SPLIT: Sign of Peace/Agnes Dei Reverence

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cindyr9
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

Cindyr9

Guest
"]This is a reply to an old post, but since I am new to the forum I would like to say that I find that the sign of peace has become somewhat of a social greeting where people are sometimes turning from pew to pew looking for more people to greet besides those in their immediate vicinity. I find this detracts from the solemnity of the Agnus Dei which is said immediately afterwards. My personal remedy for this is to kneel during the Agnus Dei. I was a member of an Anglican church for over 20 years and we knelt during the Agnus Dei right after the peace. It seemed to flow better and it served as a reminder of the solemnity of the prayer where we call upon our precious Savior as the sacrificial “Lamb of God.”
 
Ideally? would LOVE to see it totally removed. It is nothing but a nasty germ spreader.
 
I think we should exercise the legit option and omit it most of the time. It is optional for a reason. If the church wanted it at every Mass, she would make that clear. But she hasn’t. She has said it’s optional, and that it may be used “When appropriate.”
 
elgar said:
How interesting as a Protestant (Anglican), we kneel during the Lord’s Prayer, Agnus Dei and at the Communion rail. The exchange of Peace takes place after the confession right before the Offertory. It sometimes becomes mayhem but at least it is placed in a less sensitive time in the mass.

We also love our Sanctus bells.
Click to expand...
I have noticed this in Anglican churches and, whilst I don’t obviously receive communion, it feels much less disruptive to follow the order set out above (I also like the way a steward releases people up to the communion rail row by row rather than the mad rush, and congestion, you sometimes find).

Sharing the peace used to be a quiet and dignified act, but it has become - in many places - a bit of a free-for-all and distracts from the solemnity of that part of the liturgy.
 
lisahiku said:
Ideally? would LOVE to see it totally removed. It is nothing but a nasty germ spreader.
Click to expand...
I disagree. The Sign of Peace also spreads good germs.

Seriously, though, abusus non tollit usum. Just because the Sign of Peace is often misused to be a social chit-chat rather than the acknowledgment and sharing of the peace of Jesus Christ, that doesn’t mean we should get rid of it altogether. I would rather we catechize properly about the liturgy (especially those parts which are poorly celebrated or misunderstood), instead of changing things.
 
legendashmore said:
I find the sign of peace distracting.
The Lord Jesus is truly there, he is truly there on the altar. Why are we not spending time in adoration of his most sacred body, on our knees, rather than standing speaking to other people.
The sign of peace doesn’t even need to be there, it takes all of our attention away from the Lord Jesus. It puts all of our attention on the person sitting next to you. Why do we do this? . Shouldn’t we be adoring him? We should be filled with amazement that this has actually happened.

I think the sign of peace is one of the reasons many catholics today, don’t believe in the true presence. 😦 If we were to stay on our knees people would realize that he is truly on the altar.

God Bless:D
Click to expand...
The person sitting next to you is part of the Body of Christ, as well as in front of you and behind you. We are making peace with the Body of Christ, Just as in the Lord’s prayer said immediately prior, we are forgiving those who have trespassed against us and asking for forgiveness. We ask these things not just from the specific people involved but from the entire Body of Christ. When we sin, we don’t just harm the person the sin was against but the Whole Body of Christ. Forgive me for being repetitive, but the sign of peace is exactly where it should be and could only enhance our preparedness for recieving Jesus in the Eucharist, if we use it properly.
 
If I had a dime for every time I sit behind someone who happens to blow their snotty nose 6 times before the sign of peace and then have to shake thier hand, i would be very rich.
which is why of late, I cut out to “use the restroom”!😃
 
lisahiku said:
If I had a dime for every time I sit behind someone who happens to blow their snotty nose 6 times before the sign of peace and then have to shake thier hand, i would be very rich.
which is why of late, I cut out to “use the restroom”!😃
Click to expand...
i know plenty of people in my parish who make some other gesture and don’t shake hands like a wave or a bow of the head or something, and while I can’t speak of anyone else, I have never thought twice about it. The message is what matters. You could do this instead of leaving and distracting yourself right before communion.
 
really? wonder what chuch you go to. I live in the midwest and have never seen ANYONE bow or do any other sign of peace except shake hands and of course, the love birds kiss.
As a matter of fact, winter of 2009-2010 the diocese highly advised NO shaking of hands during this time in order to not spread the H1N1 going around (in some places) at the time.

No matter what anyone says, many many germs are spread by hand to hand and hand to mouth and hand to eye contact.

I will continue to be exiting during this time. I don’t need to get sick by some person that doesn’t give a flip if I have peace or not!
 
lisahiku said:
I will continue to be exiting during this time. I don’t need to get sick by some person that doesn’t give a flip if I have peace or not!
Click to expand...
Well, I’m sorry that you feel that way. Why would you continue to go to a church where you feel nobody cares about you though I doubt that is even remotely true.
 
i currently do attend a church that is extremely unwelcoming.
but regardless, I aint shaking hands anymore.
 
lisahiku said:
Ideally? would LOVE to see it totally removed. It is nothing but a nasty germ spreader.
Click to expand...
Except that it predates even the Eucharist in terms of the worship of the people of God, and that there has never been a time when the sign of peace was NOT part of Judeo-Christian worship (and the fact that the earliest records of the mass clearly denote that the sign of peace was present).

Removing core elements of the liturgy: now THAT would be improper liturgical “evolution”
 
really? it is my understanding the sign of peace was supposed to be about christ’s peace being with the people.
 
lisahiku said:
really? it is my understanding the sign of peace was supposed to be about christ’s peace being with the people.
Click to expand...
nope. The sign of peace is part of the liturgy which was handed on to us from Synagogue. Jews offered each other a greeting before Jesus was incarnate, and Jesus would have offered a greeting to others in His times at Synagogue.

Today we greet each other with the sign of peace, but that does not negate the fact that this is a pre-christian era part of the liturgy.
 
I’ve never been a fan of the sign of peace. One of the many reasons why I prefer the Latin Mass because its not done there. Nor the Byzatine/Eastern Rite for that manner.

The big issue is that it is done after the Our Father and more importantly AFTER the consecration of the Eucharist. So while Jesus is up on the alter instead of worshiping Him, the congregation is hugging and kissing. At the very least it should be moved to after the Nicene Creed (which is what the Coptic Orthodox do, and they just cross hands) or taken out altogether. Attention should not be taken off our Lord after the consecration is made.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top