The Tale of Two Tours
Important religious buildings, such as synagogues, mosques, temples or cathedrals, derive their significance from their members’ activities in the building. Believers may gather there for worship; they may make personal pilgrimages to it; they may believe that their god dwells there. In other words, the building’s fame and attraction comes from its role as a place of religious activity for its religion’s adherents.
So what about tourists, people who travel from away from their homes to visit important places? Tourists who visit religious sites, as opposed to pilgrims, do not come to worship and rarely belong to the religion associated with the site. They come to a cathedral or a temple because it is famous. They wish to see it and learn more about it; they are rarely want to participate in the religious activities held there.
So how does a place of religious importance treat tourists?
Some religious places allow in no one who not belonging to the religion. That was true with the ancient Jewish Temple in Jerusalem and it remains true for the Muslim holy city of Mecca.
Other places give the tourists a tour. The character of that tour reveals what the religion, or at least the religious officials who run the site, think is important for visitors to learn.
Take Westminster Abbey in London, for instance, the church linked to the British Houses of Parliament. Thousands of people visit it everyday. Its tour is a well-oiled business that describes the building’s history and its place in British history. Highly trained guides take groups around the entire, large building. The guides are experts in the church’s history and in its relationship to the government and the monarchs. They know the significance of every tomb, memorial and monument, and can provide key information about everyone buried in the church, from king or queen to poet, playwright, or scientist. They can explain the purposes of every side chapel and cloister.
Buildings as old as Westminster require ongoing upkeep, and the wear and tear of the many daily visitors just adds to the building’s deterioration. To pay for the building’s maintenance, the church has numerous money-raising ventures, from entrance fees to the book shop and the gift shop, to say nothing of the café. In this, the Abbey is just like the many palaces, castles, manor houses, and other historical buildings throughout Britain.
Between the historical presentation and the fund-raising, Westminster’s ongoing role as a place of worship is nearly invisible. Tourists often fail to realize that three to seven worship services take place daily, including at least one celebration of the Eucharist.
The Temple of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Salt Lake City provides a completely different presentation.
Tourists can keep their wallets in their pockets because there is nothing to buy: no food, no souvenirs, no books, no entrance fees.
The tour guides are quite different. Instead of trained, older professionals, the guides for Temple Square are college-age missionaries. They know the Square, from the Temple itself to the Tabernacle and other buildings, but are not extensively versed in its history. Indeed, being able to give detailed historical information is not their job, and they sometimes simply tell questioners they cannot answer a question. The tourists’ curiosity about the past may be better satisfied by the short videos viewed on the tour.
The tour guides at Temple Square make up in faith and friendliness what they lack in historical knowledge. Their task is to provide an understanding of the Mormon religion, the place of the Temple in that religion, and perhaps most importantly to give a sense of the vital immediacy of their beliefs in their own daily lives. There is no “hard sell,” but the tour guides mention their faith when relevant, and the tour itself ends comfortably in a contemplative room before a large statue of Jesus Christ, with the two guides each giving a minute or so of “witness” about their religion.
The treatment of tourists at these two religious sites could not be more different. At Westminster Abbey, the guide delivers a historical message of English/British continuity and importance, religious and otherwise, to which the visitors will always remain outsiders. At the Mormon Temple, by contrast, the guides deliver a personal message, one which links the founding of Salt Lake and its Temple to the guides themselves, and through them the offer is made to the visiting outsiders that they can become insiders too.
So what about tourists, people who travel from away from their homes to visit important places? Tourists who visit religious sites, as opposed to pilgrims, do not come to worship and rarely belong to the religion associated with the site. They come to a cathedral or a temple because it is famous. They wish to see it and learn more about it; they are rarely want to participate in the religious activities held there.
So how does a place of religious importance treat tourists?
Some religious places allow in no one who not belonging to the religion. That was true with the ancient Jewish Temple in Jerusalem and it remains true for the Muslim holy city of Mecca.
Other places give the tourists a tour. The character of that tour reveals what the religion, or at least the religious officials who run the site, think is important for visitors to learn.
