|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Sharing the peace felt like war
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
What I find more embarrassing than sharing the Peace is the expectation that, if a small group says the Grace together, we should gaze meaningfully into each others' eyes instead of keeping our heads bowed prayerfully or making the sign of the cross. I don't want to prolong the tangent, except to ask if anyone else has come across this practice and does anyone know its provenance?
In (British) Methodist churches it's routine to say the Grace with eyes open, looking around and trying to catch everyone's eye. It doesn't just happen in small groups, but at the end of ordinary church services.
Interesting to know that Anglicans find it rather distasteful!
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
A number of people on this thread are saying that touch makes them uncomfortable / panicky for a variety of good reasons (eg PTSD) - avoiding touch (within legal cultural limits) will be likely to maintain and increase this anxiety in the long term.
And a church is the place to sort this out?
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
Well yes, ultimately. In fact, if you were doing a graded exposure - it is one of the few life situations where you could experience touch in a really safe space, time limited.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
PD
Shipmate
# 12436
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
quote:
Originally posted by PD:
... I began to hate it thoroughly, and still do. It isn't a liturgical action, its a tea break in the liturgy (and no damn tea either!)
But PD, aren't you an Archbishop? Doesn't that mean you can abolish it? Or are there some things not even an Archbishop can do?
I have been in a blissful peace-free zone for the last 20 years, but my annual trip to the British Isles leads to occasional flash backs. I have to grit my teeth and worship with the Resolutions A, B & C brigade, most of whom seem to be ardent Anglo-Catholics. My liturgical preference is old-fashioned Central, but at least if there is a sharing of the peace in a Spiky Shack it tends to be not too effusive. When I am back in Lincolnshire I find Evensong very useful as the local parish has gone AffCath as I can dodge the mid-morning Parish Mass!
PD
[ 22. June 2013, 04:34: Message edited by: PD ]
--------------------
Roadkill on the Information Super Highway!
My Assorted Rantings - http://www.theoldhighchurchman.blogspot.com
Posts: 4431 | From: Between a Rock and a Hard Place | Registered: Mar 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
Well yes, ultimately. In fact, if you were doing a graded exposure - it is one of the few life situations where you could experience touch in a really safe space, time limited.
Not always safe. Peace is sometimes used as a cover for inappropriate touching.
Then there's the painful arthritic hands problem, peace definitely unsafe because some people will grab yours even if you didn't offer a hand.
And there are people who just plain don't like to be touched by non-family, and never did. Call them reserved. Not everyone is made to be an extrovert!
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anglican_Brat
Shipmate
# 12349
|
Posted
Any form of touching sends a message.
Here in Jerusalem, I observed that Arab men tend to be physically affectionate with one another. When greeting, they might kiss each other on their cheeks. Conversely in conservative Arab culture, physical touching between men and women, even among spouses, in public is taboo.
In North America, however, men who kiss each other on their cheeks = gay. Also, flirting between men and women in public is much more acceptable and seen as part of courtship.
There was one poster a few months ago who wondered why North American Christians no longer shared the kiss of peace the way Scripture details it. I'm betting that the first century Christians did not shake hands, but kissed each other on their cheeks as Arabs do today. However, the cultural context is vastly different.
Hugging perhaps is ambivalent as a message. There are some people who will hug just about anybody. On the other hand, I myself don't hug my family members (which doesn't mean I don't love or care for them, it means I express my love in other ways). So, for me, hugging a stranger or even an acquaintance during the Peace feels weird.
--------------------
It's Reformation Day! Do your part to promote Christian unity and brotherly love and hug a schismatic.
Posts: 4332 | From: Vancouver | Registered: Feb 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
In (British) Methodist churches it's routine to say the Grace with eyes open, looking around and trying to catch everyone's eye. It doesn't just happen in small groups, but at the end of ordinary church services.
Ah, the Meerkat Blessing. Baptists do it too.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ElaineC
Shipmate
# 12244
|
Posted
This comic song sums up how lots of people feel about sharing the peace. Enjoy!
--------------------
Music is the only language in which you cannot say a mean or sarcastic thing. John Erskine
Posts: 464 | From: Orpington, Kent, UK | Registered: Jan 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
Then there's the painful arthritic hands problem, peace definitely unsafe because some people will grab yours even if you didn't offer a hand.
And there are people who just plain don't like to be touched by non-family, and never did. Call them reserved. Not everyone is made to be an extrovert!
