P
pensmama87
Guest
I disagree. You may have to be willing to push yourself a little bit outside of your comfort zone, but I’m hardly an outgoing or pushy person.
- Status
E
EasterJoy
Guest
To the best of my memory, I have never been in a parish that announced a baby shower in the bulletin for anything but the local organization that supports teen and unmarried moms. I would never expect to see one except for a very extraordinary circumstance, such as someone who had very active and was recently widowed or the victim of an accident. A healthy parish simply has too many little ones arriving on a regular basis to have baby showers for the parishioners on a routine basis.
I’ve been in parishes that tried to have young mother’s groups, but to be frank social groups in churches depend on participation and Catholics are still new at the idea of these groups. Getting them going is usually up to a member of the demographic that will belong to them, which obviously poses a Catch-22 to the parents of small children, especially parents who do not have a spouse in their home–that is, the ones who are divorced, unmarried, or living through a deployment. Keeping these groups going involves the same issue. Catholics are used to the idea that Mass attendance is a cradle-to-grave proposition, as well, and are notorious for not wanted to spend money to pay someone to provide a service in the parish. (The Catholic family that tithes 10% of what they make to their parish is an extreme rarity.) Those two factors push against the prospect of high quality childcare in all but the most wealthy parishes.
By far the most common fellowship opportunity at Catholic parishes is coffee in the parish hall after the Sunday morning Masses, accompanied by things that kids find a treat and diabetics ought to avoid eating. I do know a parish that has a wine and cheese social once a month after the Saturday night Mass, but they have a rather large proportion of the parish that makes that their regular Mass time. Even so, it is a volunteer-run proposition, and they don’t have an easy time finding volunteers to staff it.
I don’t know that any of this makes an argument for or against the greet-on-command custom. It isn’t as if it is a terrible thing. I just don’t see that it will lead to higher rates of more substantial fellowship or more sustaining relationships. It does interrupt people trying to get to a state of recollection when Mass begins. I guess that is my problem with it: the trade-off has not, in my experience, been rewarded by the result the custom intended to produce. It is a good idea; it just doesn’t work well enough to warrant the cost.
E
Erikaspirit16
Guest
It’s fascinating to me that we are now at 15 pages and counting.
I’m not going to reply to each post individually, but I’ll try to get in all the points here. I may forget a few. Forgive me if I do, and I am not intentionally dodging anything.
If you have not read my post #165, p. 11 (this morning–it seems like weeks ago), I invite you to go back and read what I actually wrote. I try to be very careful with my choice of words and choice of analogies. I mean what I write. But as I pointed out, it’s possible I wrote one thing and people who read it are interpreting it in different ways. I understand that. Then it’s up to me to clarify it. So here goes.
As I pointed out (as clearly as I could) in post #165, we are talking about different issues. One is friendliness of fellow parishioners in general. I think we are all in agreement about this. We could (and should) be more friendly to each other. No argument from me at all. As I said, last week I suggested 10 ways a parish could go about this.
Someone else talked about “normal.” I assume what you mean by this is “average” as in “the majority of people think this way…” Again, I acknowledged that I was in a small minority on this thread. There are me, Easter Joy, and 1 Neophyte. And the rest of you are pretty much on the other side. You don’t need to point that out, I’ve understood it from the beginning, and not just on this thread, but out in the real world. I have walked out of parish meetings rather than sit there and be ridiculed; I have resigned from a parish council. Trust me, I understand there is a huge majority who not only thinks differently, they feel free to ridicule me, if they even condescend to acknowledge the existence of my point of view. These generally tend to be the same people who wonder how they could be more welcoming and friendly. I have never figured that contradiction out.
Someone else talked about a “false dichotomy.” Again, this gets back to what I have repeated over and over: by not even acknowledging that there are people who think differently, by saying they and their opinions are not “normal,” by asking us to conform to practices that are imposed on us (“Stand up and greet your neighbors”), what you are saying–or at least the message I am receiving–is that there is only one point of view and one opinion. We all need to fall into line. Or else. One of the main reasons I am spending so much time on this is to assure you that no, there is not just one point of view and not just one opinion. There is another group, small as it may be, who disagrees. I am not “creating” a dichotomy, I am simply pointing out that it exists. By denying its existence, you are denying the validity of my objections. I don’t like that. I see you and your opinions; why can’t you do the same?
