The Sign of Peace in Sao Paulo

Comments

5 responses to “The Sign of Peace in Sao Paulo”

1. Joshua Vas

   August 11, 2015

   According to the linked CNA article, it is not that the bishop said “no intinction” but rather clarified/reiterated a prohibition on self-intinction by communicants and the receiving of intincted species in the hand. (I can’t recall whether a diocesan bishop can determine one method of receiving Communion to the complete exclusion of another….the former GIRM used to allow them that with regard to the spoon, straw, etc. but I can’t recall whether such a determination can be made with regard to intinction). It would have been interesting if he had, since the Latin Church (prior to the removal of the chalice from the laity) was for the longest time one of the strongest proponents of receiving both species separately.

   Re: Pope Francis… whatever one’s views on the Sign of Peace, I’m not sure one can make an argument from the Pope’s praxis. Yes, he did do that at the Philippines, but he does not do it everywhere. My guess is that, as for many things, he behaves like a typical pastor – he observes the norm and makes a pastoral call in certain circumstances on when he should do something different. In any case, it is quite different from a regular Sunday practice.

   I also found it interesting that the bishop apparently mentioned wishes on the occasion during the Sign of Peace. I’m not advocating going around censuring people, but I do think that many people come away with a wrong impression about what this gesture is supposed to mean. While indeed it can (and should) be warm, joyful, welcoming, etc., it has a different meaning in itself. This is often obscured when (well-meaning) people inquire about each others families, exchange wishes, and so forth. It is, I think, true that places (I’m thinking here of South and East Asia) which use a more reticent form of the Sign of Peace *seem* less prone to this – though equally that might simply reflect cultural norms regarding types of public interactions. I would be interested to know of what kinds of pastoral efforts are made (if any) to try and bring an understanding of the character of the sign of peace among people.

   Loading...

   Reply
   1. 

      Anthony Ruff, OSB

      August 12, 2015

      @Joshua Vas:
      Whoops. I meant “self-intinction.” I’ve corrected the post. Thanks, Joshua.
      awr

      Loading...

      Reply
2. Aaron Sanders

   August 12, 2015

   While we often hear of the differences between “Roman” and “American” legal philosophies to justify deviations that remain within the spirit of the law (Americans do indeed see apodictic law where others see more flexible norms), there is another very important difference that we often overlook. Canon law accords a relatively small role to precedent, which is so strongly determinative in Anglo-American jurisprudence, and accordingly what the pope actually does *may* indicate to us the mind of the legislator (one available guide if the law is “doubtful” or “obscure” – can. 17), but might just as easily have no effect on our understanding of a certain prescription (a pope can always dispense himself from laws or act unthinkingly, so the mere fact that he does something doesn’t indicate any change in law).

   Loading...

   Reply
   1. Jordan Zarembo

      August 13, 2015

      @Aaron Sanders:

      I agree with Joshua Vas here. Aaron, i do not view the CDW directive on the offering of the peace as a question of common or civil law. The Holy Father is not canon law in motion, even if the pontiff performs a “big” liturgical change somewhere.

      My view on the communal Pax are well known on PTB. In any event, Joshua’s point about “reticence” at the Pax in South and East Asia demonstrates that a huggy, touchy Pax which is sometimes encountered in North America or perhaps Brazil is not a violation of a law that must be strictly applied. Demonstrative actions during the Pax are merely common activities in particular cultures and geography. Even in places where the Pax is overly demonstrative, PTB discussion has clearly noted that some persons in any culture will avoid overly demonstrative behavior. The latter is a question of human temperament. All people have unique temperaments which cannot be contained by any positive legislation.

      I doubt that Bishop Kenan intends for all demonstrative behavior to cease, but rather for demonstrative behavior to be less obtrusive. I doubt he will yell “no hugging!” from the sanctuary during Mass.

      Loading...

      Reply
3. Fr. Jack Feehily

   August 13, 2015

   Doesn’t it all boil down to the limits of authoritarian control by the clergy over the lay faithful. Clerics have been schooled in theology and other disciplines which sets them apart from many ordinary Catholics. I have made attempts to catechize about the purpose and function of the Pax and have achieved some success in toning down the “Hi, how are you” behavior. It really helps when the accompanist and cantor move right on with the Lamb of God, but people have their own understanding and can hardly be completely restrained. Unless, of course, the priest decides to chide the crowd in the name of reverential good order. We mustn’t disturb Father’s Holy Mass.

   Loading...

   Reply