I was away last mass as I was out of town.Anyway, I was reading through the past weeks bulletin and this is what I found: “LET US LOVE ONE ANOTHER” takes up so little time during the Liturgy, that it is almost impossible for us truly to hear it, to hear it not only with our outer but also our inner ears. For us today that is just one of the exclamations that precede the symbol of faith. But in earlier time this was not done. We know from the liturgical evidence of the ancient Church that kiss of peace was actually preformed after this exclamation and the entire Church, the entire gathering took part in it. This rite is still preserved to this day in the liturgical practices of Nestorian Christians, Copts and Armenians, which were not exposed to late Byzantine influences and often reflect an earlier form of Eucharistic celebration.
After reviewing liturgical, symbolic and practical importance of this beautiful rite we have decided to bring it back, however this time with no songs and with no chitchats across the pews since this is an important and undeniable part of Christian worship." My question is what is done here do I just give those closest to me a kiss, similar to the hand of peace in RC churches?

Depends on the other person if they're willing to take the cheek-to-cheek kind of kiss. Our parish just shakes hands, but those who are more familiar with one another would do the cheek-to-cheek

I sure hope this practice is not introduced into my parish. If it were I'd choose to ignore it. I love my fellow parishioners well enough already and have no bones to pick with any of them; I just want to attend DL without being pestered. It would remind me of that goofy Latin-rite thing about shaking hands. Yecch.

Well I would welcome it! I guess I am a kissy/huggy kind a guy.

This attitude boggles me, especially among the Latins. How can we all be one in Jesus Christ if we can't even stand to shake one another's hand?

Agreed. Liturgy is not meant to be experienced in isolation. What is communion without community?

Personally I think all that hannd shaking etc that takes place during services in other churches is a big distraction from the liturgy and should be done after church. It seems to take a few minutes for everyone to settle back down.

In the rare times that I am not serving at the altar, I share the kiss of peace with my wife and children in the same way I share the kiss of peace with my brother deacons.

The rite could be restored without disruption to the liturgy.

Hand-shaking in church don't mean diddly-squat. I've had my hand shaken during the Mass by people who treated me like dirt outside of the liturgical context.

Unity in Jesus Christ doesn't depend on hand-shaking nor is hand-shaking a guarantee of it. If other people want to do this, it's OK with me. It's equally OK if I don't. And I don't - so I won't.

Sielos-

Christ is Risen!

I can appreciate your feelings, but we don't shake hands we offer a cheek-to-cheek kiss. I certainly would not force a person to share the kiss of peace.

Every year at the beginning of the Great Fast we celebrate Forgiveness Vespers after the Sunday Liturgy. You'd be surprised (or maybe not)how many people rush to exit the Church so they don't have to experience the act of mutual forgiveness. True, the act does not ensure forgiveness, but we do it just the same. For that brief moment we come into an intimate relationship with the person of the community we may not ordinarily speak.

I hate to say this bergs but believe it are not this was originally part of the rite you chose to worship in.If you are not comfortable with it perhaps you should join another rite. Your attitude towards this may be seen as quite rude to some and an insult to those like myself who grew up in an RC church.

A caution!

In expressing either enthusiasm for or distaste regarding the idea of the Kiss of Peace, let none of us offer commentary which is itself antithetical to the words 'Let us love one another'.

Actually Bergs makes a good point. I found it to be rather distracting as well. What did he say that would indicate he is rude or insulting anyone? He simply said it was distracting and I have to agree with him, in the parish I once attended it was a hand shaking free for all.

In Christ:
Seraphim

Being an RC I find it's only rude when someone doesn't look at you when giving the sign of peace or act like this is just a biggest hassle ever.
Parish we're in now people genuinely express warmth thru their eye-contact, handshake, and wishing of peace in their voice.
I've been in other parishes (one right down the road) where it WAS a big distraction and people were down-right rude. In which case would have been better to not have done it at all.

I forgot to mention that it was a RC parish sorry bout that

In Christ:
Seraphim

I have seen the Kiss of Peace get out of hand in a few parishes over the years. I remember back in the late 90's, I was at the Feast of the Immaculate Conception in a RC Church, and there was a bearded man who must have been 6-5 and 350+ who at the sign of peace began hugging everyone around him. Now, I have no doubt his intentions were very sincere, but I also saw the look of discomfort on the face of a young woman in her 20's who suddenly got bear hugged by a huge man, I assume she did not know. Moral of the story, don't be overly familiar with people who don't know you.

