|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: The Sign of Peace - Why?
|
Clotilde
Shipmate
# 17600
|
Posted
Oh dear! I know there will be lots of opinions about the sign of peace - how not to do it and so on, so its with hesitation that I raise it for discussion.
I'm coming from this angle. What is it about? I hear the words sometimes 'Let us offer each other a sign of peace' which could be heard as lets show we are friendly with each other.
The I also hear 'Let us offer each other a sign of Christ's peace' which is different, I guess.
So what do you think its about, and given that what is a good way to offer it...
................................................
Anglo Catholic Congress books on eBay. Do bid!
--------------------
A witness of female resistance
Posts: 159 | From: A man's world | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
I think it's about sharing with one another a sign of the peace we have among us because of Christ. Scripturally it comes from an overarching theme of the peace Christ brings between people of all kinds, and specific texts in the epistles which encourage the members of the church to greet each other with a kiss of peace.
Liturgically, in the modern period, it came into the liturgy with the liturgical movement. Those in favour of it regard it as the restoration of an ancient practice found as far back as Hippolytus. Those against tend to regard it as an innovation.
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643
|
Posted
St. Justin Martyr mentions it as marking the Eucharist of the Faithful, does he not?
I'm not sure if the symbolic link with our Saviour's words to refrain from going to the Altar before making peace with our brother is as ancient as that, but it certainly long been recognised.
The question is not whether we should be at peace but rather how the sign should be enacted, perhaps?
--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...
Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Oscar the Grouch
Adopted Cascadian
# 1916
|
Posted
For me, the reason why this is an important part of the Eucharist is that it forces us to acknowledge that it is not about MY relationship with God, but that WE are gathered together in worship.
Yes - it may feel uncomfortable. But perhaps that's a good thing. And yes - it may seem a little hypocritical to gladhand someone we don't know or perhaps know and despise. But again, that may be a good thing overall.
And the physical aspect of sharing the peace - of offering one another a hand to shake or whatever - is equally important. It is so easy to "say" the Peace to someone we can't abide. It can be much harder to make physical contact.
Of course it is easy to highlight ways in which sharing the Peace can be annoying or naff - such as when it causes the service to grind to a halt for 10 minutes as everyone HAS to greet everyone and then share a little gossip. But that is not a reason to abandon the practice - just an opportunity to make people aware of what we are doing and why.
--------------------
Faradiu, dundeibáwa weyu lárigi weyu
Posts: 3871 | From: Gamma Quadrant, just to the left of Galifrey | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Adam.
Like as the
# 4991
|
Posted
For us, it comes right after the Lord's Prayer. We have just confessed that God is "our Father" -- not just mine. The source of our common sister/brother-hood is enthroned on the altar: through Christ, God has adopted each of us as His own beloved child. We share an amazing bond with each of our fellow worshippers by virtue of what God has done for us. As C.S. Lewis puts it in Weight of Glory, "next to the Blessed Sacrament, your neighbor is the holiest object presented to your senses."
The peace actualizes that ritually.
--------------------
Ave Crux, Spes Unica!
Preaching blog
Posts: 8164 | From: Notre Dame, IN | Registered: Sep 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
John Holding
Coffee and Cognac
# 158
|
Posted
For us it comes immediately after the confession and absolution, and seems to be understood as a physical embodiment of our common life in Christ -- with the absolution, we are right with Christ and with the exchange of the peace we are demonstrating that we are right with each other.
I have known it to be used as an opportunity for two people who have been in dispute to reconcile before they go to the altar, but I would not claim that was common or neccesarily part of the general understanding.
John
[ 21. October 2013, 16:25: Message edited by: John Holding ]
Posts: 5929 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
|
Gwalchmai
Shipmate
# 17802
|
Posted
I dislike the Peace intensely.
It disrupts the service while the clergy and half the congregation wander round the church shaking hands with everybody.
It occurs at the wrong point in the service (in the Anglican liturgy, just before the Offertory). You wouldn't go for a meal at someone's house, and then shake hands and greet everybody just as you are about to sit down for the meal - the natural time to greet people is on arrival. So if we must have it, the start of the service, before or immediatley after the introit hymn would be appropriate. Since the eucharist begins with "The Lord be with you", which also precedes the Peace in the middle of the service, it would fit in quite appropriately at the start.
