How do you behave in another religion's place of worship?
Dec 8, 2005, 5:32 am
#91
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: From and of Boston.
Posts: 4,973
I've found this to be a superb thread that discusses (1)how individuals act and feel when they visit another's place of worship, and (2)how worshippers feel when visitors behave in various ways in their houses of worship.
Please let's avoid accusations, recriminations, telling someone else how s/he should feel, and other posts that are far better-suited to Omni.
Please let's avoid accusations, recriminations, telling someone else how s/he should feel, and other posts that are far better-suited to Omni.
Last edited by gleff; Dec 8, 2005 at 8:34 am Reason: criticism of member (as opposed to discussion of the topic) edited by senior mod gleff
Dec 8, 2005, 7:10 am
#92
Original Member, Ambassador: External Miles and Points Resources
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Digital Nomad Wandering the Earth - Currently in LIMA, PERU
Posts: 58,607
As a baptised, confirmed and practicing Catholic (although it HAS been 3 weeks since my last confession...meaning I really, REALLY should NOT take Communion until I get back to see Father D for some absolution), my feeling is that if a non-Catholic or a non-practicing Catholic is in a Catholic church and is not being disruptive then that is a GOOD thing, whether they stand, kneel, sit, squat or assume the Lotus Position (ok, that might be slightly disruptive). Whatever it is that has brought them into the presence of God is a blessing and a grace, whether they believe it or not, whether they know it or not. I am just happy for them that they are there. I think Jesus would feel the same way. ^
Further, Mass is my personal time to be close to God. I simply have very little interest in what anyone around me is doing if they are not being disruptive. To me, sitting quietly is NOT disruptive. YMMV.
As for how I behave at other faith's services: I always, always take them as an opportunity to learn. Frankly the first 10 or 12 times I went to a Catholic mass (was raised agnostic) in college, I just sat there the whole time, taking it in, being quiet, being respectful. Besides, at the Newman Community in college, no one ever knelt. The Mass was held at the War Memorial Chapel and there was no room to kneel at the pews.
For my grandmother's (jewish) funeral, I did study the Kaddish so i would understand what was being said and of course wore a yarmulke. Again, neither as a sign of faith but rather as a sign of respect.
At Buddist temples in Thailand, I take off my shoes and wear trousers. Again, it is all about respect. I like to think, though, that their faiths would rather have me in there and not quite exactly to custom than have me be not interested at all in their faith...
Further, Mass is my personal time to be close to God. I simply have very little interest in what anyone around me is doing if they are not being disruptive. To me, sitting quietly is NOT disruptive. YMMV.
As for how I behave at other faith's services: I always, always take them as an opportunity to learn. Frankly the first 10 or 12 times I went to a Catholic mass (was raised agnostic) in college, I just sat there the whole time, taking it in, being quiet, being respectful. Besides, at the Newman Community in college, no one ever knelt. The Mass was held at the War Memorial Chapel and there was no room to kneel at the pews.
For my grandmother's (jewish) funeral, I did study the Kaddish so i would understand what was being said and of course wore a yarmulke. Again, neither as a sign of faith but rather as a sign of respect.
At Buddist temples in Thailand, I take off my shoes and wear trousers. Again, it is all about respect. I like to think, though, that their faiths would rather have me in there and not quite exactly to custom than have me be not interested at all in their faith...
Dec 8, 2005, 7:14 am
#93
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: SIN/CLE
Programs: UA GS/1K, SQ SilverKris, DL MM-Silver
Posts: 2,099
Originally Posted by wideman
Someone wise once said "The only truth is that there is no truth."
Last edited by JHattery; Dec 8, 2005 at 7:28 am
Dec 8, 2005, 7:57 am
#94
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: From and of Boston.
Posts: 4,973
wideman: Someone wise once said "The only truth is that there is no truth."
JHattery: Actually, perceived reality is the only truth. And each perceive reality in a different & distinct manner. Hence "A" & "B", seemingly mutually exclusive, can both in fact be true. Only in the physical world do absolute truths exist, and then even interpretations may differ.
JHattery: Actually, perceived reality is the only truth. And each perceive reality in a different & distinct manner. Hence "A" & "B", seemingly mutually exclusive, can both in fact be true. Only in the physical world do absolute truths exist, and then even interpretations may differ.
