This weekend I will be out of town doing something possibly blogworthy. Maybe I will post about it next week. Haven’t decided yet what my next stop after that will be. These last couple churches have several varieties of service and it’s derailing my plan a bit because now I’m not sure whether to revisit. Also, the 39 series is still really pulling me in and I wonder if I should take a Sunday or two and just do the 39 and go home after. It might be a nice break to do that. Especially if I have to work the Sunday afternoon. Well, I’ll let you know.
Next stop
This weekend I will be out of town doing something possibly blogworthy. Maybe I will post about it next week. Haven’t decided yet what my next stop after that will be. These last couple churches have several varieties of service and it’s derailing my plan a bit because now I’m not sure whether to revisit. Also, the 39 series is still really pulling me in and I wonder if I should take a Sunday or two and just do the 39 and go home after. It might be a nice break to do that. Especially if I have to work the Sunday afternoon. Well, I’ll let you know.
Church #8 part 6
Today the articles continue with number 22. Anyone not familiar with this; it is a lecture/talk series about the 39 articles of religion of the Episcopal church. 22 is pretty straightforward. The Anglican church does not believe in purgatory, indulgences, or prayer to saints. That is to say they are ok with asking saints to pray (St Veronica pray for me-) but not with praying to saints (St Veronica please give me-). We talked in a zig zag about related stuff and heard a bit from a visiting priest about formalities which priests must affirm as they are ordained and promoted. The visiting priest stated that he’d always heard Episcopalians (that is American versions of Anglicans) did not really believe in the 39 articles. He also said that some of the decision makers in Ireland wanted to relegate the 39 to a historical document. I can’t say I blame them. It feels a bit out of date at times, to downright ridiculous at other times. That whole mess with article 13… I’d toss that one, or at least revamp it. We also got to hear about the medieval Roman Catholic Church some more, because the article is in direct contrast to what they were teaching at the time. Kind of an interesting side note came up: Catholic teaching no longer includes limbo, which was a permanent home for the souls of unbaptized babies. It was not hell, but not heaven, and it was sort of a neutral place for babies who couldn’t possibly have sinned yet, but couldn’t have had baptism either. Currently the Catholic Church seems to hold tentatively the view that they probably go to heaven. Father Egan brings up an interesting point regarding this. He says that if these babies go to heaven, they couldn’t have had original sin. Does this negate the Catholic teaching of original sin? Without a Catholic priest handy to ask, I’m not really sure. But it really makes me realize how easy it might be to fight about this kind of thing if one is very enmeshed in it. I’m really happy that I live in a place where people don’t hurt each other over such disagreements. As for me, I don’t need to know where babies go, or whether purgatory is a real thing. Once I’m dead I’ll find out, and in the meantime it makes no sense to get worked up over it.
Church #8 part 5
oops! I just fixed this below, as it turns out two X’s in Roman numerals is 20…so the articles we looked at were 20 and 21 and not 10 and 11. Where my fact checkin’ fans at?
Another Sunday morning started off with hearing some of the 39 articles. This past Sunday we learned about articles 20 and 21. Article 20 was removed and returned several times; I don’t know why. Other articles seem more questionable than this does. I’ll define it briefly: rules can be made outside of the bible as long as they don’t contradict the bible or make the bible contradict itself. Now the bible is a challenging document to pour over entirely, but I’m sure it contradicts itself sometimes. I guess people can decide themselves how to make peace with that. Basically the article is just outlining a guide on rule-making. We also heard further that there are three steps to resolving disagreements about rules or rules to be made. They are 1) scripture 2) tradition 3) reason. This means that when deciding to set up or review a rule you need to first figure out if scripture can resolve it. If scripture is ambiguous on the point you go with tradition. If tradition doesn’t help, you use reason. And if reason fails, I guess you form a new branch of religion. You know, because this is probably how most offshoots start- from a disagreement. I said the bit about creating a new church at the talk, but no one laughed. Oh well.
