What will happen to the sign of peace once Public Mass resumes?

[HomeschoolDad]

There are issues observed with traditionalist seminaries surrounding the rejection of Vatican II fundamentals. Those cannot be suppressed if we are to pass onto the next generation all the attributes of God and signs of Christ coming again that took root in Vatican II. We have to let them flourish so that we don’t condemn the Son of Man on His return. If you have sufficiently embraced the Gospel, you will know the importance of seeing Christ in other people and the angels that are among us. How will we ever recognise Christ on His return if we have not recognised Him in our regard for others. Our enemies. The ignorant who do the best they know. Those seeking refuge from us. That’s what I’ve drummed into my kids. We can’t just flip off those passages of Scripture that don’t appeal to our worldview or politics, and think that we can sufficiently discern Christ in our midst.

I seriously doubt that the Vatican-approved traditionalist seminaries and religious societies (FSSP, ICKSP/ICSSR, et al) totally ignore Vatican II — though pastoral and not dogmatic, it is a council of the Church. Even the SSPX struggles to interpret Vatican II “in the light of tradition”, which is the only way we should interpret any council or Church teaching. What sedevacantist and other “wildcat” traditionalist seminaries do, is of no concern to me — they are, being as generous as it is possible to be, borderline schismatic, and many would say they are just schismatic, no “borderline” about it.

Traditionalists are entirely able to recognize “Christ in other people”, they just challenge whether it is necessary to interrupt one’s preparation for Holy Communion to shake hands with (or fist-bump, or elbow-bump, or nod one’s head, or whatever) everyone within arm’s reach five minutes before they receive it. Even the Novus Ordo missal doesn’t make a communal SOP mandatory — it is simply allowed as an option. And could not “recognizing Christ in other people” extend to recognizing that we are all trying to get to heaven, and if my neighbor and I leave each other alone in those precious minutes before we approach the holy altar to receive His Body, we are, indeed, helping each other to receive the sacrament more worthily?

 

[KyPerson]

I have a lot of Indian students and learned the namaste from them. You fold your hands in front of your chest and bow. It’s their custom for greeting instead of a handshake. I like it.

 

[stpurl]

Oh, no, I wasn’t making an error. It IS ironic that you think that ‘you’ get to define tradition and ‘you’ get to choose. After all, under Pope Francis the whole SOP was studied, precisely because of the many abuses that came about and in places are still there, and first, it was recognized as an OPTION, not a requirement in Mass (somewhat negating your idea that it is a Jesus tradition that had been ‘lost’ and restored), and second, its place where it is was recognized as awkward and thus, it —being the OPTION it is—can still be either omitted or replaced at some point as the OF continues its growth. After all, we had the changes from 2011. Good old Spirit-induced changes which I thoroughly cheered.

 

[Dovekin]

could not “recognizing Christ in other people” extend to recognizing that we are all trying to get to heaven, and if my neighbor and I leave each other alone in those precious minutes before we approach the holy altar to receive His Body, we are, indeed, helping each other to receive the sacrament more worthily?

What if you are not helping?

A few months ago I got into a discussion with someone who did not want to sing the communion song because he wanted to return to his kneeler and pray the Anima Christi. St John Newman’s translation of the prayer ends “Bid me come to Thee above, With Thy saints to sing Thy love, World without end.” It is a wonderful post communion prayer, but it makes no sense to me to stop singing so that you can ask to sing eternally. You are better off if you get in some practice singing with the Body of Christ. You will understand better what you are asking for.

What if, when you leave each other alone, you are keeping your neighbor from experiencing a taste of heaven? What if you are missing the message of this ritual and closing yourself off from what the Church wants to give you?

This is an optional rite, like the explanatory rites after baptism. You do not have to put on a white garment, or receive a lit candle; baptism is valid without these things. But there is a richness in receiving the light of Christ and clothing yourself with his glory. And there is a richness in the Eucharist that can be seen in the Kiss of Peace, and cannot be seen when you leave each other alone.

 

[babochka]

Perhaps you don’t hear homilies about “the problems with traditionalists” because there aren’t any.

Oh, my… Of course there are problems with traditionalists. They are still humans, of course? With the same fallen nature as the rest of us?