I am in complete agreement with you (I think). You can know something ("A") to be true, and I can know something else ("B") to be true. Even though A and B are mutually exclusive, each is true for you and me, respectively. There's a cloud in the sky, and to me it looks just like a bicycle and to you it is the epitome of an elephant. Each of us is right.
Dec 8, 2005, 8:10 am
#95
Original Member, Ambassador: External Miles and Points Resources
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Digital Nomad Wandering the Earth - Currently in LIMA, PERU
Posts: 58,607
Frankly, I agree with the prncess the heretic more than my fellow True Believer rives on the matter discussed 
[PLEASE observe the winkie before accusing ME of ad hominem attacks on either ^ ]: IF YOU ARE A NON-CATHOLIC FEEL FREE TO VISIT ANY CATHOLIC CHURCH AND SIT QUIETLY AND OBSERVE. I pray you will feel the presence of God just as I once did.
As for the rather OMNIesque question about relative truth: You can't logically argue against the existence of absolute truth. To argue against something is to establish that a truth exists. You cannot argue against absolute truth unless an absolute truth is the basis of your argument. Further, if your ARE correct then the statement "there are no absolute truths" would be an absolute truth. This one exception creates a paradox.
Thus to say 'The only aboslute truth is that there is no absolute truth' is not wisdom, it is a logical paradox and hence not terribly helpful in understanding the world.
[PLEASE observe the winkie before accusing ME of ad hominem attacks on either ^ ]: IF YOU ARE A NON-CATHOLIC FEEL FREE TO VISIT ANY CATHOLIC CHURCH AND SIT QUIETLY AND OBSERVE. I pray you will feel the presence of God just as I once did.As for the rather OMNIesque question about relative truth: You can't logically argue against the existence of absolute truth. To argue against something is to establish that a truth exists. You cannot argue against absolute truth unless an absolute truth is the basis of your argument. Further, if your ARE correct then the statement "there are no absolute truths" would be an absolute truth. This one exception creates a paradox.
Thus to say 'The only aboslute truth is that there is no absolute truth' is not wisdom, it is a logical paradox and hence not terribly helpful in understanding the world.
Last edited by gleff; Dec 8, 2005 at 8:38 am Reason: edited to remove quote of deleted post, as well as 1st paragraph which was metadiscussion of the accusations back and forth
Dec 8, 2005, 8:20 am
#96
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Sep 2001
Location: FW, TX, USA, Earth, Milky Way
Programs: 2008 FT1 Fantasy Football Champion
Posts: 10,584
As for truth, I recall a quote from Solomon Short: "No, the truth isn't pretty. But it isn't butt-ugly either." 
Last edited by empedocles; Dec 8, 2005 at 8:51 am
Dec 8, 2005, 8:29 am
#97
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: SIN/CLE
Programs: UA GS/1K, SQ SilverKris, DL MM-Silver
Posts: 2,099
I never said there were no absolute truths. I implied that differing perceptions affect perspectives of truth. One could argue that as a contributing root to variations in religious behavior.
In making this statement, I actually stretched one of my own personal mantras, which is that "perception is the only reality." Differences in perception profoundly affect different individuals' realities, i.e. world view. Einstein's Theory of Relativity is a good case in point for the physical world (a set of two scientific theories in physics: special relativity and general relativity. These theories were conceived in order to explain the fact that electromagnetic waves do not conform to the Newtonian laws of motion. Electromagnetic waves were shown to move at a constant speed, independent of the motion of an observer. The core idea of both theories is that two observers who move relative to each other will measure different time and space intervals for the same events, but the content of physical law will be observed the same by both). Two views, two perspectives, two realities, two "truths." Same underlying data.
I would postulate that differing realities or truths exist with regard to non-physical situations as well. However, I am not a Relativist. I do beleive there are absolute truths, physically and non-physically. Some we just can't explain yet (Unified theory, for example), some we just arrive at via differing paths.
In making this statement, I actually stretched one of my own personal mantras, which is that "perception is the only reality." Differences in perception profoundly affect different individuals' realities, i.e. world view. Einstein's Theory of Relativity is a good case in point for the physical world (a set of two scientific theories in physics: special relativity and general relativity. These theories were conceived in order to explain the fact that electromagnetic waves do not conform to the Newtonian laws of motion. Electromagnetic waves were shown to move at a constant speed, independent of the motion of an observer. The core idea of both theories is that two observers who move relative to each other will measure different time and space intervals for the same events, but the content of physical law will be observed the same by both). Two views, two perspectives, two realities, two "truths." Same underlying data.
