After all these years, I am still sometimes taken aback when someone in church refuses the sign of peace.
Converts to Catholicism, as everyone knows, bring a fresh perspective to the experience of the Church. Going to confession is new and harrowing and liberating in ways that a “cradle Catholic” might not quite appreciate. Participating in Mass, receiving communion, saying the rosary—everything has a newness to it, and the convert gradually learns the patterns and expectations of Catholic life. But remnants of cultural difference remain, at least if my own conversion 45 years ago this March is any indication.
I grew up in Middle Georgia attending the local Methodist church with my parents and siblings. As part of family life, I went to Sunday School, regular Sunday morning church services, and Sunday evening services. For a week in the summer, I attended Vacation Bible School. Most of my friends at school were either Methodist, Baptist, or Presbyterian, and if doctrinal differences came up, they never seemed important, especially given the great communal unanimity achieved in the stands at high school football games on Friday night. Out in the county there were more ardent and marginal congregations, such as the Primitive Baptists, but generally (if a little vaguely), we were all Protestants, beneficiaries of Martin Luther and his bold break from the deeply corrupt Roman Catholic Church.
I never knew a single Catholic growing up. I had no contact, good or bad, with priests and nuns; no exposure whatsoever to confessionals and sacristies, stoles and chasubles, mitres and croziers, chalices and tabernacles, monstrances and sanctuary lamps. “Catholicism” obviously existed in Atlanta, even Macon, and up north there were big cities like New York and Chicago full of Catholic immigrants. I suppose we were all generally suspicious of Catholics and infallible popes, but I did not have a virulent anti-Catholicism drummed into me, probably because it was not a matter of such remote concern.
But one of the differences of coming into the Church as an adult, drawn by the Eucharist, is that many of the things dear to lifelong Catholics, especially more traditional ones, remain even now alien to the sensibility of my formative years. I have a hard time even remembering the names of various things. This is clearly cultural. At eight or nine, Catholic boys might have been altar boys wearing cassocks and surplices, deftly handling patens and cruets and thuribles, but I was in a Methodist pew with a hymnal in my lap, drawing faces on the back of an offering envelope while my mother nudged me to pay attention to the sermon and my stepfather regarded me sternly from the choir loft behind the preacher.
When I joined the Roman Catholic Church in my mid-twenties, I soon discovered a difference not just between converts and cradle Catholics, but among Catholics themselves. After all these years, I am still sometimes taken aback, for example, when someone in church refuses the sign of peace. When I first began to attend mass in the decade after Vatican II, the priest or deacon would say “Let us offer each other a sign of peace,” and this invitation sometimes signaled an occasion for such an extended session of visiting and talking and waving that it seemed like the mass had been suspended. Sometimes the priest would come out into the congregation and walk around to shake hands, and what was clearly supposed to be a brief, formally symbolic moment would turn into a demonstration of—how to put it?—the empowered laity liberated from their former liturgical bondage. It was a bit ridiculous, and in my experience, this kind of excess disappeared within a few years. Now the moment is usually one of pleasant dignity: we acknowledge our neighbors in Christ.
Well, most do. For some, even at Wyoming Catholic College, the request to offer each other a sign of peace is a clear affront. Turn toward them in church, and they not only refuse to look up, but their refusal radiates high-minded repudiation, as though you were offering them chicken pox or a copy of The Watchtower. If they do look up, their eyes hold a kind of pitying reproach, because you have shown yourself to be deeply if ignorantly invested in the decline of the Church. They can no doubt cite some text proving the “kiss of peace” to be an invalid part of the mass. But in the moment, it is hardly a lesson so much as a little assertion of their own superiority, a little gesture by the eternal Pharisee—little in every way.
Republished with gracious permission from the Wyoming Catholic College Weekly Bulletin.
The Imaginative Conservative applies the principle of appreciation to the discussion of culture and politics—we approach dialogue with magnanimity rather than with mere civility. Will you help us remain a refreshing oasis in the increasingly contentious arena of modern discourse? Please consider donating now.
