|
Source: (consider it)
|
Thread: Purgatory: The till at the doorway
|
Thurible
Shipmate
# 3206
|
Posted
At Coventry (where they don't charge - at least they didn't last time I went), they don't have an holy water stoup - but do have the font which generally had a dribble of water in. Making one's way straight over was always a good way to flummox the stewards and vergers.
Thurible
--------------------
"I've been baptised not lobotomised."
Posts: 8049 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
leo
Shipmate
# 1458
|
Posted
Max and I once tried to get into Bath Abbey requesting to say the Angelus as it was 6pm - but they said they were locking up.
I once went to evensong at Westminster Abbey followed by the inaugural service for the Week of Prayer for World Peace. Once evensong and the organ voluntary were finished, the till started making loud noises, ignoring the multi-faith pressence in the chancel.
--------------------
My Jewish-positive lectionary blog is at http://recognisingjewishrootsinthelectionary.wordpress.com/
My reviews at http://layreadersbookreviews.wordpress.com
Posts: 23198 | From: Bristol | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
CorgiGreta
Shipmate
# 443
|
Posted
I should have made it clear that there were people behind the table who collected the entrance fee. It was apparent that one was expected to give the amount posted. My friend tendered a twenty, and she was handed a ten in change.
This may have been a legacy of Fr. Coughlin, who was anything but subtle regarding raising money or, for that matter, expressing his political views.
Greta
Posts: 3677 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Wm Duncan
Buoy tender
# 3021
|
Posted
Our rule of thumb in Europe was to contribute to the till in various churches, cathedrals, etc., if it was required, or if we took literature.
I don't see the till at the door in many churches in the U.S., but once in a tourist-infested U.S. city, the door was ajar at a lovely Episcopal church (possibly cathedral, I don't remember). We entered, and were quickly intercepted by an officious sort who told us we weren't allowed in except as members of a tour. My retort as we left: "I'm sorry, I thought this was a church."
Wm Duncan
--------------------
I have overcome a fiercely anti-Catholic upbringing in order to attend Mass simply and solely to escape Protestant guitars. Why am I here? Who gave these nice Catholics guitars?
-- Annie Dillard
Posts: 1193 | From: about 30 km above the Juan de Fuca plate | Registered: Jul 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cameo
Apprentice
# 12903
|
Posted
After lurking for a while, this topic has finally made me register! I have alot of sympathy for Newman's Own.
I have a deep aversion to turnstiles in cathedrals which turn a voluntary donation into what feels very close to a compulsory charge for entry.
I lived in Belgium for a brief period and went through some very significant personal struggles there. I spent long hours just sitting in the cathedral praying - a place of peace and security which I didn't feel in most other locations. There was a donation box but no turnstile or manned booth.
Similarly, my sister lived in Salisbury for a while and during this time she began to reconnect with God. She would sit in Salisbury Cathedral just to be at peace, to cry and to pray. But you can't get into Salisbury Cathedral without walking past a manned turnstile with staff who expect a hefty 'donation' before they will let you through.
My sister, though not a Christian at the time, thought it was totally wrong for a church to charge people to come in and pray. She can be pretty bolshy when she chooses so she would simply walk through the turnstile and flatly refuse to pay as a point of principle.
I really think it would be better if the building maintenance could be taken over by English Heritage or the National Trust and just leased back to the church (or some similar scheme).
Cameo
Posts: 9 | From: Canberra, Australia | Registered: Aug 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ian Climacus
Liturgical Slattern
# 944
|
Posted
Hello Cameo and welcome! Pop down to the Oz thread in All Saints and say 'Hello'.
I'm upset to read about the turnstiles and such things such as the forced march to Evensong at Westminster: how very odd. I'm happy to contribute, but forced rates and turnstiles seem a bit much -- and I can well understand NO's, and others', unease as to enquiring about a 'free entry' or discount.
I remember visiting St Paul's in 1998 and only paying for the Tower; I did go to Salisbury as well but I can't recall what happened there. How much is Canterbury? I'm planning on going to a Service and praying at Thomas Becket's shrine sometime soon.
[ 10. August 2007, 03:27: Message edited by: Ian Climacus ]
Posts: 7800 | From: On the border | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682
|
Posted
Ian, if Canterbury turns out to be too expensive you could always head up here and visit St Cuthbert and St Bede. As has been said, Durham has no entrance fee.
Oh, and I believe you could catch a mostly English language Divine Liturgy in the Castle next door if you timed it right.
Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Smudgie
Ship's Barnacle
# 2716
|
Posted
Ian, Canterbury did say that it was free entry if you were going in for a service. Surely, as a place of pigrimage, they can't charge pilgrims a tenner a time? Or can they?
My sorrow, as a single mother of two boys who rather like cathedrals, is that the high level of charge means that a visit to a cathedral has to be a one-off, rather than somewhere we might pop into each time we're in the city. It forces my children to view it as an item on the tourist trail rather than having a feeling similar to "dropping in on relatives" when we're passing. When we were in Salisbury recently, for example, we thought of going to the cathedral as I have never been, but because the boys have been before I couldn't really justify the cost of visiting again.
My kids wouldn't choose to spend part of a day out/holiday sitting through a service when we attend regularly at home, but they would enjoy wandering round and certainly do feel close to God in that setting - often choosing to light a candle. For some children it might be their one experience of being in a church. Having shown groups of school children round a cathedral, I've been moved to tears by the sense of awe and wonder they've expressed at the size, beauty and Godly atmosphere; and the discovery that Christians have been worshipping there for hundreds of years has often had an influence on how seriously they take the concept of Christianity. Slap on an exhorbitant entrance fee and suddenly those incidental meetings with God are taken away. It's no longer somewhere which is graciously welcoming you in, offering hospitality. It takes away from the visitor, reducing them to a tourist and a source of income. And it takes away from the building, turning it to a mere tourist attraction - a building.
--------------------
Miss you, Erin.
Posts: 14382 | From: Under the duvet | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Thurible
Shipmate
# 3206
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:
.
Oh, and I believe you could catch a mostly English language Divine Liturgy in the Castle next door if you timed it right.
In the Castle? Have the Orthodox moved from John's Chapel? How disappointing.
Thurible
--------------------
"I've been baptised not lobotomised."
Posts: 8049 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
seasick
...over the edge
# 48
|
Posted
quote:
Ian Climacus said:
How much is Canterbury? I'm planning on going to a Service and praying at Thomas Becket's shrine sometime soon.
There's info about visiting Canterbury on the visiting page of the cathedral's website. The normal adult entrance charge is £6.50. I have to say that it seems to clash slightly with the statement on another page that "Visitors have always been made welcome, in the ancient tradition of Benedictine hospitality. We continue the tradition, warmly inviting everyone to share with us the beauty and the unique atmosphere of one of the great holy places of Christendom."
When I visited, I attended Evensong (asking "Which way for Evensong?" at the admission gate sorts it all out for you) and went to the shrine for a prayer afterwards.
[ 10. August 2007, 09:28: Message edited by: seasick ]
--------------------
We believe there is, and always was, in every Christian Church, ... an outward priesthood, ordained by Jesus Christ, and an outward sacrifice offered therein. - John Wesley
Posts: 5769 | From: A world of my own | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
cor ad cor loquitur
Shipmate
# 11816
|
Posted
To turn this on it's head, there's the old joke (which I've heard from the pulpit of at least two synagogues): quote:
A young man runs to the synagogue on Yom Kippur with an urgent message for his Uncle Bernie. He's blocked at the door by a stern usher, who demands to see his ticket. “But I'm just going in there to give a message to my Uncle Bernie,” he protests. “All right, the usher relents. “You can go in. But don't let me catch you praying!”
Sometimes you have to pay if you want to pray.
--------------------
Quam vos veritatem interpretationis, hanc eruditi κακοζηλίαν nuncupant … si ad verbum interpretor, absurde resonant. (St Jerome, Ep. 57 to Pammachius)
Posts: 1332 | From: London | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402
|
Posted
IIRC, it's illegal to charge for admission to regular services.
And I think that's right (well, it should probably be in canon law somewhere).
The idea of us having to pay seems inimical to the gospel.
But on the other hand, if a church chooses to meet in a fancy or historic building, I see no problem whatsoever with charging for admission outside service times, because it's essentially about tourism not worship.
Of course, it's much nicer if they don't, and staff it with volunteers (as my last church did), but that depends on resources.
If a congregation can't afford to pay for the building they are in, it needs to be asked whether they are making good use of resources. I suggest not. If a school hall offers better value for money, which it sometimes does, then it's a better option.
--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Karl: Liberal Backslider
Shipmate
# 76
|
Posted
quote:
If a school hall offers better value for money, which it sometimes does, then it's a better option.
I fear this is the spiritual equivalent of knowing the true price of everything and the true value of nowt.
At our parish, I'm sure the school hall would be cheaper in our village than maintaining the church, especially since it's a church school. The scaffolding's just gone up around the spire and it won't come cheap.
