Tapestry in front of the Baptistery
We went to a Church of Christ.
This morning I woke up, as per usual. Today is Ascension Sunday! Woot! I walked to the 9 AM Mass which was abnormal to me. I couldn’t focus today at all so I didn’t enjoy my walk to Mass as I normally do. I barely remember it. At any rate, I got in there and I chose a pew that was almost entirely empty except for one bunbury sitting on the far left. I could barely do my prayer before the Mass to help concentrate my mind because I was too unfocused. I’ve been thinking about a lot of things as of late.
At any rate, I do not like the 9 AM Mass as well as the 11. I am trying not to be too negative, but I don’t like the cantor at the 9 AM Mass. He’s not bad by any means, I just don’t like him. I like my Heidi & George combo. They sang my favorite hymn at Mass today; let’s see if any faithful readers know which one that is. I get upset that the Catholic Church doesn’t place more emphasis on receiving the blood at Communion. I always fear that I’ll never get some. It wasn’t a bad Mass at all. I think that I’ll actually go next week to both the 9 AM and the 11 AM.
Then Laura came and picked me up. I had to give her money so she could get gas. I had to call my friend Ashley to find out the directions. We were going to a Church of Christ.
GASP! Yes, it’s true! We actually went!
We went to one in Elyria, which is kind of country. Laura had to park in gravel. This was bringing back so many memories.
When we walked in, Laura noted, “I feel like this isn’t even a church, lol”
When we got in, we were greeted by some greeter and we took our seats. Lurra and I like the Jesus & Me worship as opposed to everyone knowing each other, so we had waited in the car for a bit before coming inside. They started with the same tired songs that I remember from my youth such as “Tis so Sweet to Trust in Jesus,” but it felt different than before. It wasn’t as dry as I remember it; in fact, I was almost convinced that I had misread the Churches of Christ. But then I started to think about it. The sermon and the songs that were read- everything spoke of trying to imitate Christ and making ourselves holy. It just doesn’t work like that. I didn’t hear one word about grace. I could smell the Pelagianism. While I now can appreciate lay worship, it was too Pelagian for me. I couldn’t stand it. It was all about trying to perfect ourselves; God became a Grand Being sitting up in heaven entirely disconnected from us. There was no understanding of God being presently with us. Everything is an empty symbol.
Going back after not having been since I can’t remember when, I can see why Catholics fall in love with it. They go into it with their understanding that God is always with us, not knowing what the Churches of Christ actually teach; they go in with the complaints of an established priesthood and hierarchy; they go in with ignorance regarding the Eucharistic feast. They become entranced by the way people there love their Bibles. I now know why Catholics leave the Church and become Restorationists.
Other than this very upsetting theology that was woven throughout the entire service, the service bored me to tears. I didn’t sing, even though I knew almost all the songs. I only sang part of one to try and keep me awake. Before it began, I think Lurra was under the impression that we could just share a hymnal. WRONG, lol. They sang no less than 10 songs and I’m not kidding. WAY more than I remember.
The Church of Christ we attended was non-institutional. Before the service, Laura asked what was behind the curtain and I told her the baptistery. Afterwards, Laura said, “I thought of something funny. ‘The tapestry was in front of the baptistery.’” Lol I love Laura so much. I don’t think she understands just how true that statement is on so many levels. I shall miss her next year greatly.
Communion came and it quickly became awkward. We, as Catholics, aren’t supposed to receive communion anywhere else; I, as an ex-Campbellite, refuse to receive communion at one of their churches. They kept trying to give us their communion, but I had to shake my head. I’m know that everyone behind us saw us refuse communion, but we weren’t trying to make a show out of it.
A note about the Bibles is needed. Everyone here brought their own Bibles, so there were no Bibles in the pews as is usual for Churches of Christ. They had Bibles of different natures at the ends of the rows; they probably just buy them at thrift stores or other bookstores when they see them and put them at the end of the pews. I picked up the Bible next to me and thumbed though it and I saw that it contained the book of 2 Maccabees, but I just told myself, “Well, some KJVs have the apocrypha in them. No big deal.” But during the sermon, when I reached over to get this Bible, I turned it to 1 Corinthians 11 and GASP OH MY WORD! Why did this Bible contain a subheader above verse 23 that reads “Institution of the Eucharist”? Then I flipped through the back, it had a list of all the major Catholic feast days and Holy Days of Obligation. I flipped to the front and I noticed an imprimatur by a Bishop of New York. What?! Out of all the places we could have sat, Lurra and I sat down in the pew where someone accidentally bought a Catholic Bible! Of course, they probably bought this without knowing that it was the Douay-Rheims version. They probably just opened it and said, “Yep it says ‘thee’ and ‘thou’ and has a black cover- it must be a KJV!” YAY for divine providence!! That was especially exciting.