It is not properly ceremonial - see my comment above on people wandering all round the church . If we must do it why don't we formally accept a handshake from the person on (say) our right and then shake hands with the person on our left, who then passes the handshake on down the pew. The priest can start it off by shaking hands with the people in the chancel who can then each take a side of the church or block of seating to pass the peace on to. That would be much more dignified.
If we have to go back to the ancient church to determine how we conduct our services, it was the kiss of peace, not the handshake of peace. When the Peace was first introduced into Anglican liturgy sometime in the 1970s, kissing your neighbour might have seemed dangerously continental, but these days you are expected to air-kiss everybody of the opposite sex on first meeting, so I can't see that a peck on the cheek in church should cause a problem.
But I accept that a lot of people, especially the clergy, seem to like it, so I can I make a plea for a "handshake-free zone" in church where those of us who prefer a more reverential style of worship.
Posts: 133 | From: England | Registered: Aug 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
Yes, it was the kiss of peace, and in Greece this is still the case:
Clergy exchange the peace with each other or with men standing near them.
Otherwise men exchange the kiss with men, women with women - NEVER is the kiss shared between men and women.
Now, in the chilly north we dropped the kiss of peace even for celebrants at the Reformation and it only started to creep back after the RCs began to reintroduce it post Vatican II.
But it doesn't feel natural - perhaps because most people don't understand the history.
And in far too many churches it is as Gwalchmai says: a hideous exercise to see who can "get" around the most people with lay people (and clergy, who should know better) charging around.
Not only do newcomers find it confusing, many of them find it downright uncomfortable.
As an organist I'm out of it - literally, feet above the floor and able to observe with my jaundiced eye.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Clotilde
Shipmate
# 17600
|
Posted
I've noticed the text from the Gospels about 'first make your peace...' before presenting your gift, is rarely used in liturgy to introduce the peace. I've heard many different sentences or introductions but rarely that.
That made me think the Peace in worship is not about making up / reconciling but rather an expression of the peace of Christ which is already uiting us in 'the Body of Christ into which we are baptised...'
Having said which I notice some people greet differently in the peace. I've noticed a priest at one church shake hands with some people and embrace others during the same 'sign of peace'. I presumed that he did this because he knew some better than others, or was aware some were not as huggy as others.
But then I am uneasy with that differentiation if it is the 'sign of Christ's peace' offered symbolically. Maybe I am just too fussy!
..........................................
Anglo Catholic Congress books on eBay: Bid Now!
--------------------
A witness of female resistance
Posts: 159 | From: A man's world | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Gwalchmai:
I dislike the Peace intensely.
etc
You seem to be confusing 'the Peace', which is an ancient ecclesial and scriptural liturgical action, with a particular custom as practised - arguably not very well - by your church, which doesn't personally float your boat.
Like you, I don't like clergy and large numbers of congregation who wander all over the place, or get too enthusiastic about shaking hands, kissing, hugging etc at this point in the service. It's not my 'thing' either.
'The Peace of the Lord be always with you'
'And also with you' end of story - is perfectly adequate.
However, shaking hands with a fellow Christian to wish him/her, and receive from him/her, the peace of Christ is perhaps the very least I can require of myself during a service of worship, with regard to human interaction. Even at the risk of my sacrificing a few points of my supposed 'dignity'.
--------------------
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
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
I don't mind the peace, but I certainly mind how poorly it is handled in many congregations.
Quite bluntly, most places seem to care first and foremost about using it as a way to showcase how "friendly" we are. (In other words, to exhibit the extroverts and shame the introverts into "coming out of their shell.")
As a frequent visitor to churches, here's what I want: no longer than a minute, stay near or in your pew, greet all those around you. That is it.
Places that try to do what I referred to in paragraph 2 above tend to epic fail out: visitors are either pressured too much, ignored entirely, or given a perfunctory greeting and left to stew while the others chat about Aunt Bessie's lame horse.
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
dj_ordinaire
Host
# 4643
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Anselmina:
However, shaking hands with a fellow Christian to wish him/her, and receive from him/her, the peace of Christ is perhaps the very least I can require of myself during a service of worship, with regard to human interaction. Even at the risk of my sacrificing a few points of my supposed 'dignity'.