The featured image is made available under the Creative Commons CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedication, courtesy of Wikimedia Commons.
Rarely do I leave comments, but I was a bit disappointed in this conclusion from a man I very much look forward to reading weekly. With the focus on the “some” who appear aloof in a refusal to partake in the kiss of peace but not offering an explanation from their side of things. More probable in my mind is the realization from the some that the essence of the Mass is sacrifice and therefore christocentric. The kiss of peace is one moment of many that exhibit an anthropocentric worship, much closer to our Protestant brothers “service”. Archbishop Schneider’s recent book on the Mass goes in depth here. I offer peace to my brothers in the social hall following mass, or at other church events, but at Mass I offer myself to God and hopefully do it with all humility, even if that paradoxically makes me aloof.
My regard for Dr. Arbery is so high that my dissent must be mild, but I would simply say “Judge not.”
Brian thank you for your response, I have been struggling with this as I believe that smiling at you and wishing you peace at mass can’t possibly have the same effect as me bowing my head and praying for peace for everyone around me since as you said I will smile and wish you peace before or after mass in the hall. But I have been struggling with the thought that my brothers and sisters will see my kneeling and praying during this time as a rejection to the peace offering
Mass is supposed to be anthropocentric. It’s the Church gathered to communally worship the God-Man.
“The Sabbath was made for man, not man for the Sabbath.”
God made the Sabbath to provide us the rest which allows us, gathered as the Body of Christ, to turn toward Him in worship. There are both horizontal (anthropocentric) and vertical (God-centric) aspects to the Mass. In the seventies the horizontal aspect was overemphasized IMO (I was there). Over recent decades we have been trending back toward a more balanced expression of the two greatest commandments: first, to love God with all our mind, all our heart, all our soul, and all our strength, and second, to love our neighbor as ourself. Personally I’m not a physically touchy-feely person so a smile and a wave feels more respectful to me than more demonstrative expresssions. But I certainly won’t refuse to shake someone’s hand if offered.
I am so sorry you had this experience. I personally have never seen this occur. I live in a small town and even tho I have lived here for nearly 29 yrs I am still considered an outsider by some. But never even when new to the area did I ever get personally snubbed during the sign of peace. … have you tried approaching these individuals after service and introducing yourself?
Speaking strictly for myself (as a cradle Catholic approaching my 70th birthday), I have to say that I’ve never really been comfortable with this whole “Sign of Peace” thing that came about somewhere in the 1970’s or so.
I well remember the seriousness and sobriety of the Mass that existed prior to all the changes ushered in by Vatican II, and the Sign of Peace seemed to disrupt that atmosphere, at least to me.
The glad-handing that occurred during the Sign of Peace, with some folks running from pew to pew to hug, shake hands and otherwise fraternalize as if they were politicians looking for the last remaining vote made me terribly uncomfortable!
It was all a bit too much for me, and I was glad when the pandemic restrictions put the kibosh to a lot of it!
I’m not against the Sign of peace per se, and always make it a point to look about at my fellow parishioners and offer a smile and a friendly raised hand of acknowledgement, but please, spare me the frivolity of grabbing strangers and other people I just don’t know!
I’m there to praise and worship God, not grab and glad-hand strangers!
As a “cradle Catholic,” I take no issue with offering the sign of peace. However, following my youthful struggles, as an alter boy, to learn the Mass in Latin — the many hours spent listening to that little red vinyl record loaned to be by Father Nolan, repeating again and again the server’s responses — I still take umbrage at the Mass being celebrated in English.
As a convert who always the thought the “passing of the peace” or “sign of peace” was a silly, sentimental innovation on the part of progressive Catholics, I learned finally that it is an accepted and respected part of the liturgy.