How do all these people manage in normal social situations? Shaking hands is expected in so many contexts, not just, or even mainly, church ones.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by venbede:
There's precious little opportunity in our society for people to know the comfort of touch with another person that isn't perceived as threatening or sexual. It is a great blessing that we have this opportunity without either of those connotations.
Aren't you fortunate (no cynicism). For people like Chive, Huia and me it is never like that and there is a hint of violence against us. We would like it to be different, desire it to be different but we can no more help our life experiences than fly to the moon.
Jengie
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ElaineC:
This comic song sums up how lots of people feel about sharing the peace. Enjoy!
Duly BookFaced.
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
venbede
Shipmate
# 16669
|
Posted
Fineline -
I quite agree with your comments on the Peace as a social thing. Evangelicals won't agree with me, but symbolically it represents Matthew 5.23-24 "So when you are offering your gift at the altar, if you remember that your brother or sister has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar and go; first be reconciled to your brother or sister, and then come and offer your gift."
Generally it represents the reconciliation of the members of the Body of Christ at the eucharist.
--------------------
Man was made for joy and woe;
And when this we rightly know,
Thro' the world we safely go.
Posts: 3201 | From: An historic market town nestling in the folds of Surrey's rolling North Downs, | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
Well yes, ultimately. In fact, if you were doing a graded exposure - it is one of the few life situations where you could experience touch in a really safe space, time limited.
Not always safe. Peace is sometimes used as a cover for inappropriate touching.
Then there's the painful arthritic hands problem, peace definitely unsafe because some people will grab yours even if you didn't offer a hand.
And there are people who just plain don't like to be touched by non-family, and never did. Call them reserved. Not everyone is made to be an extrovert!
I like sharing the peace as an introvert, not as an extrovert. This is because it's one of the few occasions where I do get to touch anyone.
In the mainstream churches I've been to hugging during the peace or otherwise isn't that common, except between close friends. It must be disagreeable to be faced with an unwelcome hugger - although it was a very 'huggy' clergywoman who got my mother to attend church again after many years, so I'd be reluctant to say hugging at church should be avoided altogether.
Where I live the mainstream churches have quite small congregations, so sharing the peace is presumably a less stressful experience for those who are affected by the problems mentioned above. And perhaps smaller, more elderly congregations are more understanding of these problems. (E.g. most attenders will probably have a touch of arthritis themselves.)
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
chive
Ship's nude
# 208
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
Then there's the painful arthritic hands problem, peace definitely unsafe because some people will grab yours even if you didn't offer a hand.
And there are people who just plain don't like to be touched by non-family, and never did. Call them reserved. Not everyone is made to be an extrovert!
How do all these people manage in normal social situations? Shaking hands is expected in so many contexts, not just, or even mainly, church ones.
I never shake hands with anyone. To be honest it rarely comes up, maybe I don't move in the same social circles as you.
--------------------
'Edward was the kind of man who thought there was no such thing as a lesbian, just a woman who hadn't done one-to-one Bible study with him.' Catherine Fox, Love to the Lost
Posts: 3542 | From: the cupboard under the stairs | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
Yes as Chive says
Personal touch is rare for me. Shake hands if I need to after church and in other formal situations where it is part of the ritual. I rarely initiate a hug, my everyday body language says no and my experience says someone who does not negotiate patiently with me over personal touch is NOT TO BE TRUSTED.
Oddly if some will negotiate I am often willing but to assume you have permission is a red flag unless you are family.
Jengie
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
Then there's the painful arthritic hands problem, peace definitely unsafe because some people will grab yours even if you didn't offer a hand.
And there are people who just plain don't like to be touched by non-family, and never did. Call them reserved. Not everyone is made to be an extrovert!
How do all these people manage in normal social situations? Shaking hands is expected in so many contexts, not just, or even mainly, church ones.
Aware that research shows that between 30-50% of the population does not wash between visits to the toilet, I have long avoided handshaking, whenever one could do so to avoid offence. Standing at a distance, holding objects or parcels in one's hand, waving or bowing, are all useful strategies.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
Adding that I never avoid the peace, I just always dread it.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by venbede:
Fineline -
I quite agree with your comments on the Peace as a social thing. Evangelicals won't agree with me, but symbolically it represents Matthew 5.23-24 "So when you are offering your gift at the altar, if you remember that your brother or sister has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar and go; first be reconciled to your brother or sister, and then come and offer your gift."
