The Sign of Peace is a Colossal Waste of Time

[PennyinCanada]

" A day will come when the civilized world will deny its God, when the Church will doubt as Peter doubted. She will be tempted to believe that man has become God. In our churches, Christians will search in vain for the red lamp where God awaits them. Like Mary Magdalene, weeping before the empty tomb, they will ask, "Where have they taken him ? "
Pope Pius XII

Powerful words.
Thanks for posting that.

 

[thirddec]

Gosh what a simple person I am ; never did I have any reason to believe that a simple act of human brotherhood such a shaking someones hand could create so many problems. So lets just drop this symbol of Christs second commandment from the mass. I personally would just move it ; to the start as a Kind of welcome and coming together of all out brothers and sisters

Jesus replied: “‘Love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind.’[c] This is the first and greatest commandment. And the second is like it: ‘Love your neighbor as yourself.’[d] All the Law and the Prophets hang on these two commandments.”

 

[thomas_jd]

I find the sign of peace to be trite, ineffective, cold and a waste of time. Why do we even need it in the Liturgy?

I know the sign of peace originated as a “holy kiss”.

I’ve been alternating between 3 parishes and in most of them, there is not even a handshake. People turn around and hold up their hands, give a quick nod, or maybe a smile if you’re lucky.

There is no “Good to see you”. In fact, it happens so fast, if someone asked me to identify in a lineup the person I exchanged the sign of peace with 10 minutes before, I’d be at a loss.

If there is no warmth in this sign of peace, why bother?

The priest prays to Jesus for peace and unity in the church! “Lord Jesus Christ, who said to your Apostles, Peace I leave, my peace I give you, look not on our sins but on the faith
of your Church, and graciously grant her peace and unity…”
We then in turn offer the sign of peace to our neighbors, we join together at mass with the priest in this prayer of peace.
Prayer is never a “Colossal Waste of time”

 

[PiousTemplar]

I find the sign of peace to be trite, ineffective, cold and a waste of time. Why do we even need it in the Liturgy?

I know the sign of peace originated as a “holy kiss”.

I’ve been alternating between 3 parishes and in most of them, there is not even a handshake. People turn around and hold up their hands, give a quick nod, or maybe a smile if you’re lucky.

There is no “Good to see you”. In fact, it happens so fast, if someone asked me to identify in a lineup the person I exchanged the sign of peace with 10 minutes before, I’d be at a loss.

If there is no warmth in this sign of peace, why bother?

Many people like it. If you dislike it so much, attend an EF Mass…

 

[PolyphonyChick]

As somebody already said, there was zero education when they reinstated the Sign of Peace. So while it might be a commendable practice, people don’t know what it means or how to do it correctly!

This has been bothering me for a while: if so many people receive communion in the hand, shouldn’t they not be touching everybody and dirtying their hands?

 

[Stylteralmaldo]

I too wish they would change the time of the sign of peace to after the mass has ended.

I disagree. I think of Matthew’s Gospel at the time of the sign of Peace:
Matthew 5:23-24:

Therefore, if you bring your gift to the altar, and there recall that your brother has anything against you, leave your gift there at the altar, go first and be reconciled with your brother, and then come and offer your gift.

During the sign of Peace, we reconcile with those we may be angry with, we “let it go” and then receive the Lord in Holy Communion. Our gift of self is more receptive and quite beautiful from my perspective.

 

[vsedriver]

If there is no warmth in this sign of peace, why bother?

you can not control the behavior of others, only your own behavior. I make it a point to look the person in the eye, smile and wish them the Peace of Christ. Some respond well, others never look me in the eye and are already looking for the next hand to shake.

I am not offended. It is my behavior I am responsible for. I put my best effort into the Sign of Peace. What others do is between them and God.

 

[Brendan]

I disagree. I think of Matthew’s Gospel at the time of the sign of Peace:

During the sign of Peace, we reconcile with those we may be angry with, we “let it go” and then receive the Lord in Holy Communion. Our gift of self is more receptive and quite beautiful from my perspective.

