Poor Vice President Joe Biden. His 1970's Catholicism of touchy-feely, touchy kissy, touchy huggy Catholicism has caught up with him in 2019. Who would have thunk!
I can remember how the Sign of Peace in the 1970's became the "Liturgy of Peace" as congregants were encouraged by affection starved priests to go hug wild at this point. Often a song would accompany the protracted Sign of Peace, like Peace if flowing like a river.... Oh MY!
It was particularly awkward in the seminary when some guys seem just too eager to come and hug during the Sign of Peace. Oh MY!
Yes, the Catholic Church, thanks in large part to the Charismatic Movement, went hug wild in the 1970's as Holy Mother Church shrugged off stiff, rigid liturgies for the 1960's let it all hang out approach. WOW!
It is no accident that the greatest amount of abuse in the Church took place in the 1970's. How many perverts got their jollies at the Hug of Peace and poor old grandma and Aunt Susie had to endure it, and not only them but the kids too!
When I was first assigned to St. Joseph in Macon in 2004, the previous pastor encouraged everyone to hold hands at the Our Father. So everyone had to hold hands whether they liked it or not. I recommended that people not hold hands at the Our Father and if they did only with family members. You would have thought it was Satan's suggestion by the people who loved doing it. But others said, thank you Father, I don't like holding hands and I don't like shaking hands with strangers at Mass and I certainly don't like being hugged at Mass!
Is there going to be a Me Too movement as it concerns the Hug of Peace at Mass??????????
Let me just say, in order to balance this, that the Me Too movement of today strikes me as Jansenistic and puritanical. But isn't secular political religion precisely that and more dogmatic than the Catholic Church ever was and more inquisitorial ???????
52 comments:
Of course, and now Francis has suggested the young people start confronting priests... social media posting will destroy people's lives...
But hey, got to 'attract' young people somehow.....
I always thought the sign of peace was silly.
"Personal Space" is a modern conceit. Is it a four foot perimeter? Two feet? 6.5 inches? It is similar to "Get our of my face!". What the heck constitutes being "in" someone's face?'
It's all so much for checking babble with no substance. By
And if you complain about Bidens behavior, but overlook the President's
There is a theory that the squalid, packed towns of the middle ages helped Europeans develop strong immune systems and made plagues less destructive than they might have been. It also probably helped them become accustomed to many of the famous cheeses developed in those same times. Perhaps a study comparing NO parishes to EF parishes during the recent spread of measles would be useful.
Anonymous K,
Good point. President Clintoon did get a little too "close" in the Oval Office! Paging Juanita Broderick, Monica Lewinksy, etc., etc.
Why do you have to politicize EVERYTHING? Stop being a Dem operative and revert to being a Catholic priest.
Your photograph of Paul VI celebrating Mass on the first Sunday of Lent 1965 at a Roman parish church is interesting for a number of reasons. Firstly, the 'altar' might well be a bog-standard dining table with a frilly table-cloth, but it has a platform underneath it which suggests it was already in use for some time.
Secondly, although the Mass was celebrated in Italian (to the extent that the vernacular was allowed in 1965) the rubrics are those for a Papal Low Mass, which were still in force at that date.
Thirdly, it sends a signal that although the Consilium was already working on a new rite of Mass which would be normatively sung and would obviate the 'Low Mass problem', the Low Mass was still the norm.
In my parish at that time the Sung Mass was dropped in favour of a spoken Mass accompanied by congregational hymns. As late as 2011 ICEL's effort to get clergy to sing their parts seems to have fallen on deaf ears.
If we are going to do the peace at all, why not right before the offertory, like in the Episcopal Church? I find it distracting to be doing amidst the solemn consecration, before the Agnus Dei. I remember a priest years ago (long since deceased) who would skip it at Daily Mass at my previous parish.
Father McDonald,
This is off this topic but you may be interested in Santita walking back his statement on Islam:
https://www.breitbart.com/faith/2019/04/04/pope-francis-says-god-only-permits-islam-to-exist/
Bee here:
Anonymous at April 4, 2019 at 9:36 AM said:
"And if you complain about Bidens behavior, but overlook the President's"
Hey, it's Democratic women who brought it up, and carried it forward, same as the Hollywood "me too" women. And it's the media, which is so far Left they might as well be in Russia and China, which seems to be jumping on board.
And another hey, aren't you the one who always is protesting "whataboutism" doesn't excuse the original perp?
You are one piece of work, I gotta say.
God bless.
Bee
Bee,
You nailed Anonymous K!!!
Anonymous @ 9:36, Yes, those terms are modern, but the idea is accurate. People have different tolerances for closeness and I think we learn to respect that in people we know. If we are among strangers, then we give them as much space as possible in situations like public transportation and crowds. We learn to say excuse me and I'm sorry. We usually know if someone is deliberately crowding us, in which case my personal space is the distance my right cross or front kick can reach.