On a previous thread related to this topic, somebody noted that in parishes where things were not going well, this would inevitably become quickly evident during the Peace, even if it was papered over pretty successfully during the rest of the service. I think the symbol is more powerful than we appreciate, even allowing for introvert/extrovert differences which should of course be respected whatever the setting.
--------------------
Flinging wide the gates...
Posts: 10335 | From: Hanging in the balance of the reality of man | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Anselmina
Ship's barmaid
# 3032
|
Posted
dj_ordinaire, that's a very interesting point to make. Perhaps, in some cases - not all by any means - some of us are rather fed up or irritated by the Peace - or the way it's done - because we're aware of what it reveals to us; either about ourselves or about our community.
But I'm not saying that this means that everyone who'd rather not participate refrains because they feel threatened by it, or are unconsciously worried about exposing their own flawed spirituality! It does seem that in some instances, people see a lot of happy hand-shaking business going on, and for some reason perceive this as not being authentic or truly representative of the fellowship doing all the happy hand-shaking.
Over the years, I guess I've just tended to allot less significance to the more superficially human elements of the sharing of the Peace of Christ, in the hope that for all our mucking about Jesus is still in the midst of us, keeping his promises.
--------------------
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
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
Olaf's points quote:
visitors are either pressured too much, ignored entirely, or given a perfunctory greeting and left to stew while the others chat about Aunt Bessie's lame horse.
are ones which I would cheerfully underline-- they are almost universal in my North American travels. Shipmates who are curious can see my past posts on the Peace, including the two attempts to feel me up (I suppose that I should be flattered, but can only take this to be a symptom of some perversion or the other), so I won't repeat it all here.
I wonder to the extent to which the problematics (primarily the very real artificiality and distraction) of this are Anglican and anglophone First World difficulties. Attending Anglican churches in Jamaica and RC churches in Spain, France, and Argentina, I found the exchange of the Peace to be natural and relaxed. Even embraces and cheek-kissing of the sort which would convince me that North American parishioners be addled evangelicals and/or rabid workshop-goers and that I need Get The Hell Out of here, were genuine and welcome and comforting. It may be a cultural thing, and we just can't do it.
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
I dislike it intensely, but that's more to do with my own reluctance to make physical contact with people in a structured way - "and now let's all do this." Where I currently go it just descends into a wandering free for all which totallty breaks the flow of the service and does nothing for my concentration.
It was best handled (in a slightly unorthodox way) by where I went as a student in the same city. "The Peace....and also with you" crash into the first bars of the Offertory, making it very clear that "there's none of that offering one another anything nonsense here."
Of course, the fellowship, talking, etc, was very much part of the sherry (or champagne in the summer) afterwards...
It's all of a mile away from where I now live, and I attended sporadically up to last term, but I'm a good decade older than the students now and a "proper" parish seems like a sensible move...
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
It does depend a great deal on context. The church I normally attend ticks all the wrong boxes for most Ecclesiantophiles: everybody gets out of their seat and walks around until they have greeted everybody. It's made worse by fixed pews with doors on them. But it's a small, very varied, and friendly congregation and nobody prolongs the process by gossip or long chats (that happens before [!] and after the service). People just want to acknowledge each other and the presence of Christ in the community.
This wouldn't work in a cathedral or with a large congregation. And a very small one would probably have a sufficient sense of togetherness not to need this ritual expression of it.
As an introvert myself I still have a residual resistance to sharing the Peace. Therefore it's all the more important to be forced out of my instinctive isolation.
--------------------
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
|
|
bib
Shipmate
# 13074
|
Posted
I would prefer not to go through the peace ritual, but that is my problem. However, I am willing just to greet my immediate neighbours. I become really irritated when the whole service stops while people wander all round the church and at times have long winded conversations. I know of one chap who refuses to come to a church that does this sort of thing as he is very shy and reserved. I am concerned that at times we put up roadblocks to some worshippers such as the peace, incense, collections of money etc.
--------------------
"My Lord, my Life, my Way, my End, accept the praise I bring"
Posts: 1307 | From: Australia | Registered: Oct 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
As an introvert myself I still have a residual resistance to sharing the Peace. Therefore it's all the more important to be forced out of my instinctive isolation. [/QB]
Horses for courses though. I find it borderline psychologically damaging and experience an enormous overwhelming dread from the beginning of the service until it's out of the way. I force myself to go because I think it must be good for me, but I'm really not convinced in any way that it is.