But the school hall would not be a better option. The church is a worship space designed from the beginning to be conducive to worship. It's written (albeit via our cultural expectations) into the very architecture. By the fact it's been consecrated for that very use. By the decoration and ornamentation. The school hall, by comparison, is an all-purpose space with no organ, no decoration, no statues, icons or painted glass windows. Nor even an organ. Its architecture does not breathe worshipfulness. It would therefore be a poor substitute.
[ 10. August 2007, 10:52: Message edited by: Karl: Liberal Backslider ]
--------------------
Might as well ask the bloody cat.
Posts: 17938 | From: Chesterfield | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Thurible:
In the Castle? Have the Orthodox moved from John's Chapel? How disappointing.
Don't know - I've never been to the Liturgy and I don't know the layout of the buildings. My information is they're in the Norman Chapel of the Castle, wherever that may be but that might be out of date.
Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Thurible
Shipmate
# 3206
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:
quote:
Originally posted by Thurible:
In the Castle? Have the Orthodox moved from John's Chapel? How disappointing.
Don't know - I've never been to the Liturgy and I don't know the layout of the buildings. My information is they're in the Norman Chapel of the Castle, wherever that may be but that might be out of date.
They used to meet (certainly 2002-06) in the Norman church, S. Mary the Less, which is also the chapel to S. John's College.
I assumed they still did.
Thurible
--------------------
"I've been baptised not lobotomised."
Posts: 8049 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
I see no problem whatsoever with charging for admission outside service times, because it's essentially about tourism not worship.
Forgive me, but this is absolute rubbish.
I often enter churches in order to pray. They are good places to do that, for various reasons which I'm surely you understand yourself. You might argue that the best way to do this is to attend a service, but I'd take serious issue with that.
There have been times in my life, particularly in my unchurched years, when I wouldn't have contemplated going to a church service but would have benefitted greatly from being able to enter a quiet church and just pray, or just feel in the presence of God (yes, I know there's a theological argument to be had here but let it pass). Cathedrals are excellent for that, particularly ones that don't require a ticket.
Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682
|
Posted
Sounds like I've got confused then, my information's from around that time and you were there.
Ian, Thurible's right again. Careful, this is getting to be a habit. ![[Biased]](wink.gif)
Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Karl: Liberal Backslider:
quote:
If a school hall offers better value for money, which it sometimes does, then it's a better option.
I fear this is the spiritual equivalent of knowing the true price of everything and the true value of nowt.
At our parish, I'm sure the school hall would be cheaper in our village than maintaining the church, especially since it's a church school. The scaffolding's just gone up around the spire and it won't come cheap.
But the school hall would not be a better option. The church is a worship space designed from the beginning to be conducive to worship. It's written (albeit via our cultural expectations) into the very architecture. By the fact it's been consecrated for that very use. By the decoration and ornamentation. The school hall, by comparison, is an all-purpose space with no organ, no decoration, no statues, icons or painted glass windows. Nor even an organ. Its architecture does not breathe worshipfulness. It would therefore be a poor substitute.
I didn't say cheaper; I said better value for money. If using the old building is better value for money (given the resources of the church), even if it's more expensive, that's fine.
--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402
|
Posted
Greyface - I do understand your argument (I think), and I like visiting cathedrals and churches partly for that reason. If I'm on foot in a town I don't know, I'll often go to the church or cathedral for a bit.
But why pray in the cathedral rather than outside, or on a quiet hillside? At the end of the day, it seems to me that it is just a form of spiritual tourism.
--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
BroJames
Shipmate
# 9636
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
But on the other hand, if a church chooses to meet in a fancy or historic building, I see no problem whatsoever with charging for admission outside service times, because it's essentially about tourism not worship.
<snip>
If a congregation can't afford to pay for the building they are in, it needs to be asked whether they are making good use of resources. I suggest not. If a school hall offers better value for money, which it sometimes does, then it's a better option.
As others have remarked it is a very sweeping assumption that people only want to enter a church outside service times for reasons of tourism. The building which I share responsibility for is one which is visited by thousands every year (avg donation about 20p/head!) many come to pray, some come as tourists but are moved to pray. [ETA where our church is it is the quiet place and it also happens to be a suitable place to pray when it rains (frequently here) or the weather is otherwise foul.] We are working on finding ways to enable people to discover something of faith through their visit to the building. IMHO charging would substantially negate that.
It is a financial struggle to go on maintaining our building but it is not our choice whether to worship there or not. We can't sell it, nor as long as there is a viable congregation could it be declared redundant, and while we have a Grade A listed building we have a legal obligation to maintain it. Since we are obliged to maintain it, it makes sense to use it for our worship.
