Kiss of peace

[organist]

Dom Cuthbert Johnson retired abbot of Quarr spoke at Westminster cathedral hall on monasticism in ordinary life and applying the Benedictine rule. He is a distinguished liturgist and is still on Vox Clara. He said a lot about liturgy including the importance of seeing the true meaning of the Kiss of Peace. Just as the celebrant(s) kiss the altar and the gospel book to show reverence for them so we should show reverence and respect for each other when greeting each other. He is totally against exuberant backslapping, rushing around the church and excessive joy. No wonder the priest is no longer to leave the sanctuary. It all sounded rather decorous and very Benedictine. And how do we get the people of God to understand all this?
My comment is that our church is losing people all the time. Why? Are we too formal and stiff and reserved? There are lots of lonely people about (not least some of the clergy). Maybe that handshake is the only human contact all week?
In my High Church Anglican background there was great reverence for the church as a place of prayer and any greetings were discrete and quiet ones. So different from many parish churches said the abbot. He would advocate that the church be only a house of prayer. So presumably no coffee at the back for him! While I agree that we all need solitary prayer (Our Lord did) we also need to address loneliness and homelessness in our comunities by which I mean that people need to feel at home in church. And what about inculturisation? Our African brothers and sisters know the joy of meeting and greeting and sharing joy and sorrow. We can learn a lot from them.

[lesley wright]

There are those of us who are absolutely not tactile - personally when invited to 'turn to your right and massage the shoulders of the person in front of you' I suddenly remember an urgent need to visit the little girls' room. For people like me your kiss of peace is anything but affirming, though I do manage to shake hands (except I loathe either the dead fish or the wringer that holds on). We have one couple who deliberately sit on the outside of a large pillar in order to not have to make flesh-contact with anyone.

[docmattc]

Organist raises some interesting points.

We do need time for solitary prayer but the Mass is not that time. It is without doubt communal worship in which we should be aware of those gathered with us in prayer as well as being aware of the presence of Christ in the Word and Sacrament.
If the sign of peace is the only time someone in our midst has human contact all week then maybe we are failing in our Christian duty. Why has that person not been greeted as they arrive or invited for coffee afterwards, or even visited? I agree that we need to make people feel at home in church, but church in this context should mean not only the building but the community (which is the church far more than is the building). Whether one has coffee at the back I guess depends on how you think of the building. on one extreme its a shrine to the Blessed Sacrament, and on the other its the meeting place of the community.

I don't think we have ever grasped the true purpose of the sign of peace. As GIRM says "the faithful express to each other their
ecclesial communion and mutual charity before communicating in the Sacrament." It is a time to remind ourselves (if we'd forgotten!) that we are gathered as the body of Christ, not a 'meet and greet' session. But as shaking hands is exactly how we meet and greet its easy to misinterpret. (If its a kiss then its definitely easy to misinterpret!) My choir (who sit in a very shallow transcept) usually shake hands with their friends sitting on the front row on their way to communion which shows they see it as greeting and are willing to extend it well beyond its place. I wonder if those same people on the front row think that I'm a thoroughly unfriendy, miserable *beep* because I ignore them on my way past?

The sign of peace is one of the "new inventions" of the Novus Ordo criticised by its detractors, however its not really a new invention as Justin Martyr mentions it in his 1st apology (AD 150ish) "having ended the prayers we salute one another with a kiss". The prayers he mentions being the prayer of the faithful I think (another VCII invention!), so interestingly its at a very different point in the Mass. A footnote to Sacramentum Caritatis mentions that the Pope has asked if it may be possible to move it to this position again.

Lesley, I don't think massaging shoulders is an approved manner of giving the sign of peace, but given how stiff my neck is at the moment, if anyone's offering...

[JW]

There's some excellent teaching on the Sign of Peace in Paragraphs 202 to 204 of "Celebrating the Mass". Our hierarchy clearly expect it to be done; they suggest a hand grasp rather than a hand shake; they describe it as a challenge. It's well worth reading the whole text which develops many of the ideas set out in the earlier posts.

I see Mass as a communal sacrifice / celebration - we have to show that we are in communion with each other and the sign of peace is a good way of doing this. I worry about the general over-exuberance (I end up being kissed and kissing people who I'd never kiss outside the church ) but this is an area where the clergy should be telling us what is expected.

I do think a (chaste!) kiss of peace is an appropriate sign between husband and wife and will continue to kiss my wife for the forseeable future

[Southern Comfort]

Exactly so. The handshake is a secular sign which has the wrong connotations. For a number of years I have been advocating the double handclasp (which has the advantage that it does not disadvantage left-handed persons), in which both persons use both hands to clasp each other's, with no pumping up and down. We need to take TIME over this gesture and look into each other's eyes.