If I could do one thing in the whole ecclesiological world (and we're into very small things territory here) it would be to go back to the early 1970s and say to the liturgical decision makers within the CofE (I do think it's particularly unEnglish) "you'd like to do this? Just think of all the people that would really hate to do it. So don't. You'll drive them out eventually."
Sorry if that's a bit hellish. I promise I would have said it nicely.
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
I sympathise. But I don't think it's anything to do with 'liturgical decision makers', at least not in the shape of Liturgical Commissions or things like that. 'The Peace' as a verbal exchange has been restored to the liturgy by them, but the fact that it's taken off as a ritual action is almost entirely down to the spontaneous decisions of various congregations. And that is not an introvert/extravert thing, at least not in the UK, because as everybody knows most C of E members are introverted in the extreme, and more to the point very conservative in matters of liturgy. There must be a very strong force driving the change, and it's certainly not a diktat from on high.
--------------------
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
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
I sympathise. But I don't think it's anything to do with 'liturgical decision makers', at least not in the shape of Liturgical Commissions or things like that. 'The Peace' as a verbal exchange has been restored to the liturgy by them, but the fact that it's taken off as a ritual action is almost entirely down to the spontaneous decisions of various congregations. And that is not an introvert/extravert thing, at least not in the UK, because as everybody knows most C of E members are introverted in the extreme, and more to the point very conservative in matters of liturgy. There must be a very strong force driving the change, and it's certainly not a diktat from on high.
Hmmm, I'm not sure that that doesn't actually make it worse though (unless you're hinting that this is some sort of movement of the holy spirit?). If congregations are making spontaneous decisions like that that make people uncomfortable then maybe they shouldn't be? If it was mandated that "thou shalt," and only the refuseniks didn't do it then that would be one thing. But "thou may, and Oh look, we all now are, no matter who we're failing to make accommodation for in the process because a small detail like this makes us feel right-on even though we could quite happily not do it" is something else entirely.
On Sunday I stood there on the verge of tears whilst being approached from all angles and you know what? You grin and bear it, because otherwise you'd never go to any service again. But you do that with a loud voice screaming incessantly in your head - "leave me alone. go away. this is spectacularly uncomfortable for me." And yet it's not like we're rocks that don't know how anti-social we must appear unless we're trying very hard. I'm aware that this says a great deal about me and those like me. But it's like bib says, how many people would go somewhere else if the sign of peace wasn't offered by the congregation? How many people get as far as the church door and can't go in because they know it's coming? That's been me - I've even left pews before the start of the service and gone home. But to stand there and physically make it clear that you want no part in it, which is what I've done in the past is even more soul destroying.
like I say, I'd love to have somehow stopped it in the first place, and if there was one thing I could actually *forbid*....
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
I don't like my personal space being invaded (for all sorts of reasons), so I don't participate when the peace is shared. It also breaks the flow of the service
IMHO it's divisive: who does the Rector hug this week???? And, what about those people who always get left out? The people who sleep rough, the girls who work the streets, those with mental health issues - all get ignored or passed over. We're up for a bit of a grope with that nice Mrs X who always has a bit on display and gives you a good squeeze but we're not so keen on someone whose personal hygiene is a bit different to ours.
Well I'm no oil painting but I'm usually clean and presentable and smile (if my straw has been renewed) but I've been "missed" at the peace in a church far from home. These days if the peace is invited, I'll say the response then remain firmly seated with eyes in the bible.
I also have a theological objection. If you have to express the peace, then perhaps you weren't at peace before. In which case you should have sought the relevant people out to be reconciled. Besides which there's plenty of time to meet greet and do whatever before the service and after. I'm quite happy to get at close quarters then: I just don't perform to order.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
There are people in all the churches I've been in, who cannot countenance close physical contact with anyone as a consequence of their life experiences. Would you have them leave over a non essential bit of liturgy?
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bishops Finger
Shipmate
# 5430
|
Posted
It's the custom at our place to keep the Peace short - we have it in the Roman position, just before Communion, and our organist is primed to start playing the Agnus Dei after a minute or two......
......my own practice, as I'm usually acting as liturgical Deacon these days, is to exchange the Peace with priest and servers, and then to rush into the nave to do the same with any visitors or newcomers, before hastening back to the altar. Our congo is pretty good at including newbies, but I feel it's right for someone at the sharp end to make the effort as well. (And, just for info, Father will go straight back into church after the vestry prayer - still in full vestments - to meet and greet.......).
Ian J.
--------------------
Our words are giants when they do us an injury, and dwarfs when they do us a service. (Wilkie Collins)
Posts: 10151 | From: Behind The Wheel Again! | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378
|
Posted
It is actually one of the earliest liturgical practices encouraged by Jesus.
"If, when bringing your gift to the altar, you suddenly remember you have a grievance against your brother, go and make your peace with him, then bring your gift." I am paraphrasing this.
Thus, it is quite appropriate to offer the sign of peace right before the offering.
If a person is comfortable with this, just sit down. Most people will honor your preference not to participate. If they approach, just shake your head, smile, and say, "No, thank you."
Posts: 2193 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
tomsk
Shipmate
# 15370
|
Posted
Like Gramps said. Mrs tomsk said to me that it is because we shouldn't carry grudges against one-another when sharing the eucharist. In the anglican liturgy, we say 'though we are many, we are one body, because we all share in one bread'. Sharing the peace provides an opportunity for grudges to be set aside. I suppose that, done properly, it ought to be less about one's mates than people one's fallen out with.
Posts: 372 | From: UK | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by tomsk:
Like Gramps said. Mrs tomsk said to me that it is because we shouldn't carry grudges against one-another when sharing the eucharist. In the anglican liturgy, we say 'though we are many, we are one body, because we all share in one bread'. Sharing the peace provides an opportunity for grudges to be set aside. I suppose that, done properly, it ought to be less about one's mates than people one's fallen out with.
You shouldn't even, in normal circumstances, get to church with the grudge. Sort it before and then you are at peace.
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
Its not a greeting. Its a ritual acknowledgement of each other as sinners in receipt of the unmerited grace of God. And also echoes the words of Jesus on his appearances to the disciples.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
crunt
Shipmate
# 1321
|
Posted
I am uncomfortable during the peace, but as someone commented upthread, perhaps that not such a bad thing. At the cathedral last Sunday (Wellington Cathedral of St Paul) it was the usual hand shaking in the pews wth regulars rushing around to shake hands / greet / kiss the people they know (I'm assuming they were regulars, and I'm also assuming they were making beelines for people they knew).
I liked it better in Korea where people just make eye contact and bow to those around them. No contact!
--------------------
QUIZ: Bible
QUIZ: world religions
LTL Discussion
languagespider.com
Posts: 269 | From: Up country in the middle of Malaysia | Registered: Sep 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Augustine the Aleut
Shipmate
# 1472
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ken:
Its not a greeting. Its a ritual acknowledgement of each other as sinners in receipt of the unmerited grace of God. And also echoes the words of Jesus on his appearances to the disciples.
There is much to be said for this approach (even if I would have the Calvinism softened, but that's me), however I do not think that one in twenty congregants have ever heard this expressed. I cannot remember the number of times we were urged to "greet each other in the Name of the Lord."
Posts: 6236 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378
|
Posted
Exclamation Mark
You said you should not go to church bearing a grudge.
That might be wishful thinking.
Often times, I do not think I am bearing a grudge.
However, I might see someone I would really rather not see.
Or something is said in the sermon that reminds me I have some unfinished business.
Or something may happen during worship that causes some friction.
Or maybe it is someone who has a grudge against me that I am unaware of.
No, church is where people holding grudges need to go. They will hear how God bears no grudge against them. They will hear encouragement to resolve whatever difference they have with their brother/sister. They will receive the power of the Holy Spirit to seek peace with their brother or sister; and they are given a place in the service, however briefly, to make amends.
Posts: 2193 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
Olaf
Shipmate
# 11804
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
As an introvert myself I still have a residual resistance to sharing the Peace. Therefore it's all the more important to be forced out of my instinctive isolation.
Why?
Posts: 8953 | From: Ad Midwestem | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Silent Acolyte
Shipmate
# 1158
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Clotilde:
'Let us offer each other a sign of peace'
This is liturgical bollocks, inviting all sorts of greeting and roaming around.