The way I’ve seen it executed with the most reverence is that the priest at the altar acknowledges his fellow priests/deacons etc at the altar with no invitation to the congregants to do anything. I recall that occasionally we in the pews might nod to one another, but there was no traveling about the sanctuary with love and kisses for all.
I admit the objection to Sign of Peace is one area where I tend to not get what Traditionalists are going on about. A “sign of peace” or “kiss of peace” is mentioned by Justin Martyr as part of the Mass. The Catholic Encyclopedia of 1911 didn’t seem against the idea so much as saying they didn’t do it any more. (I do understand those who want it placed somewhere else, say at the opening of Mass, but that’s a different issue. Also people who object because they have skin or neurological disorders are different. Although I kind of feel like if you have a medical or psychological condition related to touch there’s probably some alternative gesture that would suffice for most reasonable people.)
But I do think some of the objectors are actually converts who intentionally did not like how touchy their churches were. But it’s not like the Sign of Peace means you’re constantly holding hands. (Although I was at a parish once that did something close to that.) A moment I don’t think has to make things “anthropocentric.” And love of each other I think is part of the faith.
“this invitation sometimes signaled an occasion for such an extended session of visiting and talking and waving that it seemed like the mass had been suspended.” Exactly. Mass has been suspended. But it hasn’t but Father Jolly and others can’t stand it that the focus isn’t on them so they make it all about themselves. I pray for my fellow congregants but I could care less if you are friendly and welcoming. Just be polite and stay focused on the Holy Mass.
This is one reason why I don’t miss the NO. This frivolity still takes place in many parishes. If we have to attend the NO we try to sit a few pews away (“the 2 pew rule”) so we can stay out of the fray.
I’ve never liked the sign of peace. Mass doesn’t need a disruptive intermission. The Eucharist is the only sign of Communion needed. Rudeness to others is inappropriate, of course.
The General Instructions to the Roman Missal suggest that we offer the sign of peace to those on our right and on our left: nothing like the lengthy extroversion interruption that so distracts from the central focus of the Mass, the worship of God. It’s not superiority, I’d guess, so much as embarrassment at the eagerness and excess of the urge to disrupt the interior movement towards worship.
Read Dr. Taylor Marshall’s book INFILTRATION. This will show you how Catholics became divided.
I grew up Methodist as well and I was born in Milledgeville, Ga. And so I understand your background.
Bowing my head in silence with hands together in prayer IS a very significant, very powerful sign of peace. Bring still, immobile, eyes cast down, quiet is about as peaceful as I can get.. speaking loudly, turning around to wave at those not near you, drawing attention to yourself, waiting for eye contact with someone across the aisle, that is NOT peaceful. That is NOT a sign of peace but a sign of disorder, a sign of disruption, a sign of chaos, a sign NOT of God. Guy McClung, Texas
Thank you for your comment this is exactly how I feel but I do worry that I am hurting others who take it as rejection for their peace offering , I think that is a moment to pray for peace for everyone around me
Amy, you have outlined how our friars execute this part of the Mass as well. Is generally a balanced and dignified moment of the liturgy. But in my parish, one can feel “the divide” described by Dr Arbery. Because there has not been clear teaching and some priests say it at different masses.
Now: Some parishioners kneel immediately and refuse to look others in the eye (with a similar radiation of irritation sketched by last paragraph), some gently murmur peace be with you to neighbors and are quickly done, and others are enthusiastically looking to shake a hand or offer a kiss on the cheek until well after the priest has begun to speak. I hear complaints from all three “types” of people – wishing that there was a clear resolution of how we should proceed – and desire for everyone else to see this moment their way.
I pray the angels are encouraging us to be our best in our worship and that our priests choose to lead and teach with clarity and charity. Is rather sad that for many, the call for peace should be so full of Not Peace!
Admittedly, I do find the sign of the peace interruptive and disruptive.
Where I had been enjoying blissful contemplation, now here I am noticing my neighbor’s new hairdo, or another’s morning sickness of some sort. So to avoid the caricature you described so well, I simply acknowledge the folks nearest to me–some of them.