Generally it represents the reconciliation of the members of the Body of Christ at the eucharist.
That's exactly why if it is done, it should be done BEFORE the eucharist "leave .... and go and then...." Don't even presume to come to the altar with a problem going on: if there isn't a problem then there's peace and you don't need to do it.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
Well yes, ultimately. In fact, if you were doing a graded exposure - it is one of the few life situations where you could experience touch in a really safe space, time limited.
I'd respectfully point you to the facts that abuse happens in church contexts too.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by chive:
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
Then there's the painful arthritic hands problem, peace definitely unsafe because some people will grab yours even if you didn't offer a hand.
And there are people who just plain don't like to be touched by non-family, and never did. Call them reserved. Not everyone is made to be an extrovert!
How do all these people manage in normal social situations? Shaking hands is expected in so many contexts, not just, or even mainly, church ones.
I never shake hands with anyone. To be honest it rarely comes up, maybe I don't move in the same social circles as you.
Agree - and outside church it is very rare to have ten or more people come up and shake hands within the space of a minute - unless you are an insincere politician.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Doublethink.
Ship's Foolwise Unperson
# 1984
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
Well yes, ultimately. In fact, if you were doing a graded exposure - it is one of the few life situations where you could experience touch in a really safe space, time limited.
I'd respectfully point you to the facts that abuse happens in church contexts too.
Not generally in the middle of a service in front of witnesses - besides which this is a discussion of a liturgical practice rather than criminal behaviour.
--------------------
All political thinking for years past has been vitiated in the same way. People can foresee the future only when it coincides with their own wishes, and the most grossly obvious facts can be ignored when they are unwelcome. George Orwell
Posts: 19219 | From: Erehwon | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Percy B
Shipmate
# 17238
|
Posted
I don't mind shaking hands with those next to me as a sign. I don't like at a weekday service when everyone thinks they have to shake everyone else's hand. I try not to but then feel pressured to because everyone else is!
Far worse is at Sunday mass when it becpmes a free for all, and sometimes the priests carry on wandering around when the laity gave up quite a while before.
--------------------
Mary, a priest??
Posts: 582 | From: Nudrug | Registered: Jul 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Jengie jon
Semper Reformanda
# 273
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
Well yes, ultimately. In fact, if you were doing a graded exposure - it is one of the few life situations where you could experience touch in a really safe space, time limited.
I'd respectfully point you to the facts that abuse happens in church contexts too.
Not generally in the middle of a service in front of witnesses - besides which this is a discussion of a liturgical practice rather than criminal behaviour.
I am afraid it does Doublethink, it is normally part of a bigger thing but it is the small insidious crossing of boundaries that looks benign of itself but actually is part of a far bigger pattern. The victim is far less likely to make a fuss when it happens as part of liturgy as well.
Jengie
--------------------
"To violate a persons ability to distinguish fact from fantasy is the epistemological equivalent of rape." Noretta Koertge
Back to my blog
Posts: 20894 | From: city of steel, butterflies and rainbows | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
I have an idea.
Find a sympathetic person or two in the congregation and explain your difficulty. Then when it's time to share the peace, hold on to them and look as thought you're having a deep and meaningful interaction with them. Other people will skirt around you hoping to shake your hand, but because you're so engrossed in your interaction with this one person time will run out and everyone will have to sit back down before they've touched you.
This probably won't work in a church where the peace takes up a whole lot of time.
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Pomona
Shipmate
# 17175
|
Posted
That is a wonderful suggestion! As I mentioned, our church has a relatively small congregation, so you don't get given a choice - you have to share the peace with *everyone*! We are quite bossily friendly.
--------------------
Consider the work of God: Who is able to straighten what he has bent? [Ecclesiastes 7:13]
Posts: 5319 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Jade Constable:
That is a wonderful suggestion! As I mentioned, our church has a relatively small congregation, so you don't get given a choice - you have to share the peace with *everyone*! We are quite bossily friendly.
Plan B: Use the time to try signing people up for church committees and volunteer opportunities. They will catch on quickly.
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Belle Ringer
Shipmate
# 13379
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
quote:
Originally posted by Belle Ringer:
Then there's the painful arthritic hands problem, peace definitely unsafe because some people will grab yours even if you didn't offer a hand.
And there are people who just plain don't like to be touched by non-family, and never did. Call them reserved. Not everyone is made to be an extrovert!
