Arch Words

Reflections on art, politics, parenting, and life in the Midwest

Name: Tess Home: St. Louis

I'm now a graduate student in public health at Washington University in St. Louis... as well as a writer, parent, and teacher. I haven't updated this blog recently, but I may come back to it in the future.


E-mail: tessthompson (at) hotmail (dot) com

Thursday, October 06, 2005

Religious Musings: Community


I've been thinking about writing about religion for a while now, but I've been putting it off. I don't really feel qualified; it's like someone who can't tell a preposition from a participle deciding to write a grammar book. I also hesitate to show other people what a spiritual mess I am--can't I at least figure a few things out before I start to write about this stuff? I’m afraid of being a sort of boring Anne Lamott, without the colorful, drug-using past, the funny one-liners, or the full religious conversion. But I've been reading other people's religious and spiritual musings on their blogs, so I'm going to jump in.

I thought I'd start with the concept of community, because it seems fairly straightforward and doesn't involve thorny theological issues. When I went to church last weekend, I was shocked by how much I fit in after only three months. I walked in with Ben and saw two of the local La Leche League leaders and their kids. They greeted me, and the minister said hi. I took Ben to the nursery--we had tried keeping him with us the week before, but all his books and toys and snacks were not enough to make him happy sitting quietly during the service. Once in the nursery, Ben started playing in the familiar room he knew from La Leche League meetings. After church, I talked to a mom from my neighborhood whose daughter is exactly Ben's age; her daughter also goes to Ben's day care. I chatted briefly with the lesbian couple who are expecting a baby in three weeks. (I had been joking with Tom that the pregnant woman is my oldest friend in St. Louis; I sat next to her in church the first Sunday I went, and then I saw her at a La Leche League meeting two days later.) As I left the church, I was overwhelmed by how quickly I had formed a web of connections with the congregation.

One of the big benefits of religion is giving people a community to be a part of. Even people who don't agree with the central tenets of Christianity can agree that people are happier when they're part of a group. You don't have to believe in the divinity of Christ to see that it does people good to be visited when they're sick, or to go to a discussion group, or to do community service.

For those of us who grew up without going to church, religious communities can seem strange and intimidating. We want to belong--or do we? Before I moved here, I went to a church in Philadelphia for half a year, sometimes alone, sometimes with my friend Kaela. (It was the kind of liberal church where people just assumed we were a lesbian couple until we mentioned our husbands.) The minister had to cajole us into staying for coffee; usually, both of us were eager to walk briskly out the door when the service was over. We finally stayed for coffee the day the Girl Scouts were selling cookies in the fellowship hall and I needed a Samoa fix. The minister came over and talked to us, and we asked him how one goes about joining a church. We were ambivalent about being drawn in, but the church did so gradually.

But the more I think about the concept of community, the more it becomes the kind of thorny theological issue I hoped to avoid. Just who is allowed to be a member of the community? The church I've been going to in St. Louis is part of the United Church of Christ's Still Speaking movement, which designates churches open to practicing gay and lesbian people. Even churches without strict admissions standards tend to gather like-minded people. And when we say "community," do we mean a particular congregation? All members of that denomination? All Christians? All people?

Last week was World Communion Sunday. The pastor broke and blessed different kinds of bread to represent the breads of the world. The words "community" and "communion" both go back to the Latin root for "common." This week in the service, one of the readings was from the Didache, an early Christian text that predates the gospels but never made it into the biblical canon. It discusses communion: "As this broken bread was scattered over the mountains, and was gathered together to become one, so let Your Body of Faithful be gathered together from the ends of the earth into Your kingdom." I love the image of bread starting out as grain, but being pulled together to form a single loaf.

Communion, though, is definitely a thorny religious issue, even if one leaves aside the whole transubstantiation debate. Who can take communion? I chose my current church partially because it offers open communion, which means that I can participate even though I haven't been baptized. Churches with open communion stress that all people are welcome at God's table. Is that true? Are the admission standards of Christianity so low that I can be allowed in without professing anything in particular? Is my desire to take communion without being baptized a sign that I'm moving closer to God, or am I a fraud who should be stopped until I get my religious act together?

When I was in grad school, my mom underwent a religious conversion and became a member of the Orthodox church in America. My dad, an atheist scientist for most of his life, ignored that part of my mom's life for a while. Finally, something softened in him and he decided to go to church with her. As someone who wasn't a member of the Orthodox church (even though he had been baptized in the Protestant church), he wasn't allowed to take communion. This upset him, so he would leave at that point in the service and go down to the fellowship room in the basement. When he told me about his religious conversion, he said that he realized he was choosing to exile himself, choosing to be down below when he would have been welcome upstairs. He decided to join the church, and he was baptized again.

I’m planning on making this post the first of an occasional series of religious musings. Each paragraph I wrote today brought up other issues I’d like to explore: church shopping, parents and religion, religious rituals. I wish I could promise great insights, but I can only describe where I am on my journey right now.


Photo by drp on flickr.com.