Whether there is logical psychological or theological reason for it I don't know but many testify to the significance of a place that has been prayed in for over 500 years on a site that has been prayed on for over 800 years - maybe over 1000 years. I know if we had the option to close it down and walk away from it there would be a very clear negative message to our local community as a result - even though there would undoubtedly be some gains as well.
[ 10. August 2007, 11:52: Message edited by: BroJames ]
Posts: 3374 | From: UK | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Joan_of_Quark
Anchoress of St Expedite
# 9887
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
But why pray in the cathedral rather than outside, or on a quiet hillside? At the end of the day, it seems to me that it is just a form of spiritual tourism.
For me...
Because in England it's likely to be too wet to sit down on the grass out in the "real" countryside (vs park benches) most of the year.
Because other people are less likely to come and interrupt you in a church (even a touristy church) than they are in a park.
Because, although I get a very valued sense of Something out on a hillside, I get a slightly different sense of Something in a church that is open all day, where I know people have come to pray and think in this particular space for centuries. It's because of the two of these together that I ended up becoming Christian.
--------------------
"I want to be an artist when I grow up." "Well you can't do both!"
further quarkiness
Posts: 1025 | From: The Book Depository | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Caty S.
I read, therefore I am.
# 11996
|
Posted
The last CofE cathedral I was in (incidentally, one asking for donations) publicised a running cost of £40,000 a week, and from memory I think most others I have been to are similar. In the tubs, alongside the (few) gift-aid envelopes and the (very) occasional £20 note, was an awful lot of small change. Very small change. A large quantity of coppers. I accept that people who are visiting may not have much money; however, for the person who has to find the £40k each week, a large number of people putting in a nominal bit of small change when they're being asked to donate (not charged) £4 a head, and told why, must stretch the limits of Christian charity.
I don't like entrance fees for Cathedrals, but I'd rather they charged them than that the Cathedrals fell into disrepair because many of the people who visit as tourists, creating wear and tear and saying how important the buildings are for the nation's heritage, are too mean to stick more than 20p in the donation tub.
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
In the same way, a cathedral might make an impression on you the first time you visit. But it takes time for the subtleties to work their magic on you, and maybe for the building's spiritual power to become apparent. So an admission charge is an admission (pun deliberate) that a cathedral is just a big tourist attraction.
FWIW, York Minster have a scheme where gift-aiding your entrance fee gets you a pass for a year's free entry instead of just the entrance ticket. Not much use if you're not a UK taxpayer, but I'd guess that most people who want to make repeat visits* are. I think there's also some provision for all York residents - but since I'm not one, I haven't paid close attention to that.
*those who visit, as opposed to those who go regularly because it's their regular place of worship.
[ 10. August 2007, 12:03: Message edited by: caty the southerner ]
Posts: 2119 | From: Devon | Registered: Nov 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402
|
Posted
Yes, the free for local residents thing does seem a good idea. I think Chester used it too in its brief flirtation with charging.
--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Thurible
Shipmate
# 3206
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:
Ian, Thurible's right again. Careful, this is getting to be a habit.
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
Custard,
The Blessed Sacrament doesn't tend to be reserved on hillsides and the tombs of Saints are often inside.
Thurible
--------------------
"I've been baptised not lobotomised."
Posts: 8049 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ian Climacus
Liturgical Slattern
# 944
|
Posted
Thank you Greyface, Smudgie, Thurible and seasick: £6.50 isn't beyond my means [if I can travel to the other side of the world...], but more than I expected. I couldn't imagine making it a regular occurrence to visit outside of services.
[and I'll try and get up north if I can, but time is very limited. ![[Smile]](smile.gif) ]
Posts: 7800 | From: On the border | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
GreyFace
Shipmate
# 4682
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
But why pray in the cathedral rather than outside, or on a quiet hillside? At the end of the day, it seems to me that it is just a form of spiritual tourism.
You have a point, up to a point but aren't you also hovering around the edges of a gnostic-like error? You seem to be arguing that it doesn't matter where you are or what you're doing, which is almost to say that the material world is irrelevant.
Our environment affects the way we think and the way we feel, so simplistically it is either conducive or not to prayer and to particular kinds of prayer. I'm not averse to praying on quiet hillsides myself incidentally but it evokes different feelings and thoughts from those I encounter at St Cuthbert's shrine, for example.
