Let’s embrace the kiss of peace
God Sister Teresa
The sign of peace (more correctly, it should be the kiss – and not the sign – of peace) was reintroduced into the Roman Catholic Mass by the Second Vatican Council in the 1960s. At the time, it gave rise to a lot of controversy but it needn’t have. It started happening 20 years after the Passion – so it is old, very old, very basic and part of what one scholar has called ‘the primary rock strata of liturgy’.
The early Church was at pains to ensure that the liturgical sign of peace didn’t degenerate into a formality: there was an insistence that fellow Christians who might be at variance with one another should be reconciled before they could attend the Eucharist together. We find it in Matthew 5:22-24: ‘But I say unto you, that whosoever is angry with his brother without a cause shall be in danger of the judgement … therefore, if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother hast ought against thee, leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way: first be
reconciled with thy brother and then come and offer thy gift.’
It is worth noting that Christian disciples are to seek reconciliation with those whom they have offended and not only with those who have offended them. As most of us know, this is a much more difficult undertaking than just forgiving those who have ‘trespassed against us’. Recognising that one is in the wrong is very uncomfortable and doing something about it can feel excruciating.
This Gospel directive implies that a Christian of Matthew’s own time might still have attended the Jewish Temple services, as well as a Eucharistic meal founded by Jesus at the Last Supper. Leaving a gift before the altar in the Temple would have required a great deal of nerve and a high degree of immunity from embarrassment. It would be one thing for him to abandon an inert and silent basket of cereals or vegetables and fruit, but quite another to desert a large and carefully selected beast to moo, bleat or cluck while he went off to look for the person who had been offended. The Temple officials would have had cause for considerable irritation at the abandoned offering and the consequent interruption of their schedules. Another thoroughly unpleasant side-effect caused by anyone’s just leaving the sacrifice on its own would have been the surprise of the onlookers and their speculation as to what the fellow had been up to.
Common sense being so closely linked to charity, anyone with the least judgement would be inclined to do the right thing before making a complete fool of himself.