Take Westminster Abbey in London, for instance, the church linked to the British Houses of Parliament. Thousands of people visit it everyday. Its tour is a well-oiled business that describes the building’s history and its place in British history. Highly trained guides take groups around the entire, large building. The guides are experts in the church’s history and in its relationship to the government and the monarchs. They know the significance of every tomb, memorial and monument, and can provide key information about everyone buried in the church, from king or queen to poet, playwright, or scientist. They can explain the purposes of every side chapel and cloister.
Buildings as old as Westminster require ongoing upkeep, and the wear and tear of the many daily visitors just adds to the building’s deterioration. To pay for the building’s maintenance, the church has numerous money-raising ventures, from entrance fees to the book shop and the gift shop, to say nothing of the café. In this, the Abbey is just like the many palaces, castles, manor houses, and other historical buildings throughout Britain.
Between the historical presentation and the fund-raising, Westminster’s ongoing role as a place of worship is nearly invisible. Tourists often fail to realize that three to seven worship services take place daily, including at least one celebration of the Eucharist.
The Temple of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints in Salt Lake City provides a completely different presentation.
Tourists can keep their wallets in their pockets because there is nothing to buy: no food, no souvenirs, no books, no entrance fees.
The tour guides are quite different. Instead of trained, older professionals, the guides for Temple Square are college-age missionaries. They know the Square, from the Temple itself to the Tabernacle and other buildings, but are not extensively versed in its history. Indeed, being able to give detailed historical information is not their job, and they sometimes simply tell questioners they cannot answer a question. The tourists’ curiosity about the past may be better satisfied by the short videos viewed on the tour.
The tour guides at Temple Square make up in faith and friendliness what they lack in historical knowledge. Their task is to provide an understanding of the Mormon religion, the place of the Temple in that religion, and perhaps most importantly to give a sense of the vital immediacy of their beliefs in their own daily lives. There is no “hard sell,” but the tour guides mention their faith when relevant, and the tour itself ends comfortably in a contemplative room before a large statue of Jesus Christ, with the two guides each giving a minute or so of “witness” about their religion.
The treatment of tourists at these two religious sites could not be more different. At Westminster Abbey, the guide delivers a historical message of English/British continuity and importance, religious and otherwise, to which the visitors will always remain outsiders. At the Mormon Temple, by contrast, the guides deliver a personal message, one which links the founding of Salt Lake and its Temple to the guides themselves, and through them the offer is made to the visiting outsiders that they can become insiders too.
posted by Paul Flesher at
10:47 PM
5 Comments:
Thank you for your interesting and fair-minded analysis. You have indeed made an original and informative comparison.
hthalljr'gmail'com
By
Tracy Hall Jr, at 4/03/2008
ACTAULLY NON JEWS WERE ABEL TO ENTER THE T EMPLE PRECINETS , UNTIL TH ETIME OF THE HASHMONEAN REBELLION. THEREAFTER FENCES WERE POSTED INSIDE THE PRECINTS SO THAT ONLY OBSERVANT JEWS COULD ENTER THE SCARED AREA. nON JEWS WERE ABLE TO OBSERVE FROM B A LCONIES - AROUND THE TEMPLE MOUNT. PLEASE CHECK YOUR SOURCES BEFORE MAKING MISLEADING STATEMENTS
By
Anonymous, at 4/03/2008
Dear Anonymous,
Actually, both your observations are incorrect.
First, as far back as Leviticus, the precincts of the Temple and Tabernacle (a portable temple) were off-limits even to non-Levites (i.e., most Israelites) except when they were in the act of making sacrifices. Non-Israelites and impure Israelites were never to enter.
Second, non-Jews down into the first century were able to observe from outside the Temple mount. After the Antonia fortress was built, it provided a platform for observation. Roman soldiers, often hostile to the worship going on below them, were able to watch, as Josephus tells us. However, they are outside the Temple Mount itself, and so nowhere near the Temple precincts--the Temple itself occupying only a small section of the Temple Mount.
By
Paul Flesher, at 4/04/2008
so is this talk was about the Jewism??? The temple was just a target for non-jews and romans...???
By
gifteveryone, at 12/11/2009
I'm not sure why Anonymous above mentioned the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem. It has nothing to do with the preceding column, which is not about Judaism.
The Jerusalem Temple was guarded during the Roman occupation of the first century CE to ensure that anti-Roman sentiments were not expressed against the Roman conquerors and occupiers during ceremonies.
By
Paul Flesher, at 12/12/2009
Post a Comment
<< Home