The sign is the address of the words 'The peace of the Lord be with you' and 'And with your spirit' to those standing nearby.
All the pew-leaving, hand-shaking, cheek-n-lip smacking, howz da wife-n-kids, whaddyadoin' fer lunch is witless embroidery engendered by announcing the sign rather than just performing it.
Of course the theology doesn't carry through, but the late, lamented leo had it right when he thought, All ya need is namaste (or, namaskar).
Posts: 7462 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
quote:
Originally posted by Clotilde:
'Let us offer each other a sign of peace'
This is liturgical bollocks, inviting all sorts of greeting and roaming around.
All the pew-leaving, hand-shaking, cheek-n-lip smacking, howz da wife-n-kids, whaddyadoin' fer lunch is witless embroidery engendered by announcing the sign rather than just performing it.
![[Overused]](graemlins/notworthy.gif)
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Olaf:
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
As an introvert myself I still have a residual resistance to sharing the Peace. Therefore it's all the more important to be forced out of my instinctive isolation.
Why?
Because church isn't all about me.
--------------------
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
|
|
The Silent Acolyte
Shipmate
# 1158
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
Mebbe so, but if, in quoting me, you're going to ellide a portion of my post, you might do us all the courtesy of indicating the place where the core bit was removed with an ellipsis or a "<snip>". I did not jump immediately from bollocks to a faux folksy dialect.
Posts: 7462 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Zach82
Shipmate
# 3208
|
Posted
I always connected the peace to Matthew 5:23&24 in my mind.
"Therefore if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hath ought against thee;
Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift."
--------------------
Don't give up yet, no, don't ever quit/ There's always a chance of a critical hit. Ghost Mice
Posts: 9148 | From: Boston, MA | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
betjemaniac
Shipmate
# 17618
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by The Silent Acolyte:
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
Mebbe so, but if, in quoting me, you're going to ellide a portion of my post, you might do us all the courtesy of indicating the place where the core bit was removed with an ellipsis or a "<snip>". I did not jump immediately from bollocks to a faux folksy dialect.
And there we go - 59 posts to my first telling off. Ironic that it came in the act of agreeing with someone. I'll of course do you the courtesy of apologising - is it that I've made your post look flippant though or what? I struggle with peoples' emotional meaning when I'm face to face, I've got no chance with internet text....
--------------------
And is it true? For if it is....
Posts: 1481 | From: behind the dreaming spires | Registered: Mar 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
Carys
Ship's Celticist
# 78
|
Posted
There have been a few occasions on which l have needed to exchange the peace with an individual to clear the air. l tend to peter handshakes, though at TSSF gatherings hugs tend to be more likely. One problem l've noticed is that if there are fewer 20 people present it is possible to get round everyone over 50, it's impossible, 20-50 is awkward.
Carys
--------------------
O Lord, you have searched me and know me
You know when I sit and when I rise
Posts: 6896 | From: Bryste mwy na thebyg | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Leaf
Shipmate
# 14169
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Carys:
l tend to peter handshakes
Now there's a practice of the Peace I haven't seen before. ![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
Posts: 2786 | From: the electrical field | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
L'organist
Shipmate
# 17338
|
Posted
Carys
Why do you have to "get round everyone" - this is not some sort of party game.
When originally (re)introduced in the 1970s the stated intention of the people on the Liturgical Commission was that people should turn to those standing on either side of them to shake hands; if there were very few people in church perhaps turn to those seated behind and in front - AND THAT'S IT.
It was NEVER intended to be an opportunity for people to go waltzing around churches, hugging and exchanging pleasantries.
And at the time many of us raised objections on several counts, but including
a) that since many attend church with their nearest-and-dearest what is being achieved? - after all, how many of us shake hands with our spouse?
b) what exactly was "the sign of peace" - did they intend us to go back to the kiss of peace?
c) what would happen in churches where congregants were spread out and had no obvious neighbours?
(d) what about those who didn't want physical contact in church? - it was potentially coercive and thus abusive.
None of these objections were ever seriously addressed.
IMHO the only satisfactory "peace" sharing technique is to clasp BOTH of the hands of the person next to you while saying "God's peace be with you" (or something similar) - and nothing more.
"The Peace" is meant to be part of solemn liturgy, not an occasion for socialising which can be done at the proper time, after the service.