I would postulate that differing realities or truths exist with regard to non-physical situations as well. However, I am not a Relativist. I do beleive there are absolute truths, physically and non-physically. Some we just can't explain yet (Unified theory, for example), some we just arrive at via differing paths.
Last edited by JHattery; Dec 8, 2005 at 8:35 am Reason: can't type....
Dec 8, 2005, 8:43 am
#98
FlyerTalk Evangelist
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: DCA
Programs: AMC MovieWatcher, Giant BonusCard, Petco PALS Card, Silver Diner Blue Plate Club
Posts: 22,297
Folks, I have gone ahead and made several deletions and edits to the past bunch of posts.
The topic is how does one behave when visiting a place of worship for another religion. When discussing how to approach this thread, one of my fellow senior moderators made the simple point that perhaps the question could be answered with a single word: "Respectfully."
Still, the discussion may be a valuable one and I appreciate those who have stayed on topic. However, much of the conversation has begun to get personal. Please do not question the motives of other members or make personal attacks. And please don't criticize members on-thread for making those criticisms either -- just report the thread to the moderators. (This forum doesn't have any moderators assigned, hitting the report post button sends the thread to the senior moderators.)
This is a new forum, and I understand that folks are still getting their bearings here. But be reminded that this is not a place to discuss which religion is right or wrong -- it's a place to discuss travel -- whether to religious destinations or with special religious needs.
Since it is new, perhaps a bit of extra leeway is in order here. I've not issued formal 'warnings' or closed this thread. I've just tried to refocus it a bit.
A fair point can be made that I haven't gone through every post on thread to clean it up -- just the past several -- I'm trying to refocus the discussion here. Special appreciation to the recent posts from kokonutz that have helped to bring us back to (at least an offshot of!) the topic at hand.
Discuss the topic only: How do you behave in another religion's place of worship? Do not discuss or each other or make accusations. If you have a problem with a post, report it or send a PM.
This is the only warning for this thread, thanks.
Regards,
Gary
aka gleff
Senior Moderator
The topic is how does one behave when visiting a place of worship for another religion. When discussing how to approach this thread, one of my fellow senior moderators made the simple point that perhaps the question could be answered with a single word: "Respectfully."
Still, the discussion may be a valuable one and I appreciate those who have stayed on topic. However, much of the conversation has begun to get personal. Please do not question the motives of other members or make personal attacks. And please don't criticize members on-thread for making those criticisms either -- just report the thread to the moderators. (This forum doesn't have any moderators assigned, hitting the report post button sends the thread to the senior moderators.)
This is a new forum, and I understand that folks are still getting their bearings here. But be reminded that this is not a place to discuss which religion is right or wrong -- it's a place to discuss travel -- whether to religious destinations or with special religious needs.
Since it is new, perhaps a bit of extra leeway is in order here. I've not issued formal 'warnings' or closed this thread. I've just tried to refocus it a bit.
A fair point can be made that I haven't gone through every post on thread to clean it up -- just the past several -- I'm trying to refocus the discussion here. Special appreciation to the recent posts from kokonutz that have helped to bring us back to (at least an offshot of!) the topic at hand.
Discuss the topic only: How do you behave in another religion's place of worship? Do not discuss or each other or make accusations. If you have a problem with a post, report it or send a PM.
This is the only warning for this thread, thanks.
Regards,
Gary
aka gleff
Senior Moderator
Dec 8, 2005, 9:34 am
#100
Original Member, Ambassador: External Miles and Points Resources
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Digital Nomad Wandering the Earth - Currently in LIMA, PERU
Posts: 58,607
Originally Posted by gleff
This is a new forum, and I understand that folks are still getting their bearings here. But be reminded that this is not a place to discuss which religion is right or wrong -- it's a place to discuss travel -- whether to religious destinations or with special religious needs.
Also feel free to follow along in the 'Catholic Dance' (with the sitting and the standing and the bowing and the kneeling and the standing and the sitting) if you want, or just sit quietly (but please DO lean forward when others are kneeling unless you like some stranger's breath on the back of your neck). SOME parishioners (as noted in this thread) may be offended or even look askew at you if you dont follow customs exactly, but don't let them bother you! Enjoy! God welcomes everyone in His house, if not at His table (and that, dear friends, is another discussion for another forum)!
