Moving the sign of peace

[Angela Barber]

My Catholic press tells me that the Pope is considering the removal of the sign of peace from its present place in the mass to after the intercessions. I wholeheartedly agree with Benedict that shaking hands, etc. is not appropriate before the most solemn part of mass. As an organist I find myself rushing from one to the other of my choir so that I can return to the organ in time to strike up the agnus dei. We used in the past, at our church, to have the peace after the intercessions and it worked well but, with a change of priests, we have reverted to the old form. I wonder what others think? I could, I suppose, sit in stony and immoveable silence whilst everyone else rushes around the church............ Angela

[festivaltrumpet]

Old news- this consideration was published early in 2007. Do the Catholic press not read apostolic exhortations? Members of this forum have discussed it elsewhere
viewtopic.php?f=4&t=675

[gwyn]

My Catholic press tells me that the Pope is considering the removal of the sign of peace from its present place in the mass to after the intercessions. I wholeheartedly agree with Benedict that shaking hands, etc. is not appropriate before the most solemn part of mass. As an organist I find myself rushing from one to the other of my choir so that I can return to the organ in time to strike up the agnus dei. We used in the past, at our church, to have the peace after the intercessions and it worked well but, with a change of priests, we have reverted to the old form. I wonder what others think? I could, I suppose, sit in stony and immoveable silence whilst everyone else rushes around the church............ Angela

It does make more sense to express peace prior to the offertory (Matthew 5: 23 & 24).
Note though that the sign of peace is a symbolic gesture, it's not required to greet the loads of individuals, just those either side of you, individuals rushing aroundthe church is neither necesssary or indicated. It's this "greet-the-whole-world" mentality that leads to it obscuring the liturgically more important Fraction in its current place in the Mass.

All good fun though.
Be joyful, keep the faith.

[HallamPhil]

This debate has raged for decades already. I am presuming that Gwyn's scriptural reference is the bit about before you bring your gifts make peace with each other.

Regardless of when the peace is exchanged I also presume that the liturgical designers never had it in mind that we would find ourselves each Sunday in the same pew sitting next to the same people. With such a view it does make sense to offer sign of peace to whomsoever might find him/herself stood alongside. Alas we are creatures of habit and surround ourselves with a cordon of friends rather than an openness to strangers.

Phil

[musicus]

When I (and a few others on here) attended the Universa Laus meeting in Milan a few years ago, we had the experience of celebrating Mass in the Ambrosian rite (which is proper to that place), with the Pax in this earlier position. It felt very right to me, and I hope it is taken into the Roman rite. If it is, let's hope that the change is accompanied by suitable formation, both about the historical roots of its place in the ancient Ambrosian rite and, perhaps more importantly, about the Pax itself. If people learn that it is not a touchy-feely 60s Vatican II innovation, much of the excess that Angela rightly objects to might be curbed.

[VML]

I hope someone can sort out the practice of the deacon at a Eucharistic Service shaking hands with everyone in the church.
It's not Mass and he's in charge...

[organist]

I know priests who go right down the nave aisle and shake as many hands as possible. Still at least it's friendly!

[organist]

The Anglicans have it in the earlier place and it always feels right at that point. Let's hope the change does happen! Pity the poor organist isolated at a console who NEVER gets to shake a hand or two!

[festivaltrumpet]

I know priests who go right down the nave aisle and shake as many hands as possible. Still at least it's friendly!

It has been suggested that the priest is forbidden to leave the sanctuary at this point in order to thwart the possibility of desecration of the Blessed Sacrament whilst it is unattended. Should the placing of the peace change, one could conjecture that this stricture would be removed. The thread I linked above cites a more theological reasoning behind this rubric concerning the presence of Christ in the assembly. It seems to me that we are moving away from this viewpoint and returning a more hierarchical model in which a dissemination of the peace from the ordained hands of the priest alone would be more appropriate.

[organist]

Well I would feel very uncomfortable about that - it would be a bit like "pass it on". Currently we have priests greeting each other on the sanctuary and usually a server or two. Only at funeral liturgies and weddings do the priests actually greet people! What a lonely existence! The earlier position would also avoid the problem of a priest whose hands have been ritually washed the shaking hands.