I visit an FSSP parish not infrequently and my daughter is in the youth group there. After nearly every meeting, I have to talk her through one thing or another, explaining (from an Eastern perspective) that they have a particular perspective on theology and tradition that is not universal and not inherently superior. I could go on and on about the problems that I see in this parish that I love, but I will not, as it is only my limited and outsider perspective.

If you’d rather not take my word for it, perhaps you’ll take Fr. Ripperger’s. He has a much broader perspective than I do, informed by his education and experience as a priest.

10 Problems in the Traditional Catholic Movement

Fr. Chad Ripperger lists the 10 biggest problems that are holding back the traditional Catholic movement.

www.tumblarhouse.com

If you’d rather listen to him on the same subject:

 

[HomeschoolDad]

What if you are not helping?

A few months ago I got into a discussion with someone who did not want to sing the communion song because he wanted to return to his kneeler and pray the Anima Christi . St John Newman’s translation of the prayer ends “Bid me come to Thee above, With Thy saints to sing Thy love, World without end.” It is a wonderful post communion prayer, but it makes no sense to me to stop singing so that you can ask to sing eternally. You are better off if you get in some practice singing with the Body of Christ. You will understand better what you are asking for.

What if, when you leave each other alone , you are keeping your neighbor from experiencing a taste of heaven? What if you are missing the message of this ritual and closing yourself off from what the Church wants to give you?

This is an optional rite, like the explanatory rites after baptism. You do not have to put on a white garment, or receive a lit candle; baptism is valid without these things. But there is a richness in receiving the light of Christ and clothing yourself with his glory. And there is a richness in the Eucharist that can be seen in the Kiss of Peace, and cannot be seen when you leave each other alone.

Well, what if I’m not helping the other person by interrupting his preparation? It cuts both ways.

People who don’t care for the SOP really need to seek out rites (such as the TLM) or one of the few parishes where it’s not done. This is too divisive. And as I said upthread, I will exchange it when I have to — refusing the SOP could be misinterpreted as being a jerk, racist, snob, or what have you. Some traditionalists just flat-out refuse. You’d never think it, but as traditionalists go, I am fairly liberal. I am entirely willing to concede that a vernacular Mass might have been desirable — I just question the way and the extent to which it was done.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

HomeschoolDad:

Perhaps you don’t hear homilies about “the problems with traditionalists” because there aren’t any.

Oh, my… Of course there are problems with traditionalists. They are still humans, of course? With the same fallen nature as the rest of us?

I thought after I wrote this, that I should have added “…aside from that sin problem that we all share, no one more so than I”.

I’m entirely willing to hear what Fr Ripperger has to say. Thanks for sharing this.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

HomeschoolDad,

There are several posters, some of whom are active in this thread, whose offerings I have simply stopped reading. It has done wonders for my blood pressure. You will never convince them, especially as you are guilty of the “sin of disagreement” with those who apparently know better than you your own degree of spirituality. Remember that when traditionalists assert their opinion they are being “judgmental”, but when others do so they are simply “enlightening” you.

I have had an interesting life. I have put up with so much garbage from certain people (and I don’t mean to dismiss anyone’s objections here on CAF as “garbage”) in my life and work, that I’m immune to it. Rolls off my back like water off a duck. Haters gonna hate. I am at peace, and I wish peace to everyone.

Incidentally, there is a stronger word than “garbage”, more suitable to the pasture, but we have forum standards here, so I’ll choose more family-friendly terminology.

 

[Dovekin]

Well, what if I’m not helping the other person by interrupting his preparation? It cuts both ways.

It does. I assure you, you can choose whatever you want to do. I am just explaining what the ritual is about and why I think it is appropriate during the Communion Rite. You can step out for a cigarette as far as I am concerned. Such behavior will only make me want to repeat how good this can be and dispute the claims that the EF is better because he Kiss of Peace was suppressed in it, (or clericalized).

Isn’t his the hread where I talked about different worldviews of EF and OF adherents? IDK. I am just trying to defend and explain the Mass as I have received it. If you do not understand it, reject it, or otherwise object, that is fine with me. I am delighted you use your conscience this way.

 

[ChuckB]

[T]he other is to bump elbows.

Bump elbows? Is that still a thing? How February can you get??

