Sign of Peace?

DiscussãoCatholic Tradition

Aderi ao LibraryThing para poder publicar.

Sign of Peace?

Este tópico está presentemente marcado como "adormecido"—a última mensagem tem mais de 90 dias. Pode acordar o tópico publicando uma resposta.

1margd
Ago 7, 2014, 2:39 pm

During flu epidemics, we have been urged not to shake hands as a sign of peace. Sometimes people with compromised immune systems avoid handshakes year-round.

I suspect fewer and fewer people will be shaking hands as sign of peace in future. Maybe some, like mean girls of a certain age, will use the uncertainty or liberty to not have to touch perceived inferiors in a church situation. (I saw one girl shake some hands, but not others!)

What is happening in parishes elsewhere? Is the handshake being phased out as sign of peace? What will replace it?

***********************************************

My son's hospital doctor sometimes keeps his hands in his pockets or makes a point of using antiseptic gel after shaking hands. (I assumed to avoid hospital nasties such as MRSA and Clostridium difficile, and am fine with it--MRSA killed an uncle--but it is a bit awkward from social perspective.) Ebola apparently prompted another MD to suggest other social gestures: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/cary-a-presant-md/preventing-ebola-and-more_b_5652.... (The wai greeting that Thais use is a gracious substitute, IMHO.)

2LesMiserables
Ago 9, 2014, 1:11 am

Well if you go to a Traditional Mass, you do not go through this proceedure.
If you go to a Novus Ordo, then you can simply smile and nod your head towards the person.

3margd
Editado: Ago 9, 2014, 8:33 am

Interesting, I'd forgotten that. I like the sign of peace, though! I remember how astonished a priest new to my kids' school was at the kids' enthusiasm. :-) Hand-shaking just doesn't seem to work as well as sign or symbol, though, when hygiene concerns have people on the defensive, e.g., . one mom keeps antiseptic gel beside her in the pews! (I don't think gel, while off-putting, is effective on cold and flu viruses she meant to avoid.)

I have to admit that when I have a cold, I wave my scrunched-up hankie by way of explanation...but I think if those nearby noted my sniffling and coughing they are probably happy that I offer smile and nod instead! Different, though in that I AM infectious and am trying to protect THEM, not trying to protect myself from unspecified infection? (Although immune-compromised people, like a young friend bald from cancer treatment, must and should.)

Not a huge issue in the larger scheme of things--more etiquette and symbol, I guess

4sullijo
Ago 9, 2014, 11:24 am

I've seen a few conversations about the Sign of Peace in light of the current Ebola scare. Keep in mind that sharing the Sign of Peace is optional; it's not required in the Mass. If there is a legitimate public health concern I think it would be perfectly appropriate for a priest to eliminate it (and even limit offering the Precious Blood during Communion).

5John5918
Editado: Ago 10, 2014, 8:13 am

I tend to think that the sign of peace would be better offered after the prayer of the faithful, just prior to the presentation of the gifts. A couple of decades ago I was involved in a parish in the USA which did it that way, and it seemed to work well. However I see that Rome has recently decided that it should stay in its current place just before communion. C'est la vie.

In South Sudan, which has experienced very little peace in the last six decades, sharing a sign of Christ's peace is seen as a very significant part of the Mass.

I often think people in the west are a little too fastidious. Shaking hands is far more prominent in South Sudanese culture than it is in Europe or north America. The right hand is used for eating and greeting and so is relatively cleaner than the left, which is used for such things as blowing one's nose (usually without a handkerchief) and wiping one's arse (usually without bog paper), but I note that many priests and Eucharistic ministers do wash their hands before giving out communion. We haven't experienced ebola in South Sudan for nearly 40 years, so it's difficult to say what effect a new outbreak might have, but we do currently have a cholera epidemic and that has had no impact on the sign of peace yet.

6margd
Ago 10, 2014, 8:05 am

>5 John5918: I often think people in the west are a little too fastidious.

Yes, I think the fewer risks we suffer, the more risk-adverse we become. Here in America, CDC is advising hospitals on quelling fears re Ebola: http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/hcp/patient-management-us-hospitals.html. Anti-vaccine community is all a'twitter, apparently.