17 Comments:

Blogger Ben said...

As I started reading this post I had the feeling that it would get theological whether you wanted it to or not. Being a minister I have opinions but I'll try to keep my comment brief.

"One of the big benefits of religion is giving people a community to be a part of." I totally agree.

"Who can take communion?" Great question. Churches answer this question differently. Personally I think we find more biblical basis for an open communion, that anyone who professes faith in Christ may partake. I don't think it's right for a church to refuse someone a place in the Lord's Supper just because they haven't been baptized or aren't a member of that particular church.

"Are the admission standards of Christianity so low that I can be allowed in without professing anything in particular?" I think there may be a difference between "allowing a person into the church" and "allowing them to become a member of that church." I think it is our duty as Christians to accept all people, regardless of what sin they are guilty of (we're all guilty, btw.) If a church refuses gay men or women or druggies or prostitues from attending then that church is in sin and is wrong. However, I do think that as we look at Scripture we see that even though God accepts us as we are but is not content to let us stay that way. He accepts us along with our sins, and so should the church, but it's the duty of the church to share the truths God lays out in the Bible. That's not to say that it's acceptable for a church to constantly beat someone over the head with their sin, but at the same time a church should hold its members accountable to the truth. Does that make sense?

10:29 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Thanks for yet another thoughtful post. Based on my experience in the United Methodist Church (local and beyond), I can say that decisions about who is "in" and what, if anything, is required of them, cut to the heart of so many contentious issues, even for an open communion church like the UMC. Some right-wing activists in the UMC have been agitating for several years now for clearer delineation of fundamental doctrine, of what it takes to be a good United Methodst, what you have to "confess" in order to fully belong. Left-wing activists (including me), on the other hand, have agitated for greater acceptance of gay and lesbian people, among other things, on the grounds that the Church should be open to everyone.

I personally think that we should avoid drawing boundary lines, although there are always hard cases, such as when I was strongly tempted to sign a petition to call for the excommunication of Bush and Cheney from the UMC for so flagrantly violating its moral principles. I decided not to sign the petition, however, on the grounds that excommunication is just a bad idea, period. Who gets the power to say what is okay and what isn't? Too often, I fear, it would be the rich, connected, and powerful who would still escape censure, while the marginalized scapegoats, such as pastors who perform same-sex unions, or such couples themselves, would absurdly bear the weight for the tremendous moral failings of the Christian community.

If I did get to set rules about what you have to do to qualify as a "good Christian", I would say: 1) give up all desire for money or material things, completely and totally; 2) dedicate your life to working to empower the marginalized and bring justice to the poor; 3) renounce violence in all forms and be willing to take personal risks to work for peace, disarmament, and an end to war; and 4) be willing to put your Christian values ahead of any special love for one country or another, in other words to deny the seductions of patriotism and nationalism in order to embrace the universal and equal dignity of all people, everywhere.

I fail to live up to these goals quite often; we are all sinners, as Ben helpfully points out in his comment. (Although I must disagree with his apparent inclusion of being homosexual as an example of sin, which is common among even fairly liberal Christians...it's great to "love the sinner", but what if their "sin" isn't really a "sin" but is about who they are as a person?) Interestingly, I find myself not saying anything about belief here, such as having to believe in God or that Jesus Christ is "your Lord and Savior"...I guess I am anti-Creed in the sense that I don't think people should have to say they believe something theological (although I hope they do!) I am not necessarily against having to state membership vows to belong to a particular Church (kind of like a wedding or union ceremony) as that demonstrates commitment to a community, which after all was the original issue you were addressing in this excellent post!

11:06 AM  
Blogger Carrie Lofty said...

Ben said: "Personally I think we find more biblical basis for an open communion, that anyone who professes faith in Christ may partake." This is why, at a Catholic wedding I attended last year, I did not take communion. I was one of only three in the church that day who did not. Although it was open, I do not think any Christian church is open enough to allow communion to someone who does not profess faith in Christ (I do not). So I respectfully sat in my seat, preferring to stand out rather than accept under false pretenses something that means a great deal to many people. I did not feal like trivializing other peoples' beliefs just to join the line, take the bread, and fit in.

Interestingly, and I have always loved this little fact, the word "companion" comes from the Latin meaning "with bread" (think of the Romance languages here - "con pan," "col pane," or "com pão"). It adds to the significance of this discussion of faith and community - that the root of our relationships to each other was defined, long ago, as the act of sharing food.

11:55 AM  
Blogger Milliner's Dream, a woman of many "hats"... said...

I read this, and feel I need to give it it's due and re-read it later. I _love_ talking spirituality (and religion, but think they're different.)

I often read and come back to posts and will be chewing on this while I head out to teach a class.

I'll be back, but know that you did well sharing (imho) and thank you for your vulnerability.

Hh

4:35 PM  
Blogger Ben said...

This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.

7:27 PM  
Blogger Ben said...

I deleted my last comment because it wasn't very nice. And this isn't my blog so I'm going to behave.