Actually, no we don’t, not during the sign of peace. The reconcilliation has already happend during the Penitential Rite ( I confess to Almighty God AND TO YOU MY BROTHERS AND SISTERS…)

The reconcillation between us must happen before the Offetory ( as Mark noted) and that is exactly where the Penitential Rite is placed.

Here is the Vatican on the subject

Redemptionis Sacramentum

1. The practice of the Roman Rite is to be maintained according to which the peace is extended shortly before Holy Communion. For according to the tradition of the Roman Rite, this practice does not have the connotation either of reconciliation or of a remission of sins, but instead signifies peace, communion and charity before the reception of the Most Holy Eucharist.

(emphasis mine)

 

[purplesunshine]

Actually, no we don’t, not during the sign of peace. The reconcilliation has already happend during the Penitential Rite ( I confess to Almighty God AND TO YOU MY BROTHERS AND SISTERS…)

The reconcillation between us must happen before the Offetory ( as Mark noted) and that is exactly where the Penitential Rite is placed.

Here is the Vatican on the subject

Redemptionis Sacramentum
(emphasis mine)

I think that the “reconciliation” that the first poster speaks about is NOT between God and man (as stated, it’s already been forgiven) but between man and man where there may still be some enmity.

 

[Stylteralmaldo]

Actually, no we don’t, not during the sign of peace. The reconcilliation has already happend during the Penitential Rite ( I confess to Almighty God AND TO YOU MY BROTHERS AND SISTERS…)

Confession of one’s faults is part of the reconciliation process. I had seen the sign of peace as part of that reconciliation process. Perhaps it is the conclusion of that process since one can not offer peace if one is not first reconciled to his/her neighbor.

Brendan:

Quote:Redemptionis Sacramentum

1. The practice of the Roman Rite is to be maintained according to which the peace is extended shortly before Holy Communion. For according to the tradition of the Roman Rite, this practice does not have the connotation either of reconciliation or of a remission of sins, but instead signifies peace, communion and charity before the reception of the Most Holy Eucharist.

I think I understand. By the time we get to the part of the Mass where the sign of Peace is exchanged, we are already at the point of reconciliation.

 

[thirddec]

for the poster worried about cleanliness; its admirable but we can get obsessed sometimes in todays day and age with the idea of germs and cleanliness when every Tv advert selling cleaning products wants us to believe we are surrounded by dangerous germs. Bacteria are all around, in the air ; on your clothes ; on all surfaces and on your hands and the vast majority are harmless. They are part of Gods Creation which he himself looked on and said was good. So unless there is an obvious cleanliness issue then I wouldn’t worry too much. Christ when he was alive did not seem to be afraid of being with the sinners or the sick so I doubt if now he would suddenly have problems.

 

[Brendan]

Confession of one’s faults is part of the reconciliation process. I had seen the sign of peace as part of that reconciliation process. Perhaps it is the conclusion of that process since one can not offer peace if one is not first reconciled to his/her neighbor.

But you differ from what the Church thinks. Note that Pope John Paul II stated that the sign of peace “does not have the connotation either of reconciliation or of a remission of sins”, but you state that it is actually somehow part of the reconcilliation process?

Which should I believe?, you or Pope John Paul II

I think I understand. By the time we get to the part of the Mass where the sign of Peace is exchanged, we are already at the point of reconciliation.

No, we are actually PAST the part where we have reconcilled. That happened very early in the Mass, before the Offetory as Christ commanded in the Gospel of Mark which you quoted.

As R.S. noted, the phase of the Mass where the Sign of Peace occurs is a momemnt of charity and communion. Those are distinct virtues from reconcilliation.

 

[Soldier_Of_God]

Personally, I find the Sign of Peace a highlight of the liturgy. It’s a excellent opportunity for the faithful to express their love of their fellow human beings and sense of community.

 

[utah_rose]

Sober manner?

I’m looking for a smile of sisterhood/brotherhood/fellow child of God.

Then you should be in my parish. Our priest carries it into extremes, gets off from the altar and shakes hands with people, so do the Extraordinary Ministers and it soon changes into a “love in” similar to the sixties.

