In his
indispensable book Why Catholics Can’t Sing Thomas Day recounts an incident that
occurred shortly after the ancient practice of the Sign of Peace had been
reinstated in the Latin Rite Mass. He
turned at the appropriate time to an elderly woman who had been piously praying
over her rosary beads and extended his hand.
The woman, says Day, responded with a curt “I don’t believe in that s -
- t”, and returned to her rosary.
While not
everyone has quite as negative a view as Day’s pious fellow congregant, there
have continued to be concerns about the role of the Sign of Peace (also known
as the Kiss of Peace) in the Mass. Nine
years ago the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments made a formal
decision to examine the role of the Sign of Peace, especially whether it should
be moved to another part of the Mass.
According to the Catholic News Service, the Congregation has finally
issued its report (article here).
As to the
question of whether to move the Sign of Peace, the Congregation has decided to
leave it where it is, for now at least. That
is not to say, however, that all is well as it is. According to the CNS article, the
Congregation
asked bishops to study
whether it might be time to find “more appropriate gestures” to replace a sign
of peace using “familiar and profane gestures of greeting.”
That sounds good to me. I’m all for anything that leads to more
reverence at Mass and makes it seem less like a business meeting – or a
cocktail party. The letter also asks
bishops to discourage abuses, such as congregants (or priests) leaving their
places to give the sign of peace, or using it as an occasion to exchange other
greetings (“Peace be with you – and happy birthday!”) or even (this is a new
one on me, but someone must be doing it) accompanying it with a “song for
peace”.
This
sounds like a step in the right direction.
The Sign of Peace should not be obtrusive. Really, it doesn’t need to be done at all:
it’s optional. All the same, I can’t
recall ever seeing it omitted, and I have often seen most of the disruptive
abuses noted above. At high school
student Masses the Sign of Peace general erupts into a frenzy of wide-ranging
glad handing, backslapping, and general good fellowship that could, and would,
go on for a very long time if permitted.
While things rarely get so rowdy in the parish church, one will often
see the same thing on a smaller scale.
It’s conceivable that some people might get the impression that the Sign
of Peace is really one of the high points of the Mass.
Well,
what if they do get that impression?
Would that be so bad? Yes, it
would. Here’s the problem: the Mass is
our most direct and profound encounter with Jesus Christ, and it is centered
upon the Eucharist, the “Source and Summit of the Christian life” (Lumen
Gentium 11). A raucous outbreak
of joviality among ourselves between the Consecration and the reception of
Communion not only detracts from an appropriate sense of reverence at this most
solemn part of the Mass, but also draws our attention away from the miracle of the
Eucharist. We need to remember that the
word “communion” when we speak of the Eucharist means communion with
Christ, the God made Man, through the reception of his body and blood;
our communion with each other is only through Christ. This is most emphatically what we call a “vertical”
relationship: we people “down here” directing ourselves to God, in the person
of Jesus Christ, “up there”. The
interruption of a very “horizontal” relationship, that is you and I directing
attention to each other, threatens to distort our understanding of the true significance
of what we are experiencing, particularly if the horizontal seems to be
receiving more emphasis.
So, yes,
the letter from the Congregation for Divine Worship and the Sacraments is a
good first step. We should hope to see
some real follow-up on its recommendations.
In explaining why the Sign of Peace will remain where it is in the Latin
Rite Mass, the Congregation says that it relates to “the ‘paschal kiss’ of the
risen Christ present on the altar”, and points out that it immediately precedes
the moment in which “the Lamb of God is implored to give us his peace”. The letter further explains:
Christ is our peace,
the divine peace, announced by the prophets and by the angels, and which he
brought to the world by means of his paschal mystery.
The Sign of Peace is really all about Christ, not
about us. If that reality can be clearly
taught and practiced, maybe even Thomas Day’s skeptical pew mate will be
satisfied.
No comments:
Post a Comment