I think if you agree (and you may not) that for some people the use of aids to prayer like lighting a candle, or incense, or having worship music of some sort playing in the background, or kneeling, or reading a passage of Holy Scripture as a preparation are genuinely helpful and valid means of acquiring an attitude whereby they can better seek God in prayer, then you've conceded the point haven't you?
So dismissing it as tourism I take issue with, but spiritual tourism sounds like an excellent idea - it's seeking out places which enable us to better perceive God's presence.
Posts: 5748 | From: North East England | Registered: Jul 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:
So dismissing it as tourism I take issue with, but spiritual tourism sounds like an excellent idea - it's seeking out places which enable us to better perceive God's presence.
Interesting tangent provoked here. 'Tourism' as a Wallace Arnold air-conditioned glide between bland 'international' hotels with bland international cuisine is one thing. If tourism is more than that, and an engaging with different cultures and perspectives on life (not to mention Real Food), it's another. The first, dismissive, view of tourism implies that it's a diversion from real life. The second suggests it might enrich our understanding of real life.
Custard's view (with the greatest respect, and apologies if I've misunderstood) appears to be nearer the first. Real Worship is what goes on in the heart, and the context in which this is offered is irrelevant. If you visit cathedrals or shrines of any sort, it's like seeing the Eiffel Tower through the coach window: interesting perhaps, but nothing to do with the important things of life.
Whereas the traditional view is that pilgrimage to holy places is a good thing, spiritually beneficial, and enriches our awareness of what is important. If that's 'spiritual tourism' I'm all for it. But it's not the icing on the cake, it's a much nicer cake altogether.
I don't imagine that the deans and chapters who have imposed fees have done so without a great deal of agonised soul-searching. I'm sure that most of them see the spiritual value of their cathedrals and don't just see themselves as custodians of ancient monuments. But the implication that anyone who is not attending a formal service, or seeking out a utilitarian side-chapel in which to pray, is just a 'tourist' (in the Wallace Arnold sense) strikes me as condescending and elitist in its effects if not in intention.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Ann
Curious
# 94
|
Posted
It's not that I mind making a donation - although, when I used to take all the children, it could get a bit pricey, it's when the cathedrals with ticket offices seem only interested in selling the tickets.
A few years ago I took the children to London and we looked at several of the sights. I had to choose between going in to St Paul's Cathedral or Westminster Abbey because I couldn't afford both so we saw St Paul's from the outside and then went to the abbey. We went in and paid for our tickets, then went further in to be told that it took forty minutes to go round, we weren't allowed to go around by ourselves, we had to go round with a tour guide, the last tour of the day had gone and so we couldn't go any further than the entrance. I think the only thing we could see was the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier. The people on the ticket office hadn't said anything; just taken our money (I think they were still selling tickets to unsuspecting tourists as we left). It left a very bad taste in my mouth.
--------------------
Ann
Posts: 3271 | From: IO 91 PI | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Cantiones Sacrae
Shipmate
# 12774
|
Posted
I've always been offended by anything resembling turnstiles and obligatory charges, particularly for Church of England buildings which, as others have implied, feel as though they belong to the nation (whatever the legal position).
On the other hand, I once heard an argument for charging along the lines of: Canterbury and other great mediaeval cathedrals and abbeys were built with such grandeur in order specifically to attract visitors/pilgrims in large numbers and the large amounts of money that could be extracted from them.
Around 30 years ago I paid £4 for a hand-calligraphed document that recorded my contribution to the upkeep of Norwich cathedral. I think £4 represented 1 minute of the running costs.
Posts: 271 | From: London | Registered: Jun 2007
| IP: Logged
|
|
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
Interesting tangent provoked here. 'Tourism' as a Wallace Arnold air-conditioned glide between bland 'international' hotels with bland international cuisine is one thing. If tourism is more than that, and an engaging with different cultures and perspectives on life (not to mention Real Food), it's another. The first, dismissive, view of tourism implies that it's a diversion from real life. The second suggests it might enrich our understanding of real life.
Custard's view (with the greatest respect, and apologies if I've misunderstood) appears to be nearer the first. Real Worship is what goes on in the heart, and the context in which this is offered is irrelevant. If you visit cathedrals or shrines of any sort, it's like seeing the Eiffel Tower through the coach window: interesting perhaps, but nothing to do with the important things of life.
No - I think tourism involves real involvement usually. Climbing the Eiffel Tower (or even getting the lift!) is quite an experience. I can even see that people could be changed by it. But we still see it as right that people should pay to climb it, because although it is wonderful and although the people of Paris might think it belongs to them, it obviously costs quite a lot of money to maintain.
