Go read the whole thing as it's a really neat experiment and he's a witty writer. I just wanted to share this excerpt on his Episcopal visit. I could have almost written this for him verbatim:
Then we recite the Nicene Creed, followed by the “Confession of Sin.” Together, as a congregation, we recite a wonderful prayer, including this passage:Exactly.
We have not loved You with our whole heart; we have not loved our neighbors as ourselves. We are truly sorry and we humbly repent.
When we finish, the priest says, “Almighty God have mercy on you, forgive you of all your sins through our Lord Jesus Christ,” and it’s such a good reminder. I love this part.
For the Eucharist, we proceed a row at a time to the front. I hear the administrants’ voices: “The body of Christ, the bread of heaven. The blood of Christ, the cup of salvation.”
I can’t overemphasize the satisfaction I get from this service. It’s contemplative, reverent and serious. There’s no swaying or hand-clapping, but the congregation participates through prayers, confessions and responses. I hear more scripture read than in any Baptist service I’ve attended...
The liturgy is different, but the words are deeply meaningful. I get the sense that the focus of the service isn’t on the music, or the preaching, or even on making visitors feel comfortable. It’s on Jesus. It’s crazy how that seems so revolutionary.
MASH HERE FOR THE FULL ARTICLE
7 comments:
"If my religious experience were an ice cream truck, the only thing in the freezer would be vanilla pops. And, once every quarter, some grape juice."
:-D
I got a good chuckle out of that line.
The line Aaron liked is a great one. I also liked the "all of the above" church. :)
When it comes time for the Apostle’s Creed, the priest asks, “Do you believe in God the Father Almighty, Maker of Heaven?” and we answer, “We do.”
This is extremely unusual. Was there a baptism? Were candidates being received?
One of the pesky things about this experiment of his is that he didn't go to any of these churches long enough to know that this is something that begs for an explanation. :(
Communion is central [to the Episcopal service]—just like last week’s [Catholic] mass—but the Episcopal church lets me participate, acknowledging me as a fellow Christian.
One would hope that part of the reason for this experiment would be the promotion of mutual understanding. Yet here he is, completely misrepresenting Catholicism.
Well, I think he was really just trying to relay the Sunday morning experience, not dig deep into the doctrinal differences. So I don't think it was his intent to misrepresent anyone. I think he's expressing the situation the way most Protestants understand it, inaccurate as it may be.
Given my background in the AG, I was having flashbacks on that one, though the "Luther is my homeboy" t-shirt made me chuckle too.
And that thing with the abbreviated creed was odd. I got the impression that they did that in lieu of reciting the entire Apostle's or Nicene Creed because it doesn't appear he missed any of the service.
I don't think it was his intent to misrepresent anyone. I think he's expressing the situation the way most Protestants understand it, inaccurate as it may be.
But there's a tremendous difference, I think, between misunderstanding due to simple ignorance (as many Protestants do) and publishing an article promoting misunderstanding to others (as this fellow did). Clearly he didn't even attempt to look into the matter (as simple as looking at the missal sitting in the pew) before publishing the misrepresentation. I'm sorry, but I think that's a really, really bad oversight for an article of this kind. :/
I got the impression that they did that in lieu of reciting the entire Apostle's or Nicene Creed because it doesn't appear he missed any of the service.
Right. And the "Q&A Creed," if I may call it that, is something Catholics occasionally do. But it's not something we do every week-- it's unusual. It's a renewal of baptismal vows usually done on the occasion of a baptism, reception of candidates, etc.
Because it's generally brought out only for special occasions, the Catholic reader naturally wants to know what the occasion was. Meanwhile the reader who's never been to a Catholic Mass may think it's the norm. :)
One of the unfortunate things about this guy's "experiment" was that he only went to each of these churches once. So there's no way he would know Catholics don't do that every week, but only for special occasions.
I think the brevity of the experiment would be unfortunate in pretty much every church he visited, not just in the Catholic church. Episcopalians and Methodists also observe a liturgical calendar, for example. It would be better to see more of the calendar and lectionary in action. And some of those groups only do periodic Lord's Suppers. It would be good to see how more of them do it. I understand why he didn't do it, but I think he would've gotten more out of the experiment by spending more time with each group. :)
Honestly Qat, I've been to 2 or 3 Catholic services now and I don't recall seeing that in a prominent place in the missal, although I did eventually find it.
I just don't think he was trying to give an in depth analysis, just an impression of his visit. Maybe if he'd set out to do a more detailed study and attended 2 or 3 services at each place (and Relevant would have given him the print space), he could have done a more thorough version.
I don't recall seeing that in a prominent place in the missal
It's usually on one of the opening pages, right where a person perusing the missal is most likely to find it. I found it quite easily on my first visit to a Catholic church without any assistance.
Besides which, even the most glancing familiarity with Catholic teaching will clearly show that Catholics regard Protestants as Christians.
I just don't think he was trying to give an in depth analysis, just an impression of his visit.
Though I think it is unfortunate he didn't spend more time with each church, that's not what I have a problem with.
I have a problem with him publishing an article promoting misunderstanding to others without even making the least attempt to investigate the matter. That doesn't require any in-depth analysis. If the issue concerns him enough to publish about it, it should concern him enough to actually open the missal, or at least ask someone knowledgeable.
And let's be clear on this point: he didn't say "the Episcopal church lets me participate, which makes me feel more like they regard me as a fellow Christian." He said "the Episcopal church lets me participate, acknowledging me as a fellow Christian." In other words, he's not just talking about how it makes him feel, how it impresses him. He's actually claiming that the Catholic Church--not his feelings about it, but the Church itself--doesn't aknowledge him as a Christian.
That's simply wrong. And he's publishing the information to other people, encouraging them to think it is true.
I don't think he did it maliciously, as if he had some evil intent. Not at all. But I do think this passage reflects deplorable negligence, especially in an article that could be promoting mutual understanding.
He probably thinks it is true. I know I did. I understand it more now, but if you'd asked me 4 years ago about it, I probably would have expressed it somewhere along the lines of how he did.
Post a Comment