I respectfully disagree with Christian regarding homosexuality, but that's the beauty of America, we can all disagree and then go out for coffee afterwards, right?

Indeed, Tess, you've given me much to think about. Perhaps I'll post my full thoughts over on my blog and not in your comment space. :)

8:21 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

I would be happy to disagree and go out for coffee (actually, tea, in my case, since I don't drink coffee) with conservatives such as Ben. I have been friends with and had lively discussions with conservative Republicans ever since college! However, that is easy for a straight guy like me, whose personal identity is not being called a "sin" from the beginning.

Actually, I find it ludicrous beyond belief that people can get all "morally" upset about two people who love each other making a lifelong commitment, while all around us real, serious sin is ruling the world: increasing poverty and inequality, materialism and greed, the slaughter in Iraq, and patriotic idolatry. The more people join moral crusades against gays, feminists, etc., the more they seem to blind themselves to the real moral crises of the world today. I don't think that's a coincidence.

3:16 AM  
Blogger Tess said...

Thanks for keeping things civil, Ben. And I thought "community" would be an easy, noncontroversial topic!

Christian_Left, I miss being able to have tea with you--next time you're in St. Louis, if you stop by I promise lots of tea AND biscuits.

LS, my husband generally doesn't take communion when we go to church with his parents, even though he was baptized and a member of the church. He doesn't share those beliefs any more, and he can't pretend he does just to make his parents happy.

Thanks for all the responses, people. Always interesting to hear your perspectives.

Tess

5:44 AM  
Blogger tom said...

just to add to christian left's comments: i may not be a christian anymore, but i do recall that jesus was concerned that his follower (peter, right?) *feed* his sheep.

now, sheep display homosexual behavior (try googlesearching "homosexual behavior in sheep"), yet jesus's priority is on food, not: "stop the sheep from displaying homosexual behavior."

(i know the food part is often/usually taken metaphorically: but even metaphorically, my (somewhat silly) point still stands.)

and christian left: perhaps you already know that your definition of being a good christian is also a perfect definition of being a buddhist in the "engaged buddhism" strain? just substitute "buddhist" for "christian" in the last bit. i just thought that was interesting.

my word verification: yjekamy

6:49 AM  
Blogger Phil said...

Very interesting Tess. Nice thought provoking. I've always been of the opinion that all religions have more in common than they have differences. As far as communion goes, why are those wafers so dry? It's like having a ball of tissue in your mouth. A little salsa would definitely improve communion a whole lot and probably keep people coming back to church.

5:25 PM  
Blogger Ben said...

Phil: Salsa, nice idea. I'll pass that one along to my pastor. I only see a problem with Catholics since they believe that the bread LITERALLY becomes the physical body of Christ. I don't know if they'd want to dip the Almighty in Old El Passo. ;)

5:38 PM  
Blogger Carrie Lofty said...

My best friend is Catholic, and she was told since she first took communion (and probably before) that you DON'T CHEW THE HOST! You let it dissolve on the tongue and it becomes part of you. She visited a friends' (Protestant?) church in high school and their communion consisted of larger pieces of bread. She took the bread in her mouth - and they way she told it - she about choked. All of that old conditioning (DON'T CHEW THE HOST) and she - a lapsed Catholic now of the most profoundly agnostic and logical type - couldn't force her jaw to chew a piece of bread.

She finally managed to get it down, but after minutes of struggle, trying to let it dissolve without using her teeth :)

7:02 PM  
Blogger Tess said...

I think this is the most nonspam comments I've gotten so far. Not that I have anything against Catholicism, but I don't quite understand why chewing is bad but exposing to stomach acid is okay.

One thing I've noticed (and forgive me if I'm overgeneralizing) is the more liberal the church, the better the bread. Trust the hippies for chewy, whole-grain goodness.

Tess

7:20 PM  
Blogger Milliner's Dream, a woman of many "hats"... said...

Ah, still "chewing" on this post, Tess, but one comment on your last one, about the "more liberal the church, the better the bread..."

When I was a kid we went to a VERY, VERY conservative, legalistic church. Think _just_ to the left of Amish, and you're close.

The bread each week was a homemade loaf of bread...which, now I know wasn't Biblical at all, as unleavened bread (more crackerlike) was what Jesus and the disciples used.

Anyway...it was GOOD bread. :)

Hh

11:53 AM  
Blogger Ben said...

Tess: I think that the whole "don't chew Jesus" thing is a little goofy too. And yeah, the more liberal churches to seem to splurge a little for decent bread. I think all churches should have good bread, but that's just me. ;)

12:13 PM  
Blogger Carrie Lofty said...

I wonder what's so goofy about the idea that it's bad to chew the bread (Jesus)? It's no more strange or ritualistic than the larger idea of communion anyway, no matter what stipulations you put on the ceremony.

7:44 AM  
Blogger Ben said...

Well, I suppose the idea that bread changes form and becomes the flesh and blood of a person that is now in Heaven isn't so goofy an idea. Even if the Bible never mentions it as becoming that.

10:43 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home