It is nice and maybe even helpful to climb the Eiffel Tower, but it is not essential. It is essential (or at least very important) to meet together with other Christians for worship. It is essential (IMHO) to pray to God. It is nice and often helpful, but not essential, to do that in a space which has been set apart for that purpose for hundreds of years. It's not an essential part of the Christian life. Like reading "Mere Christianity", it's useful, but not essential. And if the publishers of Mere Christianity need money to keep their publishing going, we don't object to that.
--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
mrs whibley
Shipmate
# 4798
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Saint Chad:
It's like the Forth Bridge - they finish painting it then go back to the other end and start again.
This is a total tangent, but the Forth bridge is no longer like the Forth Bridge - they are currently putting some sort of permanentish coating on it and will no longer need to paint it all the time.
I heard that this came about partly because the person who had been in charge of the painting didn't know what every British schoolchild knows, and had let the painting contract lapse to save money!
Mrs Whibley
--------------------
I long for a faith that is gloriously treacherous - Mike Yaconelli
Posts: 942 | From: North Lincolnshire | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Low Treason
Shipmate
# 11924
|
Posted
*Churchwarden's hat on*
Most of us would not be surprised or outraged to pay to visit a stately home. We understand that the owners need to money to keep the place standing. If people go to sight-see the house of God, it seems they expect others (ie the parishioners) to keep the place standing.
I am humbled to report today that when I counted the collection after Mass, I found that one visiting American had placed more in the collection plate than the rest of the congregation put together!
*Churchwarden's hat off again*
--------------------
He brought me to the banqueting house, and His banner over me was love.
Posts: 1914 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
There is a real conflict of ideology here in this debate. It's parallelled by several others in current (British at least) society, for example that over public transport. Some of us would argue that for the health of the environment and the general efficiency of the nation, the railway system should be improved and extended by massive and unprecedented government subsidies, ie. from the rest of us, whether we use trains regularly or not. Others would claim that this is unfair and that those who get the (immediate, short-term) benefits should be the ones who pay.
In the same way, the logic of cathedral admission charges seems to be saying: we're offering something of value which if you want it enough you'll be prepared to pay for it. But it's not fair that it should be subsidised by those who don't want it or don't (on the surface) appear to benefit from it.
This does seem to stem from an individualist and not a catholic perception of spiritual value. And for those who believe in the value of an established church (ie, a national church which exists for all whether or not they actively support it or appear to need it) somewhat contradictory.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
This does seem to stem from an individualist and not a catholic perception of spiritual value.
I think that fails adequately to make the distinction between cathedrals as a place for corporate worship and cathedrals as a place for individual worship / pilgrimage / tourism.
I want to make that distinction precisely because I think there is a difference between an individualist attitude and a catholic one. The question is not whether they should charge for admission to catholic (i.e. corporate) worship - we all seem to be agreed on that - but whether they should be allowed to charge for an act which in itself already assumes individualism.
--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
quote:
Originally posted by Angloid:
This does seem to stem from an individualist and not a catholic perception of spiritual value.
I think that fails adequately to make the distinction between cathedrals as a place for corporate worship and cathedrals as a place for individual worship / pilgrimage / tourism.
I want to make that distinction precisely because I think there is a difference between an individualist attitude and a catholic one. The question is not whether they should charge for admission to catholic (i.e. corporate) worship - we all seem to be agreed on that - but whether they should be allowed to charge for an act which in itself already assumes individualism.
With respect, Custard, I think your reply shows why you are not a catholic! No catholic would say that 'private' prayer (a misleading adjective in any case) is 'an act which assumes individualism'. We are all members of one Body and when we pray we are never alone. Indeed, that is one of the reasons why catholics prefer to pray in places sanctified by the prayers of generations of saints who are still part of the one Body.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
ken
Ship's Roundhead
# 2460
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Custard.:
I think that fails adequately to make the distinction between cathedrals as a place for corporate worship and cathedrals as a place for individual worship / pilgrimage / tourism.
I don't think there is a distinction to make there. Its a spectrum or a field rather than two distinct things. And going into something like a cathedral sometimes moves people along in the direction of worship. Just a little nudge.
Just as a matter of records lots of people report their conversions as having been sparked off by visiting a church building such as a cathedral. Just a few weeks ago I heard a woman give her testimony in church and she said that she had come to believe when a tourist in Italy. Actually in St Peter's in Rome. She started thinking about the Christian story as a historical report, and about the martyrdom of the apostles, and the continuous Christian witness and became convinced. (her background is neither European nor Christian so the whole idea was genuinely new to her) Later on, in Britain, she joined an evangelical church and was baptised. She went as a tourist and came back as a believer.