Others have begun talking about silence. Silence is one more way going to Mass is different from everyday life. In everyday life we are constantly bombarded by visual and audio noise. Cardinal Ratzinger (there, I’ve said it: I’m a big fan) wrote about how silence can be “active participation” in the Mass. Just because you are silent doesn’t mean you are dead or inattentive. I’m reminded of a boss who caught me looking out a window and said “Get back to work!” to which I responded “I am working. I’m thinking. Do you want me to stop thinking?” This was the same boss who complained that I went for a run every lunch hour. What a waste of time! I then listed several good ideas that he had praised. Every one of them occurred to me during my lunch-time runs. So silence is good. But that’s not what I’m talking about when I complain about the mandated greeting before Mass. It’s not that it “breaks the silence.” It’s that it’s inappropriate in that place at that time. If you think it is appropriate, then we disagree on what the Mass is.
I was discussing this thread at lunch with a friend. She said, “You’re nitpicking. This stuff doesn’t matter.” And I think most people on this thread would agree with her, and have said so in different ways: “It’s only 10 seconds,” “What harm can it do,” etc. Again, I see your point of view. But for me, this is not nitpicking. This is the essence of the Mass. It’s the essence of why I go to Mass. To me it’s a BIG DEAL. Thus the energy I’m putting into it.
I’m not going to reply to each post individually, but I’ll try to get in all the points here. I may forget a few. Forgive me if I do, and I am not intentionally dodging anything.
If you have not read my post #165, p. 11 (this morning–it seems like weeks ago), I invite you to go back and read what I actually wrote. I try to be very careful with my choice of words and choice of analogies. I mean what I write. But as I pointed out, it’s possible I wrote one thing and people who read it are interpreting it in different ways. I understand that. Then it’s up to me to clarify it. So here goes.
As I pointed out (as clearly as I could) in post #165, we are talking about different issues. One is friendliness of fellow parishioners in general. I think we are all in agreement about this. We could (and should) be more friendly to each other. No argument from me at all. As I said, last week I suggested 10 ways a parish could go about this.
Someone else talked about “normal.” I assume what you mean by this is “average” as in “the majority of people think this way…” Again, I acknowledged that I was in a small minority on this thread. There are me, Easter Joy, and 1 Neophyte. And the rest of you are pretty much on the other side. You don’t need to point that out, I’ve understood it from the beginning, and not just on this thread, but out in the real world. I have walked out of parish meetings rather than sit there and be ridiculed; I have resigned from a parish council. Trust me, I understand there is a huge majority who not only thinks differently, they feel free to ridicule me, if they even condescend to acknowledge the existence of my point of view. These generally tend to be the same people who wonder how they could be more welcoming and friendly. I have never figured that contradiction out.
Someone else talked about a “false dichotomy.” Again, this gets back to what I have repeated over and over: by not even acknowledging that there are people who think differently, by saying they and their opinions are not “normal,” by asking us to conform to practices that are imposed on us (“Stand up and greet your neighbors”), what you are saying–or at least the message I am receiving–is that there is only one point of view and one opinion. We all need to fall into line. Or else. One of the main reasons I am spending so much time on this is to assure you that no, there is not just one point of view and not just one opinion. There is another group, small as it may be, who disagrees. I am not “creating” a dichotomy, I am simply pointing out that it exists. By denying its existence, you are denying the validity of my objections. I don’t like that. I see you and your opinions; why can’t you do the same?
Others have begun talking about silence. Silence is one more way going to Mass is different from everyday life. In everyday life we are constantly bombarded by visual and audio noise. Cardinal Ratzinger (there, I’ve said it: I’m a big fan) wrote about how silence can be “active participation” in the Mass. Just because you are silent doesn’t mean you are dead or inattentive. I’m reminded of a boss who caught me looking out a window and said “Get back to work!” to which I responded “I am working. I’m thinking. Do you want me to stop thinking?” This was the same boss who complained that I went for a run every lunch hour. What a waste of time! I then listed several good ideas that he had praised. Every one of them occurred to me during my lunch-time runs. So silence is good. But that’s not what I’m talking about when I complain about the mandated greeting before Mass. It’s not that it “breaks the silence.” It’s that it’s inappropriate in that place at that time. If you think it is appropriate, then we disagree on what the Mass is.
I was discussing this thread at lunch with a friend. She said, “You’re nitpicking. This stuff doesn’t matter.” And I think most people on this thread would agree with her, and have said so in different ways: “It’s only 10 seconds,” “What harm can it do,” etc. Again, I see your point of view. But for me, this is not nitpicking. This is the essence of the Mass. It’s the essence of why I go to Mass. To me it’s a BIG DEAL. Thus the energy I’m putting into it.