How do all these people manage in normal social situations? Shaking hands is expected in so many contexts, not just, or even mainly, church ones.
I've been trying to think when is the last time I shook hands with anyone outside church?
It seems to be a gesture reserved for meeting a stranger at the start of a social or business one-on-one conversation. Even most of those, there's no handshake - not with the bank teller or restaurant waiter, for example.
The start of a conversation that does not follow ritual wording can easily include "sorry, I can't shake hands, arthritis." Also usually handshakes are with one or two people, not 20, a huge difference in the amount of physical strain.
But what intrigues me is the contrast between the societal handshake as the start of a conversation between strangers, vs handshake as the whole of a brief encounter with people you already know and would not formally shake hands with in real life because that would be distancing them.
Maybe a formality distancing existing relationships is why the peace comes across as stilted (to some of us), and why some people prefer to hug if they already know you?
Thinking out loud.
Posts: 5830 | From: Texas | Registered: Jan 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
no prophet's flag is set so...
Proceed to see sea
# 15560
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink:
Well yes, ultimately. In fact, if you were doing a graded exposure - it is one of the few life situations where you could experience touch in a really safe space, time limited.
I find myself feeling 2 ways at once about this. First, that you're right, it could be a place for graduated exposure.
But the second way I'm thinking about it is that it may well distract from the point of the liturgy which about prayer and god and all that stuff.
I'm also considering the extension of the exposure to others with the eye contact version of the Grace, and the additional hands holding practice we're seeing. It also may well steer towards social things, like working out eye contact.
This whole discussion has me realizing that, if there's a scale running from 0 to 10, with introversion in worship at 0, and extroversion in worship at 10, I'm running at about a 4. I'm okay with short, focussed greeting: "peace be with you", "peace of Christ" (the two most common phrases I hear), with a handshake, and not wanting a full factorial that requires all must greet all others in the pews. Everyone gets to "do" the two on either side, and perhaps 2 or three in pew in front, and the same behind, and we're back from this brief commercial/greeting interruption into our regularly scheduled liturgy.
Thus:
Rule #1, don't leave your place in the pew to mingle cocktail party like.
Query:
How to enforce or otherwise make happen?
Query #2:
How to let people just do the eyes open or closed/not looking at others in the Grace, against the current fashion of lovingly gazing around the room?
[[Here I sit considering tomorrow, and what it will be like! Well, I guess it'll be just fine if there's no Shine Jesus Shine or She Flies On!!]]
--------------------
Out of this nettle, danger, we pluck this flower, safety.
\_(ツ)_/
Posts: 11498 | From: Treaty 6 territory in the nonexistant Province of Buffalo, Canada ↄ⃝' | Registered: Mar 2010
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fineline
Shipmate
# 12143
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
quote:
Originally posted by venbede:
Fineline -
I quite agree with your comments on the Peace as a social thing. Evangelicals won't agree with me, but symbolically it represents Matthew 5.23-24 "So when you are offering your gift at the altar, if you remember that your brother or sister has something against you, leave your gift there before the altar and go; first be reconciled to your brother or sister, and then come and offer your gift."
Generally it represents the reconciliation of the members of the Body of Christ at the eucharist.
That's exactly why if it is done, it should be done BEFORE the eucharist "leave .... and go and then...." Don't even presume to come to the altar with a problem going on: if there isn't a problem then there's peace and you don't need to do it.
Ah. I didn't know it was supposed to represent reconciliation. But thinking about it, in my experience, I think it is generally done before the eucharist. I can't think of an occasion when it's been done after.
What do the evangelicals believe about the peace? In my experience, evangelicals don't do the peace - at least, at all the evangelical churches I've been to. It's the Anglicans and Catholics who do it.
Posts: 2375 | From: England | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fineline:
What do the evangelicals believe about the peace? In my experience, evangelicals don't do the peace - at least, at all the evangelical churches I've been to. It's the Anglicans and Catholics who do it.
I'm evangelical(ish) and, as far as I recall, have only come across the Peace when I've been at Anglican services. I had no strong opinion either way about the Peace until this thread, really. However, taking part in this discussion has made me think it's a pretty tokenistic nod towards unity and reconciliation, which tends to cause more trouble than it's worth - in terms of the potential for anguish in those with social anxiety issues and the like, and the possibility of excluding certain people.