--------------------
Ken
L’amor che move il sole e l’altre stelle.
Posts: 39579 | From: London | Registered: Mar 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Bartolomeo
Musical Engineer
# 8352
|
Posted
I see both sides.
The problem from the cathedral's point of view is that, at large cathedrals that draw significant numbers of tourists, the vast majority of tourists have no interest in prayer or in the role of the cathedral as a physical point of the faith. Many if not most of them are on guided tours and are adverse to what they see as "hidden charges" in addition to what they have paid the tour operator; many of those who are not are trying to see the sites as cheaply as possible.
I would liken the situation to the one of an accordion dealer in downtown Madison, Wisconsin. They sold high-end accordions that appealed mainly to serious amateurs and part-time professional musicians. The problem they had is that the store was enough of a curiosity, and had enough foot traffic, that they had to pay a sales rep to entertain people who came in. People who would never buy, because someone happening by isn't going to drop US$ 3000 on a custom accordion. The visitors were a distraction from the core mission of selling accordions.
They moved to more remote location in a sort of industrial area and solved the problem.
I think this is a harbinger of what the cathedrals face. Tourists are as a rule not especially open to the message of Christ. They are on holidays and are on a vacation they have saved for and they want maximum entertainment at minimum cost with zero commitment or engagement. In short, they are in a consumer mindset. Like the tourists at the accordion shop, they are a distraction from the core mission rather than the focus of it.
The fact that some cathedrals have adopted policies that have the effect of discouraging the devout from engaging in private prayer in a suitable setting is unfortunate but is by no means a unique or even novel manifestation of foolish facilities policy on the part of the church. Many smaller churches are locked, or unheated, or otherwise discourage casual visits for prayer even by church members.
--------------------
"Individual talent is too sporadic and unpredictable to be allowed any important part in the organization society" --Stuart Chase
Posts: 1291 | From: the American Midwest | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
Angloid
Shipmate
# 159
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bartolomeo:
I think this is a harbinger of what the cathedrals face. Tourists are as a rule not especially open to the message of Christ. They are on holidays and are on a vacation they have saved for and they want maximum entertainment at minimum cost with zero commitment or engagement.
Evidence for this sweeping statement? I would have thought that people on holiday, freed from the pressures of everyday life, would be more, not less, open to the possibility of an encounter with God. You might well be right that modern western citizens in general are 'not especially open to the message of Christ', but I wouldn't expect tourists, per se, to form a higher proportion of them. Especially as those visiting cathedrals are not usually the same people as the 'sun, sex and sangria' types who flock to the beaches.
--------------------
Brian: You're all individuals!
Crowd: We're all individuals!
Lone voice: I'm not!
Posts: 12927 | From: The Pool of Life | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Genie
Shipmate
# 3282
|
Posted
It was a small village church rather than a catherdral, but I think the principle is the same. Myself and a friend were on a geography field trip, and had dropped into the parish church in search of leaflets about local social events. Whilst I was rifling through the table of leaflets at the back, my friend was transfixed by a shaft of sunlight that came through the window above the altar and rested in the middle of the nave tiles. The sense of peace, permanence and accepting love was overwhelming. Later, my friend told me that it was at that moment that she began to believe in God. We had been in there for purely tourist/academic reasons, and God had taken the moment to bring my friend something wonderful. Someone who enters a church as a tourist may well not leave as one.
--------------------
Alleluia, Christ is risen!
Posts: 762 | From: Cambridge | Registered: Sep 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
Soror Magna
Shipmate
# 9881
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by Bartolomeo:
... Tourists are as a rule not especially open to the message of Christ. They are on holidays and are on a vacation they have saved for and they want maximum entertainment at minimum cost with zero commitment or engagement. In short, they are in a consumer mindset. Like the tourists at the accordion shop, they are a distraction from the core mission rather than the focus of it.
I'm not sure where I fit into this stereotype. I'm not a Christian, I've visited many cathedrals, and when travelling, I make an effort to attend services at those cathedrals if possible because I think they give a better sense of the place and its people. And I don't mind contributing, whether at the door or into the plate. And I loved Durham. <waves> OliviaG
--------------------
"You come with me to room 1013 over at the hospital, I'll show you America. Terminal, crazy and mean." -- Tony Kushner, "Angels in America"
Posts: 5430 | From: Caprica City | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by GreyFace:
There have been times in my life, particularly in my unchurched years, when I wouldn't have contemplated going to a church service but would have benefitted greatly from being able to enter a quiet church and just pray, or just feel in the presence of God (yes, I know there's a theological argument to be had here but let it pass). Cathedrals are excellent for that, particularly ones that don't require a ticket.