It’s sad that it has come to this, but it’s going to be awhile before I get close enough to some stranger to bump elbows.

 

[stpurl]

I thought that the whole ‘waving the peace sign’ at people in church was too 1970s (just like the music too often is, not that there aren’t some beautiful pieces of music from that era), but you’re right —elbow bump?? I seriously cannot understand why a smile (hey we traditionalists do smile you know) and a nod of the head are not more often utilized. They satisfy the need for physical motion and person-to-person recognition.

 

[MagdalenaRita]

You are better off if you get in some practice singing with the Body of Christ

Singing together is good but it is not singing that makes Catholic’s one but all its members agreeing in one faith, and are all in one communion, and are all under one head.
In all charity, as a protestant I used to hear that all the time, singing makes us one. It is not that way with Catholics.

What if, when you leave each other alone ,

That is a “what if” and would be just a matter of assumption that the person next to you is wanting you to shake their hands.

the message of this ritual

The message of this “ritual”, the Sacrifice of Christ on the altar is to honor and glorify God;
to thank Him for all the graces bestowed on the whole world; to satisfy God’s justice for the sins of men; to obtain all graces and blessings.

the message of this ritual

The message of the sign of peace is to pass on to one another Christ’s peace. This peace is not about a greeting or wishing one well or even a fellowship but offering a peace admist our trials and sufferings. This peace amongst the Christians struggle is also what unites us as one but today the sign of peace has turned into a “hello” moment. At least in my small town parish it has.

For me what unites me to others is not shaking their hands at Mass and forgetting what just happened on the altar but being together worshipping Christ on the altar. IMHO I do not have to shake their hands to feel united with them.

 

[Fuerza]

My post was flagged as offensive and removed, which I suppose I should have anticipated. This is why it’s always better to ignore certain things. Oh well. Moving on.

 

[MiserereMeiDei]

Fortunately HSD preserved it.

 

[HomeschoolDad]

HomeschoolDad:

Well, what if I’m not helping the other person by interrupting his preparation? It cuts both ways.

It does. I assure you, you can choose whatever you want to do. I am just explaining what the ritual is about and why I think it is appropriate during the Communion Rite. You can step out for a cigarette as far as I am concerned. Such behavior will only make me want to repeat how good this can be and dispute the claims that the EF is better because he Kiss of Peace was suppressed in it, (or clericalized).

Isn’t his the hread where I talked about different worldviews of EF and OF adherents? IDK. I am just trying to defend and explain the Mass as I have received it. If you do not understand it, reject it, or otherwise object, that is fine with me. I am delighted you use your conscience this way.

It’s not so much “conscience” as “spirituality”.

Broadly speaking, I think this breaks out into two groups — those who like “all the new stuff”, and those who do not like “all the new stuff”:

• Communion — to kneel or not to kneel
• To receive under only one species or both species
• To receive from a priest (or deacon) or to receive from a layperson
• To be at liberty to follow one’s own spirituality during Mass (Rosary, etc.) or to do everything in lock-step with everybody else
• And to have the SOP reserved to the priest (pax vobiscum) or exchanged communally

Three words: Traditional Latin Mass.

This “whole ball of wax” is so different as to be almost two separate rites of the Church. That does not imperil the unity of the Church. Does the existence of Eastern Catholic rites threaten that unity? Personal prelatures such as the Chair of St Peter or Opus Dei? Fervent Marian apostolates when not everyone embraces that kind of spirituality?

Most people are in, and of, the modern world, and they like everything in their lives — including their worship — to reflect contemporary, 21st-century sensibilities. Paul VI pointed out that laypeople, unlike priests, are both in and of the world, which left me scratching my head as to how that squares with the Gospel, but in that he was the Pope and I am not, I will defer to him on that. Some of us are more “retro”. We prefer, among other things, more traditional lifestyles, manners, forms of entertainment, social and political philosophies (I’m a monarchist myself, which in the United States makes one an odd duck indeed!), and spiritual and liturgical forms. You could say that, in a sense, we are “the Catholic version of the Amish”. We live our lives “old-fashioned” because, for one thing, it worked. I need look no further than vocations. Traditionalists turn them out in large numbers. Perhaps it’s different in, say, Africa or the Philippines, but what are the numbers and percentages like among those of more modern spirituality in the affluent West? Just something to consider.