FWIW, along with to the ever-popular Christopher, thought you might be interested to know that there are actually 24 patron saints of travellers:
Alexius
Anthony of Padua
Balthasar
Bona
Botulph
Brendan the Navigator
Brigid of Ireland
Caspar
Christopher
Francis da Paola
Gertrude of Nivelles
Gertrude the Great
Infant Jesus of Prague
Joseph
Julian the Hospitaller
Martha
Mary, Blessed Virgin
Mary Euphrasia Pelletier
Melchior
Nicholas of Myra
Nino de Atocha
Raphael the Archangel
Sebastian of Aparicio
Valentine
Travellers in the mountains have their own: Petronilla.
Hope no one here ever REALLY need their intervention!
Dec 8, 2005, 9:55 am
#101
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: SIN/CLE
Programs: UA GS/1K, SQ SilverKris, DL MM-Silver
Posts: 2,099
Originally Posted by kokonutz
FWIW, along with to the ever-popular Christopher, thought you might be interested to know that there are actually 24 patron saints of travellers:
Aside - general regrets for participating in almost setting us collectively on the path to perdition. Sorry.
Dec 8, 2005, 1:11 pm
#102
Original Member, Ambassador: External Miles and Points Resources
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Digital Nomad Wandering the Earth - Currently in LIMA, PERU
Posts: 58,607
Originally Posted by JHattery
Is there a patron saint of flying/aviation? Or of hotels/inns/hospitality? Restaurants? Do they create new patron saints in the modern era?
Patron Saints of aircraft pilots, aviators, flyers, air crews, aviation, Belgian air crews, Spanish air crews, aviation, flying:
Joseph of Cupertino
Our Lady of Loreto
Therese of Lisieux
Innkeepers, hotel-keepers:
Amand
Goar
Julian the Hospitaller
Martha
Martin de Porres
Martin of Tours
Theodatus
Computers, computer users, computer technicians, pc technicians:
Isidore of Seville
My Confirmation name is Joseph beause I admired his following the Holy Spirit's advice that he stay with his pregnant virginal wife. But if I had thought about it some more, I might have chosen this one:
Against oversleeping:
Vitus
Dec 8, 2005, 1:11 pm
#103
A FlyerTalk Posting Legend
Original Poster
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Yiron, Israel
Programs: Bates Motel Plat
Posts: 68,927
Originally Posted by kokonutz
FWIW, along with to the ever-popular Christopher, thought you might be interested to know that there are actually 24 patron saints of travellers:
Dec 8, 2005, 1:20 pm
#104
Original Member, Ambassador: External Miles and Points Resources
Join Date: May 1998
Location: Digital Nomad Wandering the Earth - Currently in LIMA, PERU
Posts: 58,607
Originally Posted by Dovster
Christopher does remain popular but he is no longer a saint. The Vatican removed him from the rolls about 40 years ago as it has no evidence that he ever existed.
Dec 8, 2005, 1:33 pm
#105
Join Date: May 2005
Programs: UA 1K 2MM, DL MM, Hyatt Globalist, Hilton Diamond
Posts: 1,445
As to kneeling vs. sitting vs. standing: As a guest in a house of worship, I don't mind covering or uncovering my head, taking off my shoes, sitting when people sit or standing when people stand, but I won't kneel. The difference to me is that, while everything else listed is an act of respect, kneeling is an act of submission. Similarly, I would stand for a monarch entering the room but not bow or curtsey to him or her. (Well, I think only women curtsey anyway.)
I'm truly surprised that rives21 feels that standing is more respectful than sitting when others are kneeling. I've always remained seated, scooting or leaning forward so as not to inconvenience anyone kneeling behind me, and I've been told by others that that's the appropriate thing to do. Standing is just much more visible and therefore, I would think, disruptive. I'd gladly stand instead if I understood that to be more acceptable, but I've never heard anyone else suggest that.
Of course, if the only acceptable choices are kneeling or not being present, I would not be present.
I'm truly surprised that rives21 feels that standing is more respectful than sitting when others are kneeling. I've always remained seated, scooting or leaning forward so as not to inconvenience anyone kneeling behind me, and I've been told by others that that's the appropriate thing to do. Standing is just much more visible and therefore, I would think, disruptive. I'd gladly stand instead if I understood that to be more acceptable, but I've never heard anyone else suggest that.
Of course, if the only acceptable choices are kneeling or not being present, I would not be present.