Just wanted to say hello Father McDonald, and tell you again how much we (Susan & I) miss you.
In the year 2000 or thereabout, I was President of the St. Joseph parish council. One night at one of our meetings I brought up the fact that it really bothered me that there was a group that sat in the first several rows of pews in the right center section. They would turn around and basically form a circle during the sign of peace and during the OUR FATHER. They would hold hands and laugh and giggle as they did it.
The only reaction my comment brought was a very cool stare and no discussion. It was as though I had said or done something unpardonable.
Susan and I sit in those same pews now and things are quite different, thank Heaven.
By the way, I loved seeing the pictures of you in your early days. They reminded me of myself at that age.
Please come see us!
Jack Poole
Hi Jack,
Thanks for the kind words. All is well way down here in Richmond Hill, a not so sleepy bedroom suburb of Savannah. I miss you guys and tell Susan I said hello!
In the third picture, the men are not giving the peace sign, but rather "devil horns." How appropriate.
"Why do you have to politicize EVERYTHING?"
Why do you abortionize EVERYTHING?
Personal space is non-existent. What a person may like or prefer is not relevant.
Who gave you the right to demand or expect "personal" space in public? If you have to have "personal" space, stay home.
If you want to be a part of the human race, get over the notion that you have some expectation of not having someone stand "too close" to you at a checkout line or sit "too close" to you in church.
I've often wondered why response "And with your spirit" isn't sufficient. Why must a physical action/PDA accompany it? I've seen people ignore the rare priest who chooses to not have the "offered sign" and still kiss/hug/shake. I've never understood the importance placed upon this physical action and I grew up in the 70s. I always found it to border on being silly, awkward, overdone and contrived.
Anonymous @ 4:15, We have the right to expect common decency and decorum in public. By law, any unwanted touch can be construed as assault (my daughter is a criminal defense attorney). So, yes, people need to respect each other's person. Crowd me in public and I will push you away. Do it again and you will receive a warning. Do it a third time and you will find yourself in an arm lock or wrist lock. We can escalate from that point if you like.
Gene,
You realize whom you are speaking to, don't you? It is Anonymous Snark!
We can escalate... Oh, you are SO masculine and forceful. I'm sure that kind of talk gives you such pleasure. But, you know, it is all talk.
No one suggested you would be touched. But to claim you get "x" square feet as your "personal space" is absurd.
You or your daughter can construe anything any way you wish. It's a free country!
Cheers!
The kiss of peace at High Mass is a highly stylized gesture which is taken from the altar by the priest and given to the deacon. It is then passed on in order. One gives, another receives. The 'sign of peace' in the Novus Ordo is a shambles; we are enjoined to shake hands since the bishops have decided it is culturally appropriate in Europe and North America (if we were Eskimos we would presumably rub noses).
However, the handshake is not a liturgical gesture and is governed by social etiquette. For a start, we do not shake hands with strangers. Gerard Hoffnung's hlariously misleading advice to foreign tourists contained the following: 'On entering a railway compartment be sure to shake hands with the other occupants.'
Secondly, who gives and who receives? It is bad form to proffer one's hand to a lady, and in any case when introduced to a lady these days one is more likely to be given an 'air kiss' on both cheeks, as is the custom in France.
Thirdly, the form of words recommended in the GIRM (Pax Domini sit semper tecum/Et cum spiritu tuo) presupposes that there is a giver and a receiver.
I suspect that most people find the whole thing mildly embarrassing. I turn to the person next to me and recite the above formula, and if a hand is proferred I take it. Everyone else gets a cheery 'Good Morning!'
Why do I think that Anonymous would defend the silly feminists (Democrats?) that get so upset at 'man-spreading' on public transportation?? As though these guys are doing it just to offend...
Anonymous, truly it is ridiculous to try to argue that human beings and all animals have a 'personal space'... it's a part of our evolution and psychology.. it is perfectly natural.
Btw Anonymous I'm pretty sure you would be the first to get upset if any grown man went all "Biden" on a preteen daughter of yours...
Silly "man" are you...
Dan,
Because this pseudo-anonymous makes a stock-in-trade of puerile point-scoring which simply advertises the shallowness of his intellect.
He is the epitome of the internet troll. Treat him with the contempt he so richly deserves.
John Nolan,
Thanks for pointing out that the Pax is a dignified part of the ceremoniale of the High Mass.
The other faux, folksy gesture in the US, is joining of hands at the Pater. It is not universally done, but it is a feature at many OF Masses. My old liberal tyrant pastor even demanded we cross the aisle to join hands with the folks on the other side.
Naturally, I did not, and will not, respond to this kind of order. Other than my young grandsons, I am not inclined to hold another man's hands!