How do you decide which of the children of God nearest you are not worth acknowledging?
It’s always bothers me that at the moment Jesus is present on the altar, we turn our back on Him. I have never liked the kiss of peace during Mass, especially right after the consecration. My heart is full of love for my neighbor and the best way I can express it is to kneel and pray for us all. I’m sorry if you implied a snobbery intent on my desire to stay focused on what’s happening on the altar.
Thank you for your article. It is a good illustration of the problematic nature of the “sign of peace” post-Vatican II innovation. As you point out, some people interpret it as a time to demonstrate one thing or another, which is ridiculous,–an excess, which in fact, has not disappeared at all. For example, in one parish we attend for daily Mass, a fellow raises both arms dramatically and slowly rotates, waving and calling out to all and sundry, like a politician on a parade float. Daily. In many parishes people turn the ritual into an ebullient, mini-social hour. And, as you point out, if one does not participate, there is danger of being tagged as a snob or snubber, when in fact, the non-participant may have reasons—for example, having been up all night with a sick baby who has pink eye too. Do you want to shake hands? You never really know what someone’s motives are for what they do, or do not.
It draws our minds away from the fact that we stand before the true presence of Jesus Christ, King of the universe. Were we to really believe and understand this, our hearts and minds would burst.
The kiss of peace is attested as part of very early Christian liturgy. It is historical. To object to its inclusion in the mass on traditionalist grounds therefore is not very traditional. I will say it has become very awkward post-coronavirus, as some people (women, always) pointedly refuse to shake hands. The shared protocol of what constitutes a proper sign of peace has been lost.
If you went to a symphony and 3/4ths of the way through the 4th movement, the orchestra quit so that the audience could have a little face time….
or
If the person you loved and wished to marry was down on one knee ready to pop the question and your sister rushed into the room to show you her new puppy….
My experience of the sign of “peace is so mixed that refraining from it seems a reasonable response, and staying in a prayerful, reverent mode, better than shaking hands with all and sundry. As the author mentions, it does break up the preparation for reception of Holy communion, which after all is not with each other but with God. As it is an innovation that breaks up the solemnity of Holy Mass, I say forget it. Luckily in my diocese, it is not always used, so having to glad-hand everyone is not an issue all the time
I think the reaction of a Jewish friend who attended our wedding captures my own attitude toward the Sign of Peace: It was a nice ceremony, he observed, but why did everyone suddenly stop in the middle of it and shake hands?
Thank you for answering last week’s with this week’s, Dr. Glenn. I and clearly many others were waiting for it.
Dr. Arbery, I am a Catholic convert and came in the church at age 59. I am now 70. I have always thought the sign of peace to be a strange directive, especially at that particular point in Mass. I walk in the church and greet pleasantly all I come in contact with before going down the aisle and kneeling before entering the pew. I do the same afterwards. To be told to give “the sign of peace” reminds me of experiencing the same kind of “greet those around you” directive in the Baptist Church we attended. That was out of place too. I am at peace with all who I am worshiping with and don’t need someone to tell me, a grown man, to give this vague salutation in the middle of Mass. I love the people around me but I am worshiping at the very moment we are interrupted by handshaking. How odd it is. I would much rather be in the state of prayer rather than switch to something similar to a social gathering. There is a right time and place for that. You might consider it is not a snub by someone but rather that person is seated by the feet of Jesus and doesn’t want to give up that position for the business of Martha.
I am a Catholic convert for the last 37 years. I absolutely ABHOR the phony ‘sign of peace’. I am glad Covid at least has made it ‘touchless’….. I will nod at pew mates in front of me but I generally do not look all over the place, turn around, etc. in order to prolong the agony. The un-Catholic ‘sign of peace’ is an unseemly thing to do during the holy and sacred sacrifice of the mass. And stupid.
People used to confess their sins in front of the entire congregation, spending years as penitents, also, should we go back to that too?