The Mass is centered around the Eucharist NOT the sign of peace. There’s plenty of time to say hi and get friendly AFTER Mass. I personally would like the Sign of Peace either eliminated after the Consecration or put at the end of the Mass.

In other parishes they do it correctly, it’s not supposed to be a time of “let’s get together” but a time of adoration after the Consecration.

Perhaps your parish may have “gatherings” after Mass such as ours does, like coffee and doughnuts where you can get to know your fellow parishioners and chat.

It takes a little time to know each other too. I am a “revert” and came back in the Church about 8 years ago, but it took me about a year to make friends and know people in the parish.

And welcome home. Meet and greet and join some organizations in your parish where you’ll get a chance to meet them. Most Parishes have some activities going on during the rest of the year too.

 

[Stylteralmaldo]

But you differ from what the Church thinks. Note that Pope John Paul II stated that the sign of peace “does not have the connotation either of reconciliation or of a remission of sins”, but you state that it is actually somehow part of the reconcilliation process?

Which should I believe?, you or Pope John Paul II

Perhaps I was unclear. What I was trying to convey is that the “reconciliation” portion of the Mass needs to take place before the sign of Peace. Peace can not take place without reconciliation taking place. If the Pope is teaching that these two ideas (reconciliation & peace) need to be completely separated, then I do not understand the Pope’s thoughts on this and perhaps someone can further explain for me.

Brendan:

No, we are actually PAST the part where we have reconcilled. That happened very early in the Mass, before the Offetory as Christ commanded in the Gospel of Mark which you quoted.

As R.S. noted, the phase of the Mass where the Sign of Peace occurs is a momemnt of charity and communion. Those are distinct virtues from reconcilliation.

When I say we are already “at the point of reconciliation”, I didn’t mean it occurs at the same time, but that it already occurred. What I am getting at is that I acknowledge that you have shown information that the Church teaches that reconciliation does occur prior and not at the sign of Peace itself.

 

[Havard]

Personally, I find the Sign of Peace a highlight of the liturgy. It’s a excellent opportunity for the faithful to express their love of their fellow human beings and sense of community.

There are always plenty of opportunities in life to express charity and community, but in the liturgy, we already have the most beautiful and sacred form that Christ gave to us: “For we being many, are one bread, one body, all that partake of one bread.” (1 Corinthians 10:17) I don’t see how the sign of peace fills a role that Holy Communion does not already accomplish, and better, at that.

 

[Love_Divine]

Personally, I find the Sign of Peace a highlight of the liturgy.

Grrr! The highlight is the most Holy Sacrifice!!

When there was the H1N1 over-reaction and the sign of peace was banned through many diocese in Canada, I didn’t miss it. Attending the TLM and it not being there is quite nice. The sign of peace is nothing more than a disruption. People talking, walking about through the aisle to shake other people’s hand, those lovey-dovey couples who turn it into an opportunity for PDA, and people who feel the need to warm up my cold hands by rubbing them between their hands and going on about how my “hands are like ice.” Ugh!

 

[Soldier_Of_God]

There are always plenty of opportunities in life to express charity and community, but in the liturgy, we already have the most beautiful and sacred form that Christ gave to us: “For we being many, are one bread, one body, all that partake of one bread.” (1 Corinthians 10:17) I don’t see how the sign of peace fills a role that Holy Communion does not already accomplish, and better, at that.

The Sign of Peace creates a positive physical interaction between fellow parishoners. I agree the Eucharist creates a beautiful spiritual binding but the Sign of Peace faciliates a corporeal one. It’s not the end of the world if it’s dropped from mass, however, I do enjoy it.

 

[Soldier_Of_God]

Grrr! The highlight is the most Holy Sacrifice!!

I think you may have misinterpreted my position somewat. I said a highlight, not the highlight. It also pertains to my perspective and, which does not necessarly reflect the doctrine/discpline/custom of the Church or the position other parish members.

 

[ciero]

Actually I’ve seen people kiss, but I think it’s man and wife, so not really so holy.

To me the sign of peace is nice, a chance to see who’s around you and acknowledge them as fellow worshippers. We don’t exist in a vacuum!

Why wouldn’t it be holy?