Biden is physical with men as well as women, pre-teen to people older than he. So your attempt at making him seem creepy with your "pre-teen" comment fails.
"For a start, we do not shake hands with strangers." At Mass, we are not shaking hands with strangers, but with our brothers and sisters in Christ.
"It is bad form to proffer one's hand to a lady,... No, it's not. Unless of course one is living in the 19th century.
Anonymous "fe-man" I wasnt trying to make Biden creepy, I was pointing out that any normal male would not appreciate someone invading the personal space of their preteen daughter... you were trying to claim there was no such thing as personal space... remember?
The etiquette is still to wait for the lady to offer her hand. Nobody likes an overly physical person glad-handing them and putting their hands all over them. If you think it is all talk, test me one day. My daughter did not "construe" it. It is the law...any unwanted touch is an assault. Biden is a creep, even without the touching.
Anonymous K,
Snark, snark. You are getting beyond boring. Are you attempting to take MT's place?
"...any unwanted touch is an assault."
Nah. "The definition of assault varies by jurisdiction, but is generally defined as intentionally putting another person in reasonable apprehension of an imminent harmful or offensive contact. Physical injury is not required." (Cornell Law School, Legal Information Institute)
So when I bump you in a crowded bus, when I back into you in a supermarket checkout line, when I push you out of the way of a speeding Bird Scooter on the sidewalk, you have not been "assaulted," no matter how unwanted the contact was.
So, your daughter's construance is, I suggest, a little broad.
"The etiquette is still to wait for the lady to offer her hand."
Nah. It's not the 1950s. Next we'll hear that "the etiquette" is for women to wear gloves when going to town to shop or pearls when vacuuming the man's study...
Silly fe-man, you are suggesting that assault occurs when the victim "feels" or has a reason to "feel" a sense of apprehension and yet hilariously try to argue "Personal space is non-existent. What a person may like or prefer is not relevant."
Guess what? Some people "feel" apprehension when others are invading their personal space.
Anonymous K,
I am a lawyer and you are dead wrong. An assault is when someone fears that a battery is about to be committed on their person. A battery is an "unpermitted touching."
If assault can also be defined as occurring when one is in "apprehension of offensive unwanted behavior" who is the one deciding what the definition of "offensive?"
Is it the persons who feel their spaces are being invaded? Or is it that touchy-feely old guy hugging your daughter?
I only ask Anonymous, because of your brilliant mind and desire to discuss as evidenced by your interjections upon this forum.
Silly? No. Invading someone's imaginary "personal space" is not the equivalent of assault.
Some people "feel" apprehension for lots of silly reasons. That doesn't make those reasons valid.
Anon-the-troll first opined that waiting for a lady to proffer her hand applied only to the 19th century. Later he updated it to the 1950s. I thought that at least in the southern states of the USA the concept of gentlemanly behaviour still applied. No doubt Anonymous wears his boorishness as a badge of honour to advertise his classless credentials, which is both puerile and contemptible.
When I was an army officer we would all stand up if a lady entered the Mess. Ladies were always saluted (including the wives of what we call 'other ranks' and the Americans 'enlisted men'). A lady may shake hands without getting up; a gentleman would not dream of doing so.
As for personal space, I do a lot of one-to-one tuition with young people. Respect for personal space is essential, for reasons which should be obvious.
Anonymous K,
If you try it, you will need a defense lawyer. Naff off
It doesnt have to be valid or not valid in your eyes.... how anointed you the decider of things?
People here just mentioned that some "feel" like they have "personal spaces" and you.
. ( for some reason) think your opinion matters... typical fe-man behavior.
'At Mass we are not shaking hands with strangers, but with our brothers and sisters in Christ.' Sanctimonious twaddle. Unless one is acquainted with a person, he or she remains a stranger. Whether one shakes hands on introduction, or on subsequent meeting, or to seal a business transaction, it implies acquaintance.
If you regularly attend a particular parish, the chances are that you actually know the person next to you. Otherwise you don't, and the contrived and artificial 'holy handshake' remains mildly embarrassing.
The ‘Sign of Peace’ is disruptive when everyone shakes hands. Some folks go up and own the aisle shaking hands with folks in other rows. If it is a show of love for my brothers and sisters shouldn’t I make this or similar demonstration whenever the opportunity presents itself? So when I am on my morning walk about 4:30 in the morning should I pound on the door and shout “PEACE BE WITH YOU “ when I pass the house of a fellow Christian?
RCG, do this to "Anonymous" - he doesnt believe in personal space....
Of course A will try to argue that some "spaces" are more, or less, public than others, but this just shows how unenlightened he is - promoting "geographical inequality."
Very sad that "spacism" still exists.