Many years ago I heard Fr Michael Joncas saying that when we exchange a sign of peace, we're not doing a liturgical "Have a nice day!". What we're saying is "I would lay down my life for you" in order that we might all be at peace. That's certainly something which cannot be rushed. With respect to Lesley, this sign is not about touching each other (though of course we do), it's about being at one with each other, even those with whom we are at odds - rather different. The gesture is in the symbolism, and in the words. I never say "Peace be with you" but always wish people "The peace of Christ". It's time we put Christ back into this sign, which has, as I indicated above, almost become a secular sign which we've already started to take for granted.

[presbyter]

The prayers he mentions being the prayer of the faithful I think (another VCII invention!)

"another VCII restoration" surely, as you refer to Justin Martyr. In the Use of Sarum, on Sundays, the Bidding of the Bedes (Prayer of the Faithful) followed the Offertory prayers. I wonder if each of the seven deacons required for the rite had a prayer to say - ha!

And just to digress off topic a little…

We fast from Alleluia in Lent. The Use of Sarum made sure we did!

From Septuagesima to Easter,“Alleluia” was suppressed in the Liturgy, and this was dramatized by a chorister called the “Alleluia” who was symbolically whipped while being driven from the church.

[Claire B]

For a number of years I have been advocating the double handclasp (which has the advantage that it does not disadvantage left-handed persons), in which both persons use both hands to clasp each other's, with no pumping up and down. We need to take TIME over this gesture and look into each other's eyes

Exactly so. Even at a week day mass, I find those sitting closest (not very) are often looking away to the side when we exchange the sign of peace. I think it's an anxiety not to miss any one else who might be trying to greet them. Oh, and we wave at people we who catch our eye who are more than two or three steps away.

Our diocesan pastoral guidelines are in draft at present, under the apothegm 'Seeking the face of Christ'. I think the sign of peace is the one time in the mass when we can turn to each other in positive welcome. Maybe something creative needs to be thought of to mark the progress and/or close of the sign/rite.

[John Ainslie]

In connection with the Sign of Peace:

1) When you say in the 'I confess' "...and to you, my brothers and sisters," have you ever thought of turning to those on either side of you, to whom you are confessing? In the pre-Vatican II rite, more conscientious priests used to bow to their altar-servers when they said "et vos fratres" in their 'Confiteor', even though the Ritus Servandus did not oblige them to. As an altar-server, I used to feel 'real chuffed' to think that Father was confessing to me!

2) docmattc has pointed out that Pope Benedict has expressed a wish, noted in a 'Sacramentum Caritatis' footnote, to move the Sign of Peace elsewhere, e.g. before the Preparation of the Gifts. This is because the sign can 'be exaggerated and cause a certain distraction in the assembly just before the reception of Communion' (SacCar 49) - and a distraction from that rather neglected feature of the Eucharist, the Fraction, which some priests tend to hurry on with before the sign of peace ritual is finished. I sometimes wish that the sanctuary bell could be rung at this point to reclaim the people's attention to the altar before the Fraction takes place.

3) I fully support Southern Comfort's suggestion of a handclasp rather than a handshake, with the greeting "the peace of Christ" - so that the gesture becomes a more distinct sign of personal commitment to Christian fellowship (koinonia) before sealing it in sacramental communion (koinonia!). And for those whom one cannot reach physically, what about offering the Indian namaste folded-hands gesture, which contains an element of self-negation (namah = 'not me') about to be expressed in the 'Lord, I am not worthy'?

[mcb]

In the broadcast Mass on the feast of Pentecost from Liverpool, Archbishop Kelly had the sign of peace before the preparation of the gifts. He said:

On this day when the Spirit gathered many nations into one,
before we bring our gifts of bread and wine to the altar,
let us offer each other a sign of reconciliation and peace.

recalling Matthew 5:24.

M.

[Claire B]

When you say in the 'I confess' "...and to you, my brothers and sisters," have you ever thought of turning to those on either side of you, to whom you are confessing?

That is something I have noted happen in our weekday masses and have since adopted. The koinonia only flows sideways though, which works quite well in our local church which is wider than long. I visit other churches which seem to be v long and as a visitor I have arrived a little early and so choose a seat fairly far forward. So the only time I can see most of the rest of the assembly, and their faces, is when they process to the altar for communion.

More on topic perhaps, couldn't the kiss of peace become a little more formalised, and flow forwards from the rear of the assembly to the front? or right front to rear and back up the left? Local arrangements for organising the communion procession seem to follow these conventions mostly.

[docmattc]

More on topic perhaps, couldn't the kiss of peace become a little more formalised, and flow forwards from the rear of the assembly to the front? or right front to rear and back up the left? Local arrangements for organising the communion procession seem to follow these conventions mostly.

Having the kiss of peace flowing from one place outwards implies that the peace is passed from a nuclear point (wherever that may be)through the congregation, like the divided flame of the Easter Vigil flowing from the Paschal Candle. This is the wrong symbolism though for the peace. We express it to each other rather than pass it on once we have received it.