Hard to believe sometimes that we westerners are recently descended from the Greatest Generation, who for example, lost more in one WW2 battle what we lost in all of Afghan war. In TED talk about violence, Stephen Pinker takes our declining tolerance for death and value of life as a good thing, though--it has lead to dramatic drop in violent deaths, per capita, even including 20th c wars and massacres: https://www.ted.com/talks/steven_pinker_on_the_myth_of_violence.

I'm expecting a houseguest this week who is uber-fastidious. Don't know how he tolerates my housekeeping (though I try), much less his time in Africa. Exposure to some microbes is supposed to be GOOD for us, but I doubt he'll ever be convinced of that!

7John5918
Ago 12, 2014, 8:33 am

Ebola: Spanish priest infected in Liberia dies (BBC)

Although I suspect he got infected at the hospital his order runs, not from the sign of peace at mass...

8margd
Ago 12, 2014, 9:23 am

Sad that some westerners don't want fallen health workers brought back for treatment--fearing contagion and, believe it or not, thinking that people are brought back only to serve as serum source for vaccine development. We should have backs of such brave and dedicated volunteers, western and African.

US Center for Disease Control says that health workers sweat in space-like outfits in Africa because in some (outlying?) health posts, there may be earth floors, no water & disinfectants, and health workers must deal with corpses. Apparently gowns, masks, gloves, goggles etc. suffice in modern hospitals--as long as rigid attention to disinfection, given the severe penalties for any laxness.

I read that one African church held services in spite of government advice against public gatherings. (Well attended--morale in some places must be like that of European plague-times.) A bowl of bleach water was at the front door for sanitizing hands. The (minister/priest?) used his sermon as opportunity to reinforce public health messages.

9John5918
Editado: Ago 12, 2014, 9:57 am

>8 margd: sweat in space-like outfits

I've worn one of those landmine protection suits once when I was evaluating a mine clearance project. They're pretty sweaty when the temperature is in the high forties, so I hate to think what one of the bio-protection suits is like.

morale

Thanks for mentioning this. It's one of the things that is often forgotten by secular aid agencies, but where the church excels. In situations where the physical aid, if it arrives at all, is often too little too late, helping people strengthen their spirit to survive is often a crucial intervention.

10John5918
Ago 13, 2014, 2:16 am

11John5918
Out 15, 2014, 2:29 am

And now, according to the Catholic Information Service for Africa*, the Archbishop of Kampala has banned the handshake during the sign of peace, not because of ebola but because of the Marburg virus which has popped up in Uganda.

* From an e-mail newsletter; it doesn't usually appear on their website until a few days later.

13John5918
Out 26, 2014, 5:16 am

>12 John5918: However the missionary priest who presided at this morning's mass obviously hadn't consulted the Secretary General quoted in that article, as he declined to shake anyone's hands and left it open to the punters in the pews to decide for themselves. It was a blessing in disguise, actually, as usually he wanders around the entire church shaking hands with just about everyone, as well as the crowd outside under the veranda who can't fit in the church, so mass was a little shorter today.

Mind you, the thing which I have always found unhygienic and a little disgusting is the practice of putting the communion host directly on someone's tongue. It's inevitable that the priest will get saliva on his finger tips. I would have thought that transferring fresh saliva directly from one person's mouth to another person's mouth is far more likely to spread ebola, marburg and a number of other diseases than simply shaking hands. Receiving communion in one's hand seems far better on every count than having it shoved into your mouth.

14hf22
Editado: Out 26, 2014, 6:20 am

>13 John5918:

Mind you, the thing which I have always found unhygienic and a little disgusting is the practice of putting the communion host directly on someone's tongue. It's inevitable that the priest will get saliva on his finger tips. I would have thought that transferring fresh saliva directly from one person's mouth to another person's mouth is far more likely to spread ebola, marburg and a number of other diseases than simply shaking hands. Receiving communion in one's hand seems far better on every count than having it shoved into your mouth.

Back when I was a high church Anglican, I both received and distributed hosts on the tongue. When done correctly, there is no saliva exchanged. The distributing person's hand only touches the host itself, never the receiving persons mouth.