 

[Dovekin]

Broadly speaking, I think this breaks out into two groups — those who like “all the new stuff”, and those who do not like “all the new stuff”:

• Communion — to kneel or not to kneel
• To receive under only one species or both species
• To receive from a priest (or deacon) or to receive from a layperson
• To be at liberty to follow one’s own spirituality during Mass (Rosary, etc.) or to do everything in lock-step with everybody else
• And to have the SOP reserved to the priest ( pax vobiscum ) or exchanged communally

Broadly speaking, I think this breaks out into two groups — those who love Christ, and those who love “The outward gestures”:

• Communion — to kneel, or to stand and sing with all the saints
• To receive what is enough, or all that God gives
• To leave God to priests, or to be a kingdom of priests
• To be isolated or to have fellowship/communion with the Body of Christ
• And to know the meaning of communion or just the outward gesture

This has more to do with ars celebrandi rather than forms. Either form can be motivated by an expansive love of Christ, but those who prefer the EF are wrapped up in minimalist rubricism to one extent or another. That will pass, and the EF will disappear, because the only legitimate way to celebrate is with and for Christ. All of these things can, and probably should, be done in the EF. When they are, there will no longer be a need for the EF.

We live our lives “old-fashioned” because, for one thing, it worked .

It did not. The first 50 years of the last century was marked by Christians fighting Christians throughout Europe. Atheist regimes arose because the religion was so backward looking. Catechesis was poor in 1890 (according to Pius X), poor during the wars, and is poor now. Christ deserves better. When you idealize a time before Vatican II, always think of the world 20 years earlier. If that is what you want to go back to, think about 1942-5 some more.

 

[stpurl]

Just as a point here; you point very quickly to ‘the first 50 years of the 20th century and to wars.
Well, if one goes by that, ALL centuries of Christianity, as well as ‘not Christianity’ are marked by wars.
The thing is, people were fighting to ‘make the world safe for democracy’ if you will bring up WW2, and can you tell me that they were not trying to do this to uphold the essential Christian moral values that have existed in our history?

Today many marriages end in divorce. Do we throw out marriage because at point X in human measured time so many ‘go wrong”?

I don’t think we do.

Do we blame the world’s ills on the failure of a Christian morality based on the fact that in one poster’s eyes the religion was ‘backward looking’ (Please tell us EXACTLY what you mean by this) and that the moral breakdown since mid 20th century West was not caused by attacking that morality and either putting NOTHING (and I mean nihilism) in its place or attempting to subvert and redefining Christian teachings?

No, you take the fact that traditionalists want to ‘hold fast to the teachings that Paul and the early Christians have taught” and all the other teachings that the Church has continued to uphold (not invent) and try to pretend it means we want to ‘go back’ to some ‘never never land’. We exist in AD 2020. But we don’t have to be slaves to whatever innovation of the month is being touted as the way to Utopia. We don’t have to reinvent the wheel.

 

[Buks]

The first 50 years of the last century was marked by Christians fighting Christians throughout Europe. Atheist regimes arose because the religion was so backward looking.

I’d be interested in what kind of response professional historians would have to your ideas about the causes of the world wars.

 

[Dovekin]

The claim was “We live our lives “old-fashioned” because, for one thing, it worked”

It did not. That there have always been wars only underlines that fact.

you take the fact that traditionalists want to ‘hold fast to the teachings that Paul and the early Christians have taught” and all the other teachings that the Church has continued to uphold (not invent) and try to pretend it means we want to ‘go back’ to some ‘never never land’

I am all for holding fast to the teachings of Paul and the early Christians. Paul spent a good deal of time opposing the kind of rubricism I described as common among traditionalist. “Where sin abounds, grace is even more abundant.” The perpetuation of adherence to traditional moral codes is NOT what St Paul was about. If what we hand on is only a commitment to the teachings of Paul and the Church, and does not include a commitment to Christ and the Holy Spirit, we are not being faithful.

 

[Penitent60]

I attend the Tridentine Mass where this isn’t part of the Mass. The priest offers the sign of peace rather than a scrimmage in the pews. Mind you there is the opportunity to spread disease with coughing and sneezing so it isn’t as if one rite is better than the other in this regard.