It let out fairly early because the normal preacher was out at a gospel meeting; the guest preacher today was, what I assumed to be, an elder. He led songs during his sermon, so I’m sure that he is also a song leader. His song book was also a soft cover version, so I am doubly sure that he is a regular song leader.
When it was all over, Lurra and I tried to run out of there as fast as possible, but at least four people started talking to us. I assume they did this because they saw that we didn’t take communion so they thought to themselves, “Non Christians? Gotta do sum convertin’!” We got out of there safely, however.
As we were leaving, Laura said, “I wish that one day I could leave a Protestant church without someone trying to convert me.” This, I say, is a refreshing change between the Catholic parishes and the Protestant churches. Protestant churches are more like family because there are less of them; whenever they try to talk to visitors, it is awkward. Imagine going to a family dinner to a family you have never met before. I just want to be left alone, lol.
There was a bunbury at this church, by the way. Odd.
After it was all said and done, Laura and I went to Panera. I was emo because going to the Church of Christ brought back so many (bad) memories. At least my hair looked good.
Then I went to work and I came home.
But something else of note needs to be mentioned. On the Catholic board, I wrote something of which I am proud. Everyone else seems to disagree with it, and I can see why. I am a liberal Catholic Christian. Everyone else tends to be moderate or conservative. As long as they don’t claim that I am not a Catholic (or even worse, not a Christian), I’m fine with the disagreements. I still have a lot of learning to do. At any rate, these paragraphs would make even Kathy proud. I could expound on them more, but I’m not. They’re taken out of context, but you can understand them anyway.
My understanding of the Old Testament that that it is simply the writings of a tribal people trying to make sense of their world. At least, this is true for the first part (especially of the origin of the world, Abraham, the exodus, conquering of Canaan, the period of Judges, and the period of the kingdom). God doesn’t change, that much is true; but our understanding of God definitely changes. You will notice that as time goes on, God seems to be playing less and less of a part with the “chosen people” going from God actively helping the Israelites conquer Canaan (but not completely because some of the enemies used iron =/) to God simply appointing kings and, while still the perception is that God is there helping the kings, there is a definite change insofar that there is more independence. This lessing influence of “God” upon the people of the Jews continues even until the Prophets when God became articulated by people who have experienced the mystery (which is a burden, as Jeremiah tells us) of God. Afterwards there is a period of grand silence when God decided to refrain from intervening only to come back in Jesus.
Reading the Bible becomes so much easier (in my opinion) when one stops reading it as if it were some sort of supernatural Holy Writ and starts viewing it as an evolution of a humanity trying to understand what God is and the role of God in relation to humanity. Trying to hold onto these stages of evolution by quoting “Scripture” and using it as a guide for living life is like trying to remain a homo habilis. The Bible helps us to understand God, not because God gave it to us directly, but because it is a chronicling of the human understanding of God and it contains insights by those who have experienced the mystery. These insights help guide us as we try to live them (loving mercy, tending to those forsaken, etc), not as we try to dogmatize them. Trying to “prove” the Bible as the literal, impeccable word of God is worthless. Our understanding of Creation is that God spoke everything into existence, so in that sense everything existing is the “word” of God.
God has revealed Himself (Herself/Itself. No pronoun is worthy of the glory of God) by much more than a book. Everything within reality was caused by God. To me, saying that God revealed Himself to us via the Bible is nonsense and a throwback to our days as pagans. Maybe to a henotheist like Abraham, God would need to reveal Himself to try and show him which way was acceptable to God in a world where thousands of deities (or at least the understanding of deities) existed. To monotheists, there would be no need for the One God to reveal Himself since (supposedly) the entirety of everything speaks to His glory.
So, while the Bible can lead us to God, I am almost certain myself that it is not of divine origin. Legalizing the Bible to such an extent that the need is felt to somehow “prove” its authenticity (as opposed to other “uninspired scriptures”, no doubt) distorts its purpose and ruins its ability to help us experience God.