1
1neophyte
Guest
I, for one, appreciate your energy. It makes me feel more at home in the world to know that there is at least one other person who considers this a big deal. Thank you!
E
EasterJoy
Guest
In the end, however, we are sent back to:
Finally, all of you, be of one mind, sympathetic, loving toward one another, compassionate, humble. 1 Pet. 3:8
If there is any encouragement in Christ, any solace in love, any participation in the Spirit, any compassion and mercy, complete my joy by being of the same mind, with the same love, united in heart, thinking one thing. Do nothing out of selfishness or out of vainglory; rather, humbly regard others as more important than yourselves, each looking out not for his own interests, but (also) everyone for those of others.** Phil 2:1-4**
May the God of endurance and encouragement grant you to think in harmony with one another, in keeping with Christ Jesus, that with one accord you may with one voice glorify the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. Welcome one another, then, as Christ welcomed you, for the glory of God. Rom. 15:6
All these devoted themselves with one accord to prayer, together with some women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and his brothers. Acts 1:14
At some point, after all has been discussed and the pastor makes a decision, we are sent back to giving generously, with a cheerful heart, as we are asked to do. This does not mean we pretend to think other than what we think. It does not mean that pastors have the power to change human nature or to achieve a result out of intention when it does not follow from natural cause and effect. It doesn’t mean that we can just fake it until we make it and produce a silk purse out of a sow’s ear in every situation. (I am referring to a bigger range in questions than just this one, obviously.)
No, I mean that it is usually best to agree to comply in unity and obedience until such a time as conditions change than to resist even what is clearly a second-best situation in a way that may give an experience of passive aggression to anyone else. Even in the case of a liturgical abuse (which this is not), it does not do to compound the abuse with a response that lacks the patience and kindness we are commanded to have.
By that I mean both kindness and patience with those who do not comply as well as kindness and patience towards those who seem to wish they could compel compliance of thought. As Steven Covey put it, the main thing is to keep the main thing the main thing. Our Lord will not be offended if our best efforts towards recollection are thwarted because of obedience ot even the most hare-brained ideas of our pastors. Our Lord would not want us to rush to a sense of offense when there are alternative explanations for someone’s behavior towards us.
There is a time and a way to remedy even objectively bad decisions handed down by our pastors. We have to be careful when we respond to what we think is a poor decision that we do not compound the damage by how we attempt to improve the situation.
You would have nothing but agreement for that, I think? I know of parishes damaged by lack of the willingness to speak difficult truths plainly because there is a total unwillingness to have any kind of open conflict at all. That is not what I am encouraging at all! I mean that when a poor initiative is not an abuse–and even in some instances when it is!–it is probably best to comply in the moment when charity, unity and obedience are the highest priority and work to rectify the human differences we will always have at a time and in a way more likely to resolve the matter with the least amount of rancor or hard feelings.
That is why I’d advise the OP and her family to comply with the request cheerfully for the time being. Offer it up. If the practice proves to run counter to your preparation for Mass, that still gives room to work towards a change in the custom with openness, an attitude that puts the best possible reading on the motives of others, and a great deal of kindness and patience. Those two responses are in no way in conflict.
O
Oneofthewomen
Guest
This is all fine, well and good and I understand your point.
However, the greeting that is being talked about here is before the Mass actually starts, so how is it inappropriate?
E
EasterJoy
Guest
Perhaps “inappropriate” is not quite the right word. Counter-productive, perhaps?
We are getting ready to pray together in a very intense way. The question is whether the interruption to the spiritual upheaval necessary to orient ourselves to such a great work accomplishes a commensurate gain in unity. That is a very legitimate question. It is by no means obvious that the custom of calling for a group exchange of brief greetings really does produce a good commensurate to the good being given up to achieve it. To dismiss the good that is being given up as a negligible thing can be taken as prima facie evidence that the good being given up is simply not appreciated by those who dismiss it so lightly.
In other words, when someone says they feel a loss at being interrupted in their preparations for Mass, one possible response is “you’re overstating what you’re losing.”
Another possible response, however, is “what is it that you are experiencing that I have not, that you value it so highly?” I would think that at least an appreciation that some people do not “change gears” so easily as you do may be in order?
P
Padres1969
Guest
I’ve not had a chance to read Fr Martin’s book yet, but my understanding it he doesn’t propose the RCC accepting same sex marriage.