Article 21 states that Princes may meet to make rules and that they can make mistakes if they stray from scripture. So, this article is related to the last one and gives a bit of room for the Episcopal church to be wrong sometimes. I’ve actually been complaining for a while now that groups and power figures are not allowed to be wrong by the public. We don’t let politicians change their mind without then name-calling them wishy washy. Everyone needs room to be wrong. I also learned that the word ‘Princes’ refers today to the bishops across the US. In England the bishops are technically still advised by the the queen, but I imagine in reality that it’s more like the other way around.
Overdue- a church tale
I guess it’s about time I got into one of my experiences with leaving a church. I think about it a lot. Especially when visiting churches and observing how a church involves and interacts with those coming in the door. It is a church I used to belong to and then made the hard decision to leave. I’m not revealing the name because it doesn’t really matter- it could really be anywhere. I will call it OldChurch.
OldChurch seemed like a really great place to be. In many ways it was. We had a variety of members with different views of how to live their Christianity. Each week at service we all greeted each other during a very vigorous passing of the peace in which we left our seats and wandered about for few minutes. It made me feel close to everyone to be able to smile and talk to them about their lives and families. OldChurch had some pretty good ministries for the needy and shared the building with other groups that did good works during the week. I volunteered for a number of projects at OldChurch and liked the fellowship dinners we held afterwards. I was often asked to help out with projects once it became clear I liked doing so. And things went well.
Now I tend to get into depressions periodically; sometimes they are mild and sometimes worse. I deal with that in a variety of ways and at a variety of speeds, but so far I’ve always come out on the other side. Well it was getting to that again and I was feeling blue. I was asked to participate in an event as one of the leaders. I said no. This was met with total confusion. Tracey said no? But she always says yes. Well no was my answer and they weren’t going to get a different one by acting surprised. But it didn’t end there. I was asked to help with several other projects, each of which I declined. More confusion followed. It was somehow incomprehensible that I refuse. It slowly became clear that these were seen as duties I was shirking. I was there to serve and it was not a choice. It was a requirement. That’s saying nothing of the fact that I was going through something kinda heavy at the time. It began to be a drag to show up on Sunday. It made me sad. Finally I realized it was more painful to attend church than stay home. So I left.
Many times I wondered how this could happen. I loved these people and this place. All the same OldChurch drove me away. I do not blame any individual member. I don’t think it was anyone’s fault. Rather I think it was a damaging mentality that managed to pervade a lot of what we did as a church group. Take for instance the treatment of visitors vs members: we were really big into greeting visitors warmly. It was one of the things that first drew me to OldChurch. But more energy was focused on greeting newcomers than becoming close to current members. No one saw that I was having a problem because there was no one I was really close to. Giving hugs and asking after one’s family is nice, but no one really knew me beyond that. So I felt alone and no one really understood or even tried. The second problem was the high focus on church participation. It should never have felt like volunteering was an obligation. And I don’t think that was the intent. But it happened. Words were used like ‘spiritual gifts’ and ‘be more’. There was a campaign to do more as a church. At the same time OldChurch was experiencing low membership and money problems. I think the idea was to become so active and vibrant that people would be drawn to OldChurch and fill the seats- thus solving attendance and money issues. Besides not working, this plan created undue pressure to ‘volunteer’. And this pressure was not something I imagined. One of my last interactions with OldChurch was a fundraiser, the paperwork for which I was handed and told “There’s no one else to do this.” As I understand it the woman who gave me the task was herself handed the paperwork and told, “Don’t worry, Tracey will do it.” So, while I felt very attached to OldChurch, I had to admit there were serious problems and it was time to leave.