Pax b 2 j00! Remember- the Mass never ends.
Monday, May 5, 2008 at 10:38 am
I get upset that the Catholic Church doesn’t place more emphasis on receiving the blood at Communion. I always fear that I’ll never get some.
Um … last time I checked, Catholic teaching was that the full body and blood of Christ is “fully present” “under” both “species,” a bunch of definitely hair-splitting Catholicese jargon that means the bread becomes the body AND the blood, and the cup becomes the body AND the blood, so if you get one, you’ve had both. It makes zero sense to me, but that was the claim I’ve heard, and I can’t believe they didn’t cover it in RCIA class or something. It seems to be a major point of Catholic apologetics every time a Protestant takes them to task for not allowing every member to partake of the cup.
Personally, I’m a lot more friendly to transsubstantiation than I am to that doctrine.
Communion came and it quickly became awkward. We, as Catholics, aren’t supposed to receive communion anywhere else; I, as an ex-Campbellite, refuse to receive communion at one of their churches. They kept trying to give us their communion, but I had to shake my head. I’m know that everyone behind us saw us refuse communion, but we weren’t trying to make a show out of it.
Shaking your head isn’t necessary. Just silently pass the plate on to the next person.
Fact is, most churches of Christ I know are absolutely freaked out and horrified that a non-member might take communion. They sometimes make announcements about it, and they sometimes make a huge show of passing the plate over people who aren’t members. They would love to have those people policing themselves and not partaking. I’ve always thought this was weird … a damned person isn’t any the more damned for taking communion. I’ve always felt the truth was we have “theologically closed” communion, but “open communion” in practice: i.e., technically people shouldn’t partake if they aren’t members, but nobody else should be policing them are paying attention, because they are supposed to be communing themselves, and I Corinthians says examine YOURSELVES, not everybody else. And the more educated folks I know agree with me.
I’m laughing at the Douay-Rheims Bible.
No telling how that got there; a lot of times places like that are basically using “lost and found” Bibles. It could’ve been left accidentally by a visitor. For that matter, it might be a deliberate PLANT by some zealous proselytizing Catholic.
For the record, the only Douay-Rheims Bible I’ve ever held was in the library at a university student center run by Churches of Christ.
from God actively helping Joshua conquer Canaan (but couldn’t because the enemies used iron =/)
Read closer. God didn’t continue to help them because of their sin. They lost because the enemy had iron, but that’s just the way God’s choice to cease helping them manifested itself in the physical world: God gave the enemy iron, and not the Israelites. If they’d been obedient, maybe God would’ve given them the iron.
This doesn’t invalidate your main point about reasons to believe the Bible isn’t inspired, but it is a tidbit you’ve apparently missed.
Monday, May 5, 2008 at 10:40 am
I’m sorry … where I said “definitely hair-splitting Catholicese jargon,” I meant to say “delightfully hair-splitting Catholicese jargon.”
Monday, May 5, 2008 at 12:31 pm
I know Roman Catholic doctrine. The reason I wish to have both is because I call it the Mystical Eucharistic Feast; the feast that mystically transports us to a greater understanding of and union with Christ. Feasts usually have both food and drink as far as I am concerned. I’m not “mad” at the Catholic Church not giving it to other members for the same reason that other Protestants and ex-Protestants are. I’m not “mad” at all.
And in this case, shaking my head was necessary because there was no one sitting next to us so we could not have passed the plate down and the elder just stood there and wasn’t moving.
I’m reading Judges 1 and I can’t find anything about God not supporting Israel; in fact, the opposite. The verse (19) claims that God was still with them while they were conquering. I don’t see where exactly you have this notion that God gave the “enemy” iron but not the Israelites. Either I’m missing something or you are. I see nothing about sin at all. Please tell me where you get the idea that God withheld help from the Israelites deliberately.
But you are splitting-hairs. My main point is that God was NOT with the Israelites helping them conquer anybody. The Israelites were under the impression that God was with them helping them. That goes against everything I understand God to be. Why would a God who is love (which is vastly different than simply a God who loves) help one group of people conquer another? What makes the other people the “enemies”? People (the Israelites in this case) have used God (or gods) to justify their actions, such as warring against another group of people (”Well, God is on our side so we can do this.” ) Utter nonsense. God is no respecter of persons.
By the way, we both missed the fact that Joshua was dead at this time, so I’ll have to go back over that and correct it a bit. lol