Well, the kiss of peace should always be appropriate to the culture or the parish and of the society at large. For example, in the Philippines people are a bit adverse to physical contact with strangers. So no shaking of hands. Just look each other and say "peace be with you." I imagine in Japan you'd be bowing to one another. And so on.

If I'm not mistaken, the Kiss of Peace was originally part of all the ancient rites of the Church. Schmemann points out that in the early centuries, this was considered a very important part of the Liturgy, and he concurs with that assessment. He notes that it can be easier to perceive the reality of Christ in the Eucharistic Gifts than to perceive the reality of Christ in the person of our neighbor, yet the two mysteries really are inseparable.


Peace,
Deacon Richard

[/quote]
If I'm not mistaken, the Kiss of Peace was originally part of all the ancient rites of the Church. Schmemann points out that in the early centuries, this was considered a very important part of the Liturgy, and he concurs with that assessment. He notes that it can be easier to perceive the reality of Christ in the Eucharistic Gifts than to perceive the reality of Christ in the person of our neighbor, yet the two mysteries really are inseparable.


Peace,
Deacon Richard [/quote]

The early Christians were confidants in tiny close-knit communities which met in a house; quite different from today but actually similar to the secret GC communities suffering Communist persecution.
The kiss of peace (among the laity) probably becomes a disruption rather than a show of unity with a group greater than 10 or so, because it then becomes exclusive; that is you are selecting those to whom you share your greeting.

A nod and a smile to those in your immediate vicinity should be sufficient in my opinion...and it can be as you/they enter or upon leaving.

The Kiss was still being shared by the laity at least as late as John Chrysostom, since he preached about the Kiss becoming an opportunity for lustful advances (shortly after that, he had the congregation segregated by sex on opposite sides of the aisle).

I have participated in an Assyrian Qurbono in which the Kiss was shared by the clergy and the entire congregation, with the presiding bishop kissing the senior presbyter, who kissed the next senior, who kissed the senior deacon, who kissed the next senior, who then kissed the first person in the congregation, who passed it to the next, until all had shared in it. It was not disruptive.

As to whether a handshake suffices, I would say no. The handshake is a way of greeting strangers, not brothers and sisters. Its early significance was to show that one was not armed (extending the right hand open-palmed, one could not hold a sword or a dagger). Later, it became a way of closing a business deal. No, regardless of societal custom, only the exchange of a kiss is suitable for Christians in a liturgical context, not the least because this is how Christ would greet us. That Judas betrayed Christ with the same kiss just makes it more poignant, for Judas lives in all of us.

I'll defer to Fr. Taft about where and in what form this is in the Liturgy.

Since it was in the parish bulletin I would expect you'll get some instructions from your deacon or priest so they can know that it will be done as they believe it should be done.

I've not experienced it in a Russian or Greek church during a Liturgy.



Our parish is very tiny, but in Forgiveness Vespers we do all go one by one asking for and giving forgiveness and exchanging a "kiss" left/right/left. There are some kisses but mainly it's as the priests normally do at the altar with each other in Liturgy, more of a left/right/left brief not quite hug. Believe me we have our tensions, too. It's a very powerful expression. Near the end of Lent I was in an Orthodox parish I'm in from time to time and I approached Father and asked for his forgiveness which I hadn't managed to do before that. We had a very lovely, somewhat comical, exchange.



I also experienced this with the Assyrian Chaldean Qurbono where it was "passed" just as you describe it... however there was no kiss amongst the laity, only a clasping of hands, not a handshake, more palms over palms.

Stuart,
This somewhat confirms that the kiss of peace can be disruptive. St John was archbishop of Constantinople just a short 3-4 generations after the Edict of Milan, which allowed Christians to worship in public.

Ideally, the kiss of peace should be shared by all; however we are all sinners and Christian ideals are difficult to achieve even in a monastic setting. It is even harder to achieve in secular society. This kiss of peace is a relatively minor matter when we have more grievous deficiencies. When those are overcome the kiss of peace will come naturally and without any mandate.

Your brother in Christ,
Fr Deacon Paul

In his book, Through Their Own Eyes: Liturgy as the Byzantines Saw It, Fr. Taft presents a number of first hand accounts of the "golden age" of liturgy. The description is less than edifying: most of the floor plan of Hagia Sophia was designed with crowd control in mind, the raised solea connecting the bema with the altar was a way of preventing the celebrants from being mobbed by the readers. Boisterous behavior was common, not to mention lascivious trysts. Homilies were seen as entertainment, with the people cheering (and booing) the homilist based both on style and content. In short, behavior was common then that would not be acceptable today.