One of the main things I take from this experience (besides sadness) is an aversion to false closeness. I wonder if that comes with territory though. Churches are an entity unlike most others in our world. They aren’t exactly a business, although they do require money. They aren’t exactly a set of friends because they don’t always have common interests or know everyone in the group. They aren’t exactly a club because they deal with matters of the importance of life and what we are here for. And they aren’t a governing body because they really can’t enforce the rules they preach. So what in hecks are they? They are something unique. And that means churches cannot expect to be a business or a club, or a government or a set of friends. I think churches need realistic expectations about what they are. You should not expect to be close to everyone in your church. You should expect friendliness from everyone and the possibility of close friendship with a few. I think there is another question to be answered here as well: should we serve the church or should the church serve us? Is the church as an entity mainly a place where people find things they seek, or where people go to serve others? Is there a way to do both effectively? I guess the answer could go either way depending on the church. With OldChurch it was a problem with too much serving others and not enough taking care of members internally. Other churches may have the opposite problem. Ultimately I think it is about balance. And again I am back to the refrain “that’s why I’m doing this project”- to see how possible such a balance is and if there are churches doing it right or wrong.
Easter Out of Town
No church visit this week in case you were wondering. I will be visiting relatives. I’ll see about some type of post.
Church #9, St. Thomas the Apostle
Date: 4/1/12
Church: Saint Thomas the Apostle
Pastor: Father- I didn’t even get to meet him. No idea.
Time Spent: 10:30-11:45am
Overall Impression: Ehhhh…
Type: Roman Catholic
Format: Standard Roman Catholic format in short: Song, 3 bible readings, chant/song, sermon, prayer intentions, chant/song, communion, blessing
Thoughts: This church felt like the most boring example of the most boring example of a church. It was Palm Sunday for crying out loud! That’s supposed to be one of the best and most interesting Sundays all year. I like my Catholic heritage and find the familiar formula very comforting. But this was a really dry experience for me. I wonder if the problem lies in the issues with priest shortage. The church was ridiculously filled and there were two other masses; one before and after. It felt rather like we were cattle being packed in and then shooed out to make room for the next bunch. There was no coffee hour or fellowship time after mass. The priest didn’t even stand in the doorway to meet exiting parishioners. Not a single person said hello to me outside the passing of the peace- which is basically mandatory, cursory, and felt meaningless. I am totally ashamed of this church and want desperately to see a better example ASAP to remind me of what I love about church.
Overall Feelings: Disappointed.
Church #8 part 4
I am currently doubling up on church visits, but not church services. I am still going to the 39 articles series at St Stephen’s. After the morning talk, I proceed to whatever church was next on my list. Unless I encounter a conflict of course. Then I’ll have to play it by ear. The next church on my list gets it’s own post, so scroll up to see that.
Anyways, more people are recognizing me at St Stephen’s; I’m finding both goods and bads with this. It is nice to say hi to new folks who ask about the project. But I’m also getting a slightly clingy vibe. This is something that happens to some degree in nearly every church I’ve ever been to new. Churches like getting new members. Often, they like it so much that they overwhelm visitors with messages to ‘join us!’ ranging from welcome packets, to talking your ear off about how great the church is, to acting mildly offended that you consider not coming back. I’m not saying this is a necessarily a selfish act on the part of the church or members. For one thing, Christians are taught that those who don’t believe are going to hell. And if you haven’t been to other churches outside your own, maybe you can’t be sure any other churches will get it right. So people have to attend your church because their very soul is at stake. That reason is not selfish, it’s really the opposite. Also I know that church makes some people really really happy and they want to share that, even if it doesn’t work that way for everybody. Whatever the reasons, I’ve seen a lot of churches overdo it with the please-join-us business and they wind up sounding desperate. Best way to do it and not overdo it? Jury of me is still out on that one. I know there is such a thing as undergreeting. (see my post on church #9, coming soon) The subject is worth some thought and it’s own post. I’d like to tackle this at some point soon.
To the group at St Stephen’s: Guys, I’m not staying. And it isn’t a reflection of what kind of place it is or the job you are doing. The church seems fine, everyone seems nice. But I’ve got my reasons, embedded in the project and otherwise. And I’d like to think that in a way (because this is the first church with more than two people checking out the blog) I sort of am staying. Maybe I’m staying a little bit at all the places I visit. My blog could be a way to keep that up and even connect a few people to each other. Could my blog turn into the hottest thing since baked bread? Idk. Stay tuned…