--------------------
Rara temporum felicitate ubi sentire quae velis et quae sentias dicere licet
Posts: 4950 | From: somewhere in England... | Registered: Sep 2012
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gwalchmai
Shipmate
# 17802
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Carys
Why do you have to "get round everyone" - this is not some sort of party game.
"The Peace" is meant to be part of solemn liturgy, not an occasion for socialising which can be done at the proper time, after the service.
I entirely agree.
I used to think I was just being curmudgeonly in trying to avoid shaking hands with everybody at the Peace and I have been greatly heartened by this thread to find that I am far from alone.
Posts: 133 | From: England | Registered: Aug 2013
| IP: Logged
|
|
georgiaboy
Shipmate
# 11294
|
Posted
I have found very (no, make that VERY) few parishes in TEC where the exchange of the Peace works smoothly, whether done before the Offertory or in the later (Roman) position. (The notable exceptions are those places that were using the Missal pre-1979, and so were used to seeing the Peace ceremony done at the altar.)
IMHO, the problem arose because most parishes 'discovered' the Peace in the run-up to the 1979 Prayer Book--Green Book, Zebra Book, Son-of-Zebra Book, etc. There was so much stuff being added or changed that, inevitably, some things were insufficiently explained. Result = 'Peace as Greeting/chat.'
There are some pretty bizarre aberrations by now: a friend has recently taken a job as Organist in a local parish. He reports that 'everybody runs around and chats at the top of their voices, and (hold on to your seats) the organist & choir bring it to a close by singing 'God Bless America.' ![[Ultra confused]](graemlins/confused2.gif) ![[Projectile]](graemlins/puke2.gif) ![[Killing me]](graemlins/killingme.gif) ![[brick wall]](graemlins/brick_wall.gif) (I'm almost sure he's not pulling my leg.)
--------------------
You can't retire from a calling.
Posts: 1675 | From: saint meinrad, IN | Registered: Apr 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Chorister
Completely Frocked
# 473
|
Posted
If hugs come in, I'm sticking to Evensong. The Organist has great control over the proceedings, he just strikes up the first line of the Offertory Hymn when he thinks we've shaken enough hands. A very shy organist can hide behind the organ and get missed out altogether.
--------------------
Retired, sitting back and watching others for a change.
Posts: 34626 | From: Cream Tealand | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Carys
Ship's Celticist
# 78
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by L'organist:
Carys
Why do you have to "get round everyone" - this is not some sort of party game.
I used the phrase 'Getting round everyone' not because it's my aim but to try & describe what I have observed about dynamics. l grew up with the peace (born 1979) so it does seem to be an innovation to me. I've had some powerful experiences with it and value some interaction with my fellow worshippers who are my brothers and sisters in Christ but acknowledge it can be a bit of a hiatus and dislike chit chat during it but l try and avoid being grumpy. I've noticed a tension in my reaction most in a congregation which varies between about 20 & 50. I've thus pondered why?
At very small gatherings (eg a midweek Eucharist) with 3 people in congregation then both your neighbours is everyone with 4 people would feel odd to exclude 1. Even with a few more people missing someone could feel pointed. With a larger group, the dynamic is different because the number of exchanges for everyone to greet (for want of a better word) everyone is stupidly large. There's a size which is sufficiently large for it to be getting unwieldy to get round but sufficiently small that it feels socially awkward not to, this is particularly true if congregation size varies week by week between the top end of small & bottom end of large. It's partly that we're not good at maths and don't appreciate the way the number of interactions grows much faster than number of people. So for 2 people it takes 1 interaction, for 3 people it's 3, for 4 it's 6. By the time there's 10 I think it's 45, by 20 it's 190 if I've got the maths right. This makes 50 = 1225.
Another aspect of the dynamic is how easy movement is and how expected it is. In a small space with few chairs, it is quick and simple to reach other people and if others move it seems churlish (to me at least) not to acknowledge those with whom you are gathered, whereas if the space has a lot of chairs &/or the custom is to stay in one's place then the dynamic is different.