Also, consider that the Great Church probably accommodated several thousand faithful on any given Sunday, many more on the Great Feasts, whereas our parishes average about a hundred or less per Liturgy. Given different standards of behavior today (if anything, the faithful are too passive, too staid) and the intimate setting of our parishes, the exchange of the Kiss could be done in a non-disruptive manner--and there are congregations that have restored it (mostly Antiochians, granted: those converts take everything so literally). For them it works. For others, it may not. But if we do it, we should do it properly, and not settle for "a handshake instead of a kiss".

I thought the "Wisdom, stand upright/be attentive" was a response to all that "activity" going on during the Liturgy.

It's probably more along the lines of "shut up and listen!"

And let's not forget other shenannigans that seemingly happened back then. There is a canon against allowing livestock in the sanctuary, and there is a rule of thumb that one does not legislate against things that aren't happening.

The Chaldean Qurbana I've been to has the "passing of the chalice of peace". The 2 priests exchanged the kiss and the concelebrant did the symbolic passing of the chalice to the senior altar server (probably more of an Acolyte than just a mere altar server). Then there were "altar girls" who never really served at the altar, but they were the ones who brought the chalice of peace to the congregation. One would have to have their hands clasped as if in prayer to pass it on, and the other will open their hands over the other's and slide it towards themselves and clasp their hands. Then pass it along to the next person. It was beautiful and not disruptive and the most orderly sign of peace I was ever a part of.

Hi to y'all, it's my first post. :blush:

I don't think that it's appropriate to say to others that the kiss of peace is very important or something like that, because chances are you'll make things worse rather than better that way. It doesn't even matter too much how good your intentions are I guess, because the person who becomes the object of your intentions may not perceive them anyway. Notions of what is appropriate behaviour vary from one individual to another. Unless you're already intimate with the person, I think it is inappropriate to act as if kissing him or her in church is something you should do. Let's have less group pressure rather than more of it. Let's be less persuasive and let's not force ourselves on each other.

Calling it a ritual or a tradition just adds to the confusion, in my opinion. And for the off-topic it is analogously my opinion that unless you know that you have offended a certain person and want his or her forgiveness, it is most pointless and hypocritical to ask them to forgive you. Church is not a venue for pretending or playing, is it?

The invention of the blousy sleeve presented new opportunities . .

The various military salutes share similar origins .

I'm kind of sad that we do not have do a handshake or wave after the Gospel like the Roman Catholics. I went to a Coptic liturgy once and I loved their version of the kiss of peace - put your palms together, touch your mouth, then touch hands with the next person. Plus I was on the right side of the church with other women only, so no worries about bear hugs. :-)

denstolte SVENSKEN:

Christ is in our midst!! He is and always will be!!



This may point out the difference between your experience as a Western Christian. In the Eastern Churches, it is a point that you may not know of an offense to another and to become "perfect as your Heavenly Father is perfect" we ask in humility of forgiveness just in case something hidden is causing another to hold anger or a grudge against us. There are many sins of which we are not aware because we not only forgive ourselves things that we would hold against others, but also because we assume--wrongly--that we are not in need of the constant conversion of heart (metanoia) that the Fathers of the Church teach we must be constantly about. So humility is called for in beginning the journey of Great Lent to Holy Pascha--the same humility that ought to animate us every time we approach the Holy Mysteries. This very real way of teaching these lessons is, IMHO, not only very necessary but also a very abrupt way of gaining our attention.

In Christ,

Bob

It is also important to note that the Eucharist is the Mystery of love and of unity, and the Liturgy itself informs us that love of our brethren and unity of faith are essential preconditions for receiving the Body and Blood of Christ: "Let us love one another, so that with one mind we may confess the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, the Trinity, one in essence and indivisible".

The Fathers also wrote that he who retains hatred and resentment for his neighbor cannot worthily receive the Mystical Supper. The Cherubikon reminds us, once again, that we must "set aside all earthly cares, that we may welcome the King of all".

The Kiss of Peace may remain pastorally problematic, but it cannot be dismissed as meaningless, or as "mere symbolism"--it is one of the actions at the heart of the Eucharistic Liturgy.