Our resident doctors were in fact more concerned with the common cup as a bodily fluid exchange mechanism, though even that is reasonably low risk. But from an infection control perspective, you can not be pro a common cup, and against reception on the tongue.

Mind you, it is all a little moot, as with a serious scenario the real issue is the gathering of people at all. If Ebola came, I suspect what you would need to do is cancel Mass, not just try to change minor things at Mass. Because if health care professional taking all precautions can be infected, as they have been, doing the sign of peace or not is unlikely to be a game changer.

15John5918
Out 26, 2014, 7:07 am

>14 hf22: When done correctly, there is no saliva exchanged

When done correctly. Just like condoms, worn correctly, prevent pregnancy and STD transmissions. Just like protective gear worn and disposed of correctly by medical personnel prevents ebola transmission. In reality, when a priest or lay minister gives out communion to hundreds, sometimes thousands, of communicants, it is very unlikely to be done correctly all the time. I have certainly often come away with saliva on my fingers, as have most other ministers I know.

Everything serious which I read on ebola suggests it is not just being in the same space as hundreds of people which is dangerous, as ebola is not an airborne disease. It is the exchange of body fluids, which happens when people are spitting, vomiting, shitting, bleeding on you, as happens to medical personnel taking care of them, or to family members crammed into overcrowded houses with no water, electricity or soap, and then disposing of the corpses using traditional methods which expose the family to the body fluids.

16hf22
Out 26, 2014, 7:38 am

>15 John5918:

When done correctly.

I don't know about you, but I found people are much more scrupulous when dealing with tongues than hands, meaning much less touching. And hands, to the extent they have cuts and whatnot, are also an infection risk.

ebola is not an airborne disease. It is the exchange of body fluids

Quite so. But it is generally very very infectious by that vector, and we can exchange more body fluids than one might think in day to day interactions (i.e. cuts on hands etc).

While as a matter of fact it is generally considered saliva and sweet are not vectors, very small amounts of blood can be. It is not like AIDS, another non-airborne virus, where normal interactions are entirely safe.

And given the fatality rate (60% or so in this outbreak I think), even a reasonably low chance of infection is too high.

17margd
Editado: Jan 24, 2015, 7:36 am

Social distancing is found to be crucial factor in containing swine flu. (Article quoted below uses English a bit oddly--maybe a translation or author's first language not English?):

"... In an attempt to include the outbreak, brought on by the A/H1N1 virus, the Mexican government adopted social distancing measures, which involved college, shop, museum and theater closures, as nicely as ordering people to quit kissing and shaking hands."

"Making use of the television viewing information, the team assessed the effectiveness of social distancing controls in minimizing the spread of flu."

"According to the researchers, such controls appeared to be a "crucial issue in containing the initial wave" of swine flu in Mexico City. The team estimated that if these social distancing controls were not adopted, then the price of flu transmission would have been a great deal larger."

"... (Lead reasearcher) Springborn says the group identified a "rebound impact," meaning social distancing controls were successful at the start off of the flu outbreak, but persons quickly started to invest much less time in their residences."

""This suggests that efforts to make use of social distancing to mitigate disease spread may possibly have a restricted window of efficacy, i.e., before pent up-demand for activities outside the residence requires precedence," he adds. (margd: = cabin fever!)

"The group located that people of a greater socioeconomic status and children were most most likely to adhere to the social distancing controls, as indicated by the elevated quantity of time they commit watching Television in the course of the flu outbreak."

"They explain that this may perhaps be simply because people today with a lower socioeconomic status are much more likely to be topic to variables that make staying indoors difficult, such as much less flexibility with functioning hours. "If this hypothesis had been tested and verified, it would recommend the prospective for targeting of social distancing policies to facilitate self-protective measures for low socioeconomic level people," say the researchers. (margd: poor people have to work?)

http://www.theinsiderreview.com/health/social-distancing-effective-for-minimizin...

margd: If H1N1 study was further north, I'd wonder if TV-watching also equates to warmer noses. Recent study shows immune system less effective when temps low: http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/287661.php .