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fineline
Shipmate
# 12143
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
However, taking part in this discussion has made me think it's a pretty tokenistic nod towards unity and reconciliation, which tends to cause more trouble than it's worth - in terms of the potential for anguish in those with social anxiety issues and the like, and the possibility of excluding certain people.
Maybe it's different for me because I'm on the autism spectrum, but while I often find social situations quite difficult, I find sharing of the peace to be relatively easy and straightforward. All you have to do is shake hands with people and say 'peace be with you'. Even growing up going to evangelical churches, shaking hands was something I learnt to do there - even though we didn't share the peace, the people greeting you at the door always shook your hand, and the pastor would shake your hand before you left. I find staying for coffee in the hall after the church service to be a lot more socially difficult and confusing and awkward than sharing the peace.
Posts: 2375 | From: England | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fineline:
Maybe it's different for me because I'm on the autism spectrum, but while I often find social situations quite difficult, I find sharing of the peace to be relatively easy and straightforward. All you have to do is shake hands with people and say 'peace be with you'.
Except it seems that shaking hands and saying 'Peace be with you' isn't always the limit of what's expected! If it were, then fine - but apparently some people are keen to hug any- and everyone at the Peace, even those who are giving pretty clear 'don't hug me' non-verbal signals...
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Fineline
Shipmate
# 12143
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by South Coast Kevin:
Except it seems that shaking hands and saying 'Peace be with you' isn't always the limit of what's expected! If it were, then fine - but apparently some people are keen to hug any- and everyone at the Peace, even those who are giving pretty clear 'don't hug me' non-verbal signals...
Ah, yes, that makes sense. Once we had a preacher who encouraged us to give each other a holy kiss. Most of the congregation were quite sensitive to whether this would be appropriate or welcome, but there is one guy who doesn't have a very good awareness of boundaries and appropriateness, and he had a big crush on me, so he came bounding over to me in delight, all excited that he could give me a kiss, and completely not reading my non-verbal 'No, I don't want a kiss - go away!' signals. Churches often seem to have such people though - people who don't fit in anywhere else because of their lack of social understanding, but are accepted at church because church has to accept everyone. And I think it's good that they are accepted, especially because I am also someone who has difficulty understanding social cues. But at the same time such people can make you uncomfortable, and not just during the peace.
Posts: 2375 | From: England | Registered: Dec 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fineline:
Ah, yes, that makes sense. Once we had a preacher who encouraged us to give each other a holy kiss. Most of the congregation were quite sensitive to whether this would be appropriate or welcome, but there is one guy who doesn't have a very good awareness of boundaries and appropriateness, and he had a big crush on me, so he came bounding over to me in delight, all excited that he could give me a kiss, and completely not reading my non-verbal 'No, I don't want a kiss - go away!' signals. Churches often seem to have such people though - people who don't fit in anywhere else because of their lack of social understanding, but are accepted at church because church has to accept everyone. And I think it's good that they are accepted, especially because I am also someone who has difficulty understanding social cues. But at the same time such people can make you uncomfortable, and not just during the peace.
I'm a regular church visitor, and I'm afraid that the churches that purport to be the most welcoming tend to be not the best at accommodating for special needs and challenges. There is often a leadership vibe of:
"You should not be looking in books, but looking up"
"You should be all about hugs and kisses at the peace"
"You should be a social butterfly"
The heart is in the right place, but it just pushes the old American feeling that louder and more social is better than quiet.
I suppose I shouldn't be too surprised, for the people that congregations and bishops identify as good candidates for ordination probably tend to fall into that American social ideal more often than not.
In my own Lutheran context, seminary worship tends toward the principles I mentioned above. It's no wonder that this would eventually make its way to the churches.
Unfortunately, this effort at personality realignment is ultimately doomed to fail. We are all different, and we all have our own preferences and needs.
Rather than wasting energies trying to change people into something they are not, why not spend that energy trying to meet people where they are?
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oblatus
Shipmate
# 6278
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Olaf:
The heart is in the right place, but it just pushes the old American feeling that louder and more social is better than quiet.
A church I used to belong to in another state seems to be doing very well but comes across through its website as having become a church of extroverts. Not that it was a church of introverts before, but now it looks like everyone's got a maniacal smile and is just running around doing all kinds of great stuff.
Which is terrific, but I hope if I get up the courage to go and visit, it'll still be the place that welcomes all including me, the most introverted person I know (or just about). Not that I never smile or do anything...oh well, I'll just leave it there.
