One of the singular moments assigned to the deacon at mass is to utter the phrase: “Let us offer one another the sign of peace.”

But where and when that moment occurs may be about to change.

John Allen has some analysis and insight:

In response to a worldwide consultation requested by Pope Benedict XVI, the U.S. bishops have recommended moving the sign of peace from its present location just before Communion to an earlier point in the Mass — after the scripture readings and before the offertory, or the presentation of gifts.

Msgr. Anthony Sherman, who heads the U.S. bishops’ office on liturgy, said it’s up to the pope to decide if, and when, the change will be made.

As things stand, Mass-goers exchange the sign of peace immediately after praying the Our Father, shortly before receiving Communion. In theory, liturgists say, the gesture is intended to communicate that the peace of Christ, accomplished upon the altar by the consecration of bread and wine into Christ’s body and blood, extends to the unity of the church and of all humanity.

Critics complain, however, that in practice the handshakes, embraces and chit-chat that ripple through congregations at the sign of peace often seem more at home in a church social or a cocktail party than in the key moment before the Eucharist.

“Sometimes it’s like the Packers just scored a touchdown,” said Msgr. Roy Klister, rector of St. Francis Xavier Cathedral in Green Bay, Wis., and a member of the board of the Society for Catholic Liturgy. “People are hugging, high-fiving. … It’s lost any real connection to the rite of Communion.”

In some form, a “kiss of peace” has been part of the Catholic Mass since antiquity. Prior to the reforms of the Second Vatican Council (1962-65), however, it was not an everyday feature of the liturgy. Reviving the sign of peace, experts say, was part of the council’s emphasis on “full, conscious and active” participation by the laity.

Almost immediately, it became one of the most contested elements of the new Mass. In 1967, then-Archbishop Paul Hallinan of Atlanta, an early leader in liturgical reform, reported getting letters of protest “that would curl the hair of the most reactionary prelate.”

In the mid-1990s, the U.S. bishops requested permission from the Vatican to move the sign of peace to before the offertory — which was, experts say, its original setting prior to changes in the Roman liturgy in the fourth century. It’s also where the sign of peace still falls in the Ambrosian Rite, the ancient form of the Mass celebrated in some regions of northern Italy and Switzerland.

The Vatican deferred that request, citing the need for stability. During the John Paul years, the lone exception was given to the Neocatechumenal Way, a “new movement” in the church, which received permission to place the sign of peace before the offertory.

The push for wider reconsideration, however, never went away. At the 2005 Synod on the Eucharist, bishops from around the world recommended an assessment of whether the sign of peace should be moved. In the meantime, rulings have attempted to rein it in; a 2004 Vatican document called for people to exchange greetings only with “those who are nearest and in a sober manner,” and said the priest should not generally leave the sanctuary.

Beyond the argument from tradition, experts offer two other theological reasons for moving up the sign of peace: First, that doing so would better reflect Christ’s injunction in Matthew 5:23, that one should be reconciled with one’s brother before offering a gift upon the altar; second, that many Orthodox and Protestant churches place the sign of peace before the offertory, so moving it could be seen as an ecumenical gesture.

In reality, however, the push for relocation is probably driven more by a practical instinct that the sign of peace too often is a distraction from preparation for Communion.

“Pastoral concern outweighs liturgical purity at this point,” said Msgr. John Burton of Camden, N.J., chair of the board of the Federation of Diocesan Liturgical Commissions, who said the sign of peace would be “more effective” in a different spot.

Notre Dame de Namur Sr. Kathleen Harmon of the Institute for Liturgical Ministry in Dayton, Ohio, however, said there are also powerful theological reasons for keeping it where it is. Placing the sign of peace after the consecration, she argued, puts the accent on seeing peace as something accomplished through Christ; moving it up, she said, makes it seem more like something human beings do on their own.

Trying to curb abuse of the sign of peace by changing its location, Harmon said, amounts to “solving a practical problem by making a liturgical decision.” What’s needed instead, she said, is catechesis about what the gesture really means — a challenge that pastors and liturgists will face, she warned, no matter where it falls.

Check the NCR link for the rest.

And, in this approaching season of peace, let’s offer it freely and joyfully. Peace!