OTOH: frequent hugging (but not kissing) - along with good social support - may lower stress-related infection risk! http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/287242.php

18John5918
Editado: Jan 24, 2015, 7:48 am

>17 margd: However swine 'flu is completely different to ebola in that the former is airborne and the latter isn't.

PS: Potential good news: Falling Ebola cases show 'turning point' (BBC)

19margd
Editado: Jan 24, 2015, 8:44 am

Re flu is airborne and Ebola isn't

Flu like Ebola can be picked up by contact, so avoiding kissing, handshaking, using the remote of infected person, should be effective for both? Great that Ebola is turning around--from news reports sounds like social distancing is being widely adopted. Flu study--at least as far as TV-watching is concerned--showed fall-off as epidemic proceeded. Bet folks in Ebola zone won't abandon social distancing as long as Ebola is around! Wonder what, if any, post-Ebola effects will be on social dynamics, e.g., will they resume close contact with deceased as part of funerals?

20nathanielcampbell
Jan 24, 2015, 9:14 am

Re the common cup:

There's a good reason why communion wine is "fortified," i.e. of a higher alcohol content than standard table wine.

21margd
Jan 24, 2015, 12:12 pm

>20 nathanielcampbell: communion wine is "fortified," i.e. of a higher alcohol content than standard table wine

The alcohol doesn't hurt, especially when common cup is also physically wiped with clean napkin between users.

With hand sanitizers though, a high alcohol concentration (70-95%) and exposure time (10-15 sec) is required to kill most bacteria: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hand_sanitizer . Viruses are more difficult to destroy than bacteria, unfortunately.

Still, I read somewhere that common communion cup tested remarkably low in infectious agents?

22margd
Jan 21, 2018, 12:05 pm

US Conference of Catholic Bishops.
Individual bishops responding to flu outbreak, 2018.
(Alcohol kills bacteria, not viruses?)

The Church's Liturgical Response to Influenza

In previous years, what has the Church done in localities where the outbreak of Influenza is most significant?

In those localities where the outbreak of the disease has been the most significant, bishops have introduced several liturgical adaptations in regard to such practices as the distribution of Holy Communion and the exchange of the Sign of Peace in order to limit the spread of contagion.

What measures should be taken in Roman Catholic liturgies in the United States of America during flu season?

Priests, deacons, and extraordinary ministers of Holy Communion should be especially reminded of the need to practice good hygiene. Ministers of Holy Communion should always wash their hands before Mass begins; a further precaution suggests using an alcohol-based anti-bacterial solution before and after distributing Holy Communion. The faithful should be instructed not to receive from the chalice if they feel ill.
What about further adaptations or the restriction of options at Mass?

The Diocesan Bishop should always be consulted regarding any changes or restriction of options in the celebration of Roman Catholic Liturgy. However, the need for the introduction of widespread liturgical adaptations for the prevention of the transmission of influenza in the dioceses of the United States of America is not evident at this time.

What is the United States Conference of Catholic Bishops doing to address this question?

While the USCCB Secretariat of Divine Worship will continue to monitor the situation and provide the best advice possible to Diocesan Bishops and their Offices for Worship, it is ultimately the responsibility of the Diocesan Bishop to recommend or mandate liturgical changes in response to influenza in particular local areas. The Secretariat likewise appreciates whatever information Diocesan Offices for Worship are able to provide concerning local conditions and the pastoral responses developed by Diocesan Bishops.

http://www.usccb.org/prayer-and-worship/sacred-art-and-music/influenza-and-the-l...

_____________________________________________________________

Peace be with you, but no touching: Flu season altering Mass
Jan 19, 2018

...Roman Catholic Diocese of Portland...is suspending the sharing of consecrated wine during communion and holding hands during the Lord's Prayer. The diocese is also discouraging parishioners from shaking hands while greeting each other during the passing of the peace.

Other specific guidance calls for priests to place the host into worshippers' hands instead of on their tongues during communion, and to use hand sanitizer before and after communion.

http://beta.latimes.com/sns-bc-us--influenza-maine-catholics-20180119-story.html

Adira para publicar