Posts: 3823 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Oblatus:
Which is terrific, but I hope if I get up the courage to go and visit, it'll still be the place that welcomes all including me, the most introverted person I know (or just about). Not that I never smile or do anything...oh well, I'll just leave it there.
I hear ya. A not insignificant number of suburban churches in a certain Midwestern Episcopal diocese have a bit of an issue with a ridiculously long and conversational sharing of the peace. One place in particular (after almost eight minutes) actually used the altar bell to call people back to order. To make matters worse, they didn't even use the bell at the consecration! One would think that a visitor giving up and sitting down to flip absentmindedly through a hymnal would be a Major Red Flag, but apparently not. It was not all drama; I was truly uncomfortable and exasperated.
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
venbede
Shipmate
# 16669
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Fineline:
I find staying for coffee in the hall after the church service to be a lot more socially difficult and confusing and awkward than sharing the peace.
Same here.
--------------------
Man was made for joy and woe;
And when this we rightly know,
Thro' the world we safely go.
Posts: 3201 | From: An historic market town nestling in the folds of Surrey's rolling North Downs, | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
Had the usual nomadic interval during the Peace at our place yesterday.
Waited 2 full minutes after Peace was pronounced before giving full verse playover (6 line verse plus 2 line refrain) then start on the FIVE verses.
People were still wandering about in the middle of verse 2. ![[Help]](graemlins/help.gif)
Result: in small village church with fewer than 70 congregation offertory procession didn't start till the hymn had finished.
Shambles ![[Mad]](angryfire.gif)
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
South Coast Kevin
Shipmate
# 16130
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Result: in small village church with fewer than 70 congregation offertory procession didn't start till the hymn had finished.
Shambles
In situations like this I'm at a loss as to why it's considered inappropriate or bad form (or whatever the reason is!) for someone to say 'Could everyone please find their seats again, please'. I know it interrupts the 'flow' a little bit, but isn't that preferable to the people leading the service getting annoyed / upset / distracted by the delay that enthusiastic Peace-sharing causes?
--------------------
My blog - wondering about Christianity in the 21st century, chess, music, politics and other bits and bobs.
Posts: 3309 | From: The south coast (of England) | Registered: Jan 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Baptist Trainfan
Shipmate
# 15128
|
Posted
Well, I've certainly done that - or given a quick instruction beforehand for folk not to roam too widely.
Posts: 9750 | From: The other side of the Severn | Registered: Sep 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Vade Mecum
Shipmate
# 17688
|
Posted
The usual cue here (we use the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite, so the Pax is just before the Agnus Dei - don't get me started on how much I despise that) is for the celebrant to simply intone the beginning of the Agnus Dei. People tend to get the message. Sadly this only works reliably at Low Mass, because for some reason we've decreed that everything at the Sunday Mass is to be preceded by pointless organ introductions.
On a marginally tangential note, I'd so much prefer it if the peace could be confined to the versicle and response (V: The peace of the Lord &c R: And with thy Spirit), as is liturgically sound, the priest half turning to give it, such that his back is not to the sacrament. Then both introverts and liturgical geeks - everyone except the huggers, in fact - is happy.
--------------------
I have given them thy word; and the world hath hated them, because they are not of the world, even as I am not of the world.
Posts: 307 | From: North London | Registered: May 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Baptist Trainfan:
quote:
Originally posted by SvitlanaV2:
In (British) Methodist churches it's routine to say the Grace with eyes open, looking around and trying to catch everyone's eye. It doesn't just happen in small groups, but at the end of ordinary church services.
Ah, the Meerkat Blessing. Baptists do it too.
Haha! Never heard that before.
Anglican Morning Prayer (Church of Ireland) can - and in my case always does - conclude with saying the Grace. And all our church meetings end with it, too. However, I was always taught to say it eyes closed in my early days.
I have noticed with a few of my Methodist friends that they've found it necessary in prayer meetings etc, to tag the Grace onto the end, even when it's clear that the final prayer was the final prayer. A kind of liturgical compulsion/tic, as in no gathering is properly sanctified unless someone has said it?
I don't always close my eyes these days, but I have to admit I hate the catching people's eyes and grinning inanely bit and would rather not do it if I can avoid it. I can understand 'sharing the Peace' might involve shaking hands or greeting others in some way. Liturgically it is something we 'do' to one another. But the Grace isn't. It's something we pray for ourselves and with others. So I'm not sure why the eyeball rolling mad grinning is supposed to come into it. ![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
--------------------
Irish dogs needing homes! http://www.dogactionwelfaregroup.ie/ Greyhounds and Lurchers are shipped over to England for rehoming too!
