relate an amusing story. A couple in my parish who travel extensively visited Ireland. They made a point of assisting at Mass it as many places as possible. In one country parish the elderly, rather gruff priest had a unique take on the sign of peace: “All right, shake hands if you must, but I won’t have any kissing!”

JSA

 

[OhMalley]

hiya guys, my local parish has decided to stop doing the sign of peace at mass. I do however feel they have no right to do so and was wondering if you could please set me straight on the subject.

the priests took it upon themselves to do it with no word from the archdioccese on it. I remember one time father david in this forum telling us that a priest has no right to decide what part of the mass to do and not to do.

below is the link to the small article in our local town newspaper.
a response from someone to put me on the right track here would be great.
it would certainly put my mind at ease thats for sure, as I am quite upset about it.

God bless
Stephen.<3

I am sorry to hear that. It is up to the priestly celebrant though. If you watch EWTN Masses they do not have the sign of peace yet visiting bishops often include it when they celebrate the Mass – and it’s wonderful to see.

I’m not sure why any priest would not have the sign of peace. That’s very sad. I guess they didn’t want to take the time to teach people how to behave?

 

[jediliz]

During Cold and Flu season, my parish does not have the Sign of Peace on most Sundays. However, my sister’s parish in a difference Diocese, does. I think its OKAY to suspend it during Cold/Flu Season just because there’s a bigger risk of spreading cold germs to others. That’s why if I have a cold, I just sit during it or say “I’m sick” and at least try to make a smile.

When I went to Daily Mass during my Elementary school years (Catholic School) we only at Sign of Peace at special occasions, not all the time.

 

[OhMalley]

I wish the sign of peace would get moved. ** At the parish I attend, it tends to go on for some time and people run all over. They hug, they chat, the priest is everywhere. ** And, as if that’s not enough, the music leader at the beginning of Mass, tells everyone to greet their neighbor.

If it were to be moved to the start of the Mass, it would seem less intrusive and it could be seen as welcoming everyone together for the celebration.

Seems like it would be better to instruct the people how to behave during the sign of peace rather than cancelling the sign of peace.

 

[JimG]

I don’t think the OP’s priests actually stopped the sign of peace as a part of the liturgy. That part remains in the liturgy–the point at which the priest turns to the congregation and says “peace be with you,” and the congregation responds, “and also with you.” It is also in the Tridentine liturgy.

 

[seekerz]

The first time I ever heard of the sign of peace being referred to as a distraction was on this forum. Far as I know we celebrate Mass as a community of faith…I’d miss it if it were stopped in my parish.

 

[Bluegoat]

I don’t like the shakee-hands sign of the peace. I know that it is often explained that we need to reconcile with our neighbors before we can receive the Eucharist, to forgive them and see that we are indeed a community.

But I think this is inappropriate at this point. We become a community because of the action and grace of Christ, through receiving the sacrament, not through our own efforts. I think the shaking of hands and general warm-fuzzy tends to lend itself to the mistaken idea that it is we who constitute the community ourselves, and we who make up the Church. It can also easily be misinterpreted in a Pelagian way.

Now, I think the phrase “the peace of the Lord be always with you” is fine. Also, when I was a server, the kiss of peace was passed among the clergy and servers in the Sanctuary, and it was very beautiful and meaningful, and I think less likely to lead to misunderstanding or to negatively affect the momentum of the liturgy. I don’t know if Catholics have done that in recent memory though?

Also in the Anglican liturgy is the Prayer of Humble Access, which I think reinforces the idea that we are constituted as a community through Christ, and that liturgy is a communal endevor. It goes like this:

We do not presume to come to this thy Table, O merciful Lord, trusting in our own righteousness, but in thy manifold and great mercies. We are not worthy so much as to gather up the crumbs under thy Table. But thou art the same Lord, whose property is always to have mercy: Grant us therefore, gracious Lord, so to eat the flesh of thy dear Son Jesus Christ, and to drink his blood, that our sinful bodies may be made clean by his body, and our souls washed through his most precious blood, and that we may evermore dwell in him, and he in us. Amen.