Yes, I've used churches that way. Nothing should interfere with that, IMHO.
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Low Treason
Shipmate
# 11924
|
Posted
Am I to assume that those who object to contributing to the upkeep of a cathedral when visiting also object to putting money in the collection plate when worshipping?
--------------------
He brought me to the banqueting house, and His banner over me was love.
Posts: 1914 | From: UK | Registered: Oct 2006
| IP: Logged
|
|
Carys
Ship's Celticist
# 78
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by My Duck:
Am I to assume that those who object to contributing to the upkeep of a cathedral when visiting also object to putting money in the collection plate when worshipping?
No, they're objecting to being told to put a £5 in the plate and being stared at until they comply.
I don't think anyone has said that they object to give a donation (of what they can afford) when they visit but that they object to being charged for entry.
Carys
--------------------
O Lord, you have searched me and know me
You know when I sit and when I rise
Posts: 6896 | From: Bryste mwy na thebyg | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
John Holding
Coffee and Cognac
# 158
|
Posted
quote:
Originally posted by My Duck:
Am I to assume that those who object to contributing to the upkeep of a cathedral when visiting also object to putting money in the collection plate when worshipping?
No-one's refusing to contribute to the upkeep of a cathedral. They're objecting to being told they can't go into a cathedral to pray unless they pay an entrance fee.
John
Posts: 5929 | From: Ottawa, Canada | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
seasick
...over the edge
# 48
|
Posted
Speaking for myself, I'm also bothered at the impression that charging for entrance gives to those who are not regular church attenders. To an extent, it doesn't matter if I (for example) feel off-put by something I encounter when visiting a church, especially if from my experience I know it to be out of the ordinary. Many who are not familiar might well think that all churches are like that, or that payment is also necessary to attend worship or whatever. There's enough of a popular perception that the church is out to get your money without encouraging it.
--------------------
We believe there is, and always was, in every Christian Church, ... an outward priesthood, ordained by Jesus Christ, and an outward sacrifice offered therein. - John Wesley
Posts: 5769 | From: A world of my own | Registered: May 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
Custard
Shipmate
# 5402
|
Posted
I agree that it's a bad impression. I agree that the ideal is not charging. My last church went to a lot of effort to keep the building open, entrance free and there to be someone there to chat to or pray with anyone who wanted it.
But I think that if the congregation can't support the building, they should do one of the following:
1. find someone else who can (government?)
2. charge money for those wanting to be tourists, even spiritual tourists
3. move buildings
I don't see there's any other option. And if 1. doesn't work, then it's 2. or 3.
[ 18. August 2007, 20:19: Message edited by: Custard. ]
--------------------
blog
Adam's likeness, Lord, efface;
Stamp thine image in its place.
Posts: 4523 | From: Snot's Place | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged
|
|
welsh dragon
Shipmate
# 3249
|
Posted
I was very impressed by the arrangement at Chichester cathedral when we visited today. It was very welcoming, we were greeted by helpful guides and given a plan of the church and contributions were entirely voluntary, with a box halfway around the church and another at the end.
Posts: 5352 | From: ebay | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged
|
|
FreeJack
Shipmate
# 10612
|
Posted
In London, Vicars and/or Church Administrators get given free passes to St Paul's Cathedral for members of their electoral rolls.
I know someone in Canterbury who had a pass to get into the Cathedral. I don't know if it was obtained through city residence or church electoral roll membership.
Cathedrals and their lands are shown as part of the Church Commissioners' estate.
Christ Church Meadow, Oxford
Posts: 3588 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged
|
|
SeraphimSarov
Shipmate
# 4335
|
Posted
Newman's Own seems to have disappeared from these boards and it seems this thread had much to do with it. I for one truly miss her insights and hope she returns.
--------------------
"For those who like that sort of thing, that is the sort of thing they like"
Posts: 2247 | From: Sacramento, California | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged
|
|
Golden Key
Shipmate
# 1468
|
Posted
Ditto, Seraphim Sarov.
--------------------
Blessed Gator, pray for us!
--"Oh bat bladders, do you have to bring common sense into this?" (Dragon, "Jane & the Dragon")
--"Oh, Peace Train, save this country!" (Yusuf/Cat Stevens, "Peace Train")
Posts: 18601 | From: Chilling out in an undisclosed, sincere pumpkin patch. | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged
|
|
|
Printer-friendly view