"'At Mass we are not shaking hands with strangers, but with our brothers and sisters in Christ.' Sanctimonious twaddle."
Nope. You reject as sanctimonious what the Church teaches - that we are brothers and sisters in Christ - because you loathe and despise the Sign of Peace.
That's a pretty poor basis for dismissing what the Lord has said and the Church teaches.
Anonymous, you dimwitted troll:
I didn't say I loathed and despised the 'Sign of Peace'; I said I find it a) unliturgical and b) mildly embarrassing. For someone who is so touchy about being misquoted, you are quick to make wild inferences about what other people say, or indeed think.
However, I do loathe and despise you, and other trolls who infest the internet. Since you have no name, I don't care whether or not you regard yourself as a 'brother in Christ' and the only sign I would like to offer you and your ilk would be a non-pacific kick up the arse.
If a pope can just decide to pull his hand away and make his brothers and sisters in Christ feel ashamed.... who am I to judge whether or not a sign of peace should always be given?
John Nolan,
Bravo! Ditto!
John Nolan - You loathe and despise the Sign of Peace because it is "unliturgical" and you find it "mildly embarrassing."
As if - AS IF - what you find embarrassing was the touchstone for 1) what others should like or dislike, and 2) what would make others feel embarrassed.
Your brothers and sisters - not in some sanctimonious fashion, but your brothers and sisters in the Lord, Jesus Christ - will welcome your Peace, really.
It's curious - and telling - that so many here are ready to threaten physical violence against those with who they disagree.
Very telling...
A2, surely you know that the threat to "kick arse" was only so that our "Anonymous" Christian friend here, can turn the other "arse" cheek.
In Anonymous's troll lexicon, finding something 'mildly embarrassing' equates to 'loathing and despising' it.
No doubt many do not find it in the least bit embarrassing. Some take it to extremes. Doesn't the GIRM say that the Peace be given 'only to those who are nearest and in a sober manner'? Those who make an exhibition of themselves in public embarrass those around them.
Be that as it may, many Catholics (and Anglicans) are not entirely comfortable with the handshake. This springs from a native reserve, not from a want of Christian charity. They do not expect everybody to share their views, and often preface their remarks with 'I may be old-fashioned, but ...' And they have no choice in the matter, since to refuse would cause offence.
As a member of the congregation I am also mildly irritated by the deacon's use of the imperative mood - 'Offerte vobis pacem'. He really has no business ordering us about. In the traditional Roman Rite the laity are not dragooned in this way.
The 'kiss of peace' among the laity is of course an ancient practice but was discontinued as it was becoming a source of scandal. In the Middle Ages the 'paxbrede' was offered to the congregation to kiss, but it led to arguments regarding precedence which sometimes led to violence, and was eventually discontinued, although there is a vestige in the Dominican rite.
If, as Anonymous-the-Troll alleges, I loath and detest the 'sign of peace' and therefore dismiss the word of Our Lord and the teachings of the Church (this pernicious individual has a good line in slander, as you all will have noticed), then tomorrow when I attend the NO Mass at the Oxford Oratory I could avoid it by falling to my knees after the Pax Domini sit semper vobiscum and immersing myself in silent prayer. No-one will bother me. But I won't; I'll go along with it. It's a minor irritation after all.
What amuses me about the Novus Ordo is that its fabricators talked a lot about 'useless repetition' but managed to invent a lot of it. The repetition in the responsorial psalm, the intercessions in the Universal Prayer which are repeated in the Canon, and the Pax. The priest now turns to the people and offers everyone the peace, and then we do it all over again (and if you can get away with doing it only once or twice, you're lucky).
Dan, I think you will find that 'Anonymous 2.0' is not Anonymous 2, who is an eminently sensible individual and definitely not a troll.
What is pathetic about this particular troll is that he thinks we might want to connect a theoretical boot with his derrière because we disagree with him. It doesn't seem to have occurred to him that we would like to serve all trolls in the same manner.
They are a pest. You shouldn't feed them, so it is better not to adress them directly. Do so, and they have won.
John Nolan makes the same point that Father Z does at his website. Do not feed the trolls, even if they are priest trolls.
John,
Thank you for clarifying the question of identity and for your kind words.
I have only just now scanned this thread and am not entering the lists on it. But I do want to say that, at least outside the setting of the Mass, Gene’s depiction of proper etiquette at 11:15 a.m. on April 5 (confirming the third paragraph of your post at 5:28 a.m.) and your depiction of proper etiquette in the second paragraph of your post at 5:08 p.m. is how I was brought up (except for the saluting, of course, which presumably only applies in the armed services context). It is also what I still attempt to adhere to many decades later. And it still seems to be frequent practice in Georgia. This said, perhaps such matters are demographically, and especially generationally, determined at least to some extent.
Post a Comment