I'm happy with a variety of practices but I know some people have strong preferences one way or the other & these differences can lead to awkwardness or people being uncomfortable, especially if some people don't acknowledge other preferences either because the idea of a different approach isn't on their radar or because they know their way is the right way. Boundaries need to be respected and if you've got an enthusiastic hugger who doesn't get it that not everyone wants hugs from someone they may well not know well, someone (preferably someone in the leadership & other than a person for whom hugs are unwanted) needs to challenge them and keep an eye the situation.
quote:
IMHO the only satisfactory "peace" sharing technique is to clasp BOTH of the hands of the person next to you while saying "God's peace be with you" (or something similar) - and nothing more.
In a large gathering that would be my preference, but others will differ. l was talking to an extrovert who has just changed countries and who is missing hugs the other day so she would welcome more. I also find myself behaving differently in different contexts. I'm much more likely to exchange hugs at a TSSF Eucharist because that's close family (and a complete stranger especially one with little or no idea about Christianity is unlikely to be present).
Carys
--------------------
O Lord, you have searched me and know me
You know when I sit and when I rise
Posts: 6896 | From: Bryste mwy na thebyg | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
When it was first introduced, it was regarded as something the clergy wanted us to do, but there was a lot of resistance to it. It's clear from the reaction when people were temporarily were restrained from offering one another the peace during the swine 'flu epidemic, that it has now caught on. If the clergy were to pronounce that people should stop doing it, there would be a lot of resistance.
It is about 'first make your peace...' before presenting your gift, but that isn't the only thing it is about. Whether the average congregation consciously verbalises this or not, they now regard it as an expression of fellowship and agape.
It is difficult - I think I'd say it is impossible - to gainsay that.
I can sympathise with those whose personalities mean they find this difficult. In a way, that's a bit like not being able to hear the sermon because your hearing isn't very good or the sound system is crud.
I've rather less sympathy with those who say that the peace interrupts the liturgical flow of the service, or disrupts what should be a succession of moments of formal solemnity. That seems not very far from saying 'I don't see why I should shake hands with other people I have nothing in common with, or are lower class than me'.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
Gramps49
Shipmate
# 16378
|
Posted
There is an old saying, if something is done for three years it is a "tradition."
Just last night at Evangelism committee meeting someone asked why we have chili on Epiphany Sunday. She had never experienced it, but the rest of us told her it was "tradition." We have been doing it for three years. She had missed out on it because during January she and her husband go to Hawaii for a few weeks.
Posts: 2193 | From: Pullman WA | Registered: Apr 2011
| IP: Logged
|
|
ExclamationMark
Shipmate
# 14715
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Enoch:
1. It is about 'first make your peace...' before presenting your gift, but that isn't the only thing it is about.
2. Whether the average congregation consciously verbalises this or not, they now regard it as an expression of fellowship and agape.
A good post Enoch but a couple of other thoughts
1. Why isn't this sorted as soon as it becomes a problem? Are we saying that you "suddenly" realise there's a fellowship breaking issue when you see someone at church? If it's big enough to warrant a reconciliation then it would surely come to light earlier and needs to be dealt with that way and quickly.
2. I'm not so sure. It's a habit that few people actually think about and most simply "do."
3.There's still the point of the action of sharing the peace bringing division. What about those who are excluded? It becomes counter productive
Posts: 3845 | From: A new Jerusalem | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged
|
|
The Silent Acolyte
Shipmate
# 1158
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by betjemaniac:
And there we go - 59 posts to my first telling off.
It's a tough crowd all the way round, with writing standards considerable higher that average. I did look at your post count first and upon seeing nine over fifty posts, I figured you were a shipmate tough enough. I should have softened my crank with a welcome. Or, a dratted emoticon or something.
Oops. There I go again. You can't take me anywhere.
Posts: 7462 | From: The New World | Registered: Aug 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Enoch
Shipmate
# 14322
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by ExclamationMark:
...
1. Why isn't this sorted as soon as it becomes a problem? Are we saying that you "suddenly" realise there's a fellowship breaking issue when you see someone at church? If it's big enough to warrant a reconciliation then it would surely come to light earlier and needs to be dealt with that way and quickly. ...
I think this does sometimes happen. Even if the address about examining oneself isn't read much these days, being about to take communion prompts people to be more self aware than usual.
--------------------
Brexit wrexit - Sir Graham Watson
Posts: 7610 | From: Bristol UK(was European Green Capital 2015, now Ljubljana) | Registered: Nov 2008
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