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
SvitlanaV2
Shipmate
# 16967
|
Posted
Anselmina
I think it's mostly a question of what people are used to. I've never had an issue with sharing the Grace in this way. But then, my thing in recent years has been to look for more mutual engagement in worship, and since there's so little of it otherwise I'm happy to see the Grace performed in this way. In fact, that's probably why I'm also happy with sharing the Peace.
No, I've never come across that reference to meerkats either!
Posts: 6668 | From: UK | Registered: Feb 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
chive
Ship's nude
# 208
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Vade Mecum:
The usual cue here (we use the Ordinary Form of the Roman Rite, so the Pax is just before the Agnus Dei - don't get me started on how much I despise that) is for the celebrant to simply intone the beginning of the Agnus Dei.
I've been known to start the Agnus Dei myself if I think there is an excess of faffing about. (Admittedly at a low mass with only a few people present.)
--------------------
'Edward was the kind of man who thought there was no such thing as a lesbian, just a woman who hadn't done one-to-one Bible study with him.' Catherine Fox, Love to the Lost
Posts: 3542 | From: the cupboard under the stairs | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
bib
Shipmate
# 13074
|
Posted
My friend at church hates the 'peace' ritual and has been known to say 'pieces of eight or piece of biscuit' in protest. I can understand where she is coming from as the whole ritual often turns into what might be called a love in. I always understood that you only greeted the people either side of you, not every Tom, Dick and Harry. It always takes so long that it disturbs the flow of the service and I could probably nip out the back and grab a cup of tea during the break. As for strangers kissing me - no thankyou! ![[Projectile]](graemlins/puke2.gif) I wouldn't have given the lady a second opportunity, but just moved away in the other direction.
--------------------
"My Lord, my Life, my Way, my End, accept the praise I bring"
Posts: 1307 | From: Australia | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by bib:
My friend at church hates the 'peace' ritual and has been known to say 'pieces of eight or piece of biscuit' in protest.
This did make me smile ! But I think it's a little egocentric and ignorant, too. People who grab or kiss or do inappropriate stuff at the Peace are wrong because they're making an exchange of Christ's peace between believers all about themselves. And I'm afraid your friend, imo, is falling into exactly the same trap. But in her case her inappropriate behaviour is making fun of a liturgical ritual and dragging her co-worshippers into her mockery of it.
If she doesn't like the Peace she doesn't have to do or say anything - she can politely ignore it as many people do. She doesn't have to go out of her way to take the Peace of Christ and make a joke out of it. Maybe everyone she does this with finds it hilarious. But there might be those who, genuinelly sharing the Peace of Christ with her, are a little insulted by her response or approach. That's what I mean when I say she's making it all about herself: precisely the same reason why all those bear-huggers and bottom-grabbers are such a pain.
Of course, if she's just being mischievous between friends, I guess she could argue that Jesus is in on the joke and doesn't really mind.
Posts: 10002 | From: Scotland the Brave | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
That does seem like an example of the sort of naff jokeyness that's often indulged in especially by clergy who are embarrassed by any kind of liturgical solemnity. I wonder what the reaction to this (or any other sort of frivolous exchange) is on the part of the presiding minister?
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
venbede
Shipmate
# 16669
|
Posted
Amen, Sister Anselmina, you sure preach it as it is, praise the Lord.
(Just been to see James Baldwin's play The Amen Corner at the National Theatre, London, and the linguistic register is quite easy to slip into. It was wonderful with the London Community Gospel Choir giving their all.)
--------------------
Man was made for joy and woe;
And when this we rightly know,
Thro' the world we safely go.
Posts: 3201 | From: An historic market town nestling in the folds of Surrey's rolling North Downs, | Registered: Sep 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Stephen
Shipmate
# 40
|
Posted
Reminds me of that hymn ' keep us in one unbroken peace'
What was the hymnwriter thinking of?
I've always got an image of smashed crockery whenever that hymn comes up!
--------------------
Best Wishes
Stephen
'Be still,then, and know that I am God: I will be exalted among the nations and I will be exalted in the earth' Ps46 v10
Posts: 3954 | From: Alto C Clef Country | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