E
EasterJoy
Guest
I do not know where you get the foundation for your fears. The Church has continued to be unequivocal on this matter; Pope Francis has made himself very clear as to where he and the bishops stand:
In discussing the dignity and mission of the family, the Synod Fathers observed that, “as for proposals to place unions between homosexual persons on the same level as marriage, there are absolutely no grounds for considering homosexual unions to be in any way similar or even remotely analogous to God’s plan for marriage and family”. It is unacceptable “that local Churches should be subjected to pressure in this matter and that international bodies should make financial aid to poor countries dependent on the introduction of laws to establish ‘marriage’ between persons of the same sex”.
–Apostolic Exhortation Amoris Laetita, 19 March, 2016.
Passage cites: Relatio Finalis 2015, 76; cf. Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, Considerations Regarding Proposals to Give Legal Recognition to Unions between Homosexual Persons (3 June 2003)
What else do you want the Vatican to say that is more clear than that?
J
JanetF
Guest
Most parishes do this now IME at least. I don’t really care for it. I believe the greeting and visiting should be done outside of the church before one gets to their pews, in the “gathering space”, but I’m not in charge, so I play along with the greeting before the opening hymn begins. Of note, this is not usually 5-10 minutes long, less than 1 minute in fact.
E
Erikaspirit16
Guest
EasterJoy;14743107 said:
E
Erikaspirit16
Guest
You really don’t understand, do you? Please read my post #165 again. Read my analogy about the guy about to propose to the girl…
E
EasterJoy
Guest
Me, too. Still, I thought it was a big improvement when our parish dropped the “greet those around you” and went to “turn off your electronic gadgets and let’s have quiet in the remaining moments, as we prepare ourselves for Mass.”
I think the hope was that the Sign of Peace within the context of the Mass would be more spiritual and not so “social” if there was an actual social greeting immediately before Mass started. That outcome was not realized.
C
ConfusedLucy
Guest
I think being able to go to a tea and coffee where no one is inclined to speak to you and “work the room” takes an awful lot of confidence. If people approach you it’s much easier. I’ll happily make conversation with most people but I’ve never been good at approaching. When I was part of my religious community at uni the established members always made the effort to approach new lone people, I’ve not experienced this at any parish I’ve been too though I don’t doubt some parishes are better at this.
As for being pushy, some parishes have very infrequent social activities so it’s hard to build up natural rapport with people. It’s a very slow process getting to know people this way and you can feel like you are getting nowhere. If you want to be let into a clique or make plans it does feel like you need to be pushy and put up with a lot of setbacks, not everyone is so determined.
I don’t think pre mass greetings will solve all this but it’s good to hear of a parish willing to try something.
E
Erikaspirit16
Guest
I solve my problem by going to Latin Mass. But as I said earlier, it’s a 60-mile round trip and there is a Catholic church literally two blocks away. But sometimes 60 miles (and probably $6-7 worth of gas) is worth it. And of course it’s at an awkward time–1 PM.
Someone else talked about having alternative types of service. Absolutely. But that only solves a problem if those in charge see a problem.
1
1neophyte
Guest
Give it time.
E
Erikaspirit16
Guest
This was the issue on the thread that got deleted. I will send you my 10 suggestions privately since I don’t want to be the cause of this thread being deleted too. I agree with you 100%–it should be the responsibility of those already established in the parish to reach out and include others. It is wrong for them to expect the newcomers to come to them. If they wanted to do it, they could easily do it. They don’t want to.
1
1neophyte
Guest
I actually don’t fear anything. But regardless of what the Vatican says, there are still rogue priests who pay no heed to actual Church teaching. Even in my little city, if I wanted to find a priest to affirm a homosexual union, I would know exactly where to go. It’s what happens “on the ground” that really matters.
E
EasterJoy
Guest
Heaven have mercy on them, but there are ordained men willing to do these things. Bishops typically deny them faculties, if they find out about this illicit behavior. (The truth is, there aren’t a few “rent-a-priests” who have actually lost their faculties for some reason and yet take it upon themselves to act in disobedience to their ordination promises.)
That doesn’t have anything to do with being asked to greet those around us before Mass ever begins. Digging in and refusing to do that is not going to lower the number of priests who decide to change the teachings of the Apostles.
J
johnnyc176
Guest
Not really. It’s what Jesus teaches that really matters. If some dissident priest attempts to affirm a so called homosexual marriage that does not make it a marriage just as a dissident bishop attempts to ordain a woman does not make her a priest.
- Status