I would agree, and I have never worn orange just for the sake of it or to be provocative. Unlike many on this board, I live in an area of the country where Catholics historically are pretty rare -- even the Irish people around here tended to be Protestant, and more likely than not were really Ulster-Scots. That is changing some, but historically there simply isn't a strong Irish or Irish-Catholic presence around here. Green on St. Patrick's Day was something my parents grew up with, and even now it falls more under the "everyone's Irish on St. Patrick's Day" idea than actually being Irish.

Not sure if it's still the case, but at least 10 or 20 years ago, it also had the largest concentration of Presbyterians in the country. Charlotte, NC, was second.

In the first century, Jews fasted on Mondays and Thursdays. The original Christians were all Jewish and were used to the fasting as a spiritual discipline. They moved the fast days to Wednesdays and Fridays, because Judas engineered Jesus' arrest on a Wednesday and Jesus was crucified on a Friday. Most often that fast took the form of avoiding meat in the diet. In those days, meat was a luxury food. You either had to buy it in a market or you had to own enough land to keep cattle. On the other hand, anyone could grow vegetables or forage for them, and anyone could catch a fish in a lake or a stream. You could buy better fish and vegetables, but the point is that you could eat without money if you were poor. So meat was rich people's food and fish was poor people's food. That is why the most common form of fasting was to omit meat and eat fish.

I think Pittsburgh in general is a very religious place, and also a place with very strong cultural identities. The cultural identities and religion strongly tie into one another here, and I think that more people than in other places identify themselves as "religious".

Probably true. The concentration of Presbyterians is certainly directly related to the large number of Scottish immigrants that settled in the area however long ago.

Very true! You can't swing a cat at many of the non-denominational churches!

You do know at least one non-Catholic - me! I go to an American Evangelical Baptist Church, but in my heart of hearts, I'm "non-dom".

And yes, since Pittsburgh was founded by Scots-Irish Presbyterians and to a lesser extent, English (Angelicans), with the second large ethnic group coming is Germans (Lutheran), it's not as if there's just two groups competing.

Ahem, Danielle, what about Lutheran me? Although when I go to church here, I go to the most Catholic Lutheran church I've ever seen. And also I'm not native, either. Most of the people I know here are Catholic (to varying degrees).

I didn't know you were Lutheran too! - yeah for a sister being Lutheran!!!:) :)

As would I, but I'm not surprised at it - it's pretty typical (and sad) of evangelical pastors to get their digs in at Catholics/Episcopalians/anything they aren't whenever possible.

Glad to see I wasn't the only one put off by that remark.

I'm surprised you say Louisville is "anti-Catholic." Compared to Boston, it may seem that way, but in the region it is one of the more Catholic cities I know of. And this is coming from someone who grew up there, and is now living in Indy, which seems anti-Catholic in comparison to Louisville. Trust me, Louisville is Catholic, it's actually a lot of German Catholics orginially. But there are tons of Catholic grade schools and a number of Catholic high schools. Though some have had to close in recent years due to smaller numbers of students attending due to the costs.

Courtney

Wow! This thread moved along! I hadn't seen it in a few days.

Anyway, honeychile, your pastor is a classic evangelical. :) Ok - Most eastern Christians (Orthodox) and many western Christians (Anglican, Catholic) have maintained high-liturgy - outward, communal rituals of worship. I'm sure most of the "early church" was rather liturgical as the first adherents were Jewish!!

The tendency away from liturgy was a response to what some perceived as empty worship. But, please do not be fooled into believing that low-liturgy Christian traditions (e.g. the vast majority of evangelicals) do not themselves engage in empty worship.

The issue was never with the manner of worship, but with the people doing the worship. And, there is nothing fundamentally wrong with high-liturgy or low-liturgy when one's heart is set for God.

Observance of festivals and holy days is an outward, communal sign of worship. honeychile, perhaps your church has communion services? I fail to see the difference between that and another worshipful act.

The issue of evangelicals dismissing age-old traditions is not limited to church gossip. Let me tell ya, it's happening right here at my seminary. During a discussion I had with a fellow seminarian, I was put on display. He found out that I cross myself, do prostrations and pray Morning and Evening Prayers (a practice derived from Judaism). Then, he proceeded to mock me and ask when he could stop by to "watch" me.

Be careful when you consider Christians not like yourself. Christianity is not a matter of the mind (theology/doctrine) but is a matter of the heart (the relationship with God/worship/obedience).

I am deeply sorry that I offended anyone by my remark about fasting.

What prompted me to even make the statement in the first place is by remembering some people I knew in college. They'd ever so piously fast on Wednesdays and Fridays, then go get stinking drunk and shack up for the night. I thought it was hypocritical at the time and still do. Unfortunately, I think that disgust somehow came out over the keyboard, but I certainly didn't want it to sound as if I was pointing fingers at anyone in particular (except those I was in school with, and if you're here, YOU KNOW WHO YOU ARE!).

And PreciousJeni, I am in complete agreement with your statement: "And, there is nothing fundamentally wrong with high-liturgy or low-liturgy when one's heart is set for God." That's what being a Christian is all about to me.

Thanks, HC, for the apology. I did read it as a criticism to all of us who fast. Obviously, fasting - especially one day a week - is nothing compared to the suffering and sacrifice that Christ made for us, but it still serves a purpose to those of us who participate. First, it is a reminder of Christ's sacrifice and also a prompt to pray and seek penance. I remember at work on days that I fasted, I would become completely absorbed in my work projects and then when my stomach would start growling I would switch gears and take a moment to think about the fast and the reason for it.

For those whom you directed your criticism toward - their fasting should not have been made obvious to you. As Jesus says in Matthew chapter 6:

16"When you fast, do not look somber as the hypocrites do, for they disfigure their faces to show men they are fasting. I tell you the truth, they have received their reward in full. 17But when you fast, put oil on your head and wash your face, 18so that it will not be obvious to men that you are fasting, but only to your Father, who is unseen; and your Father, who sees what is done in secret, will reward you."

Thank you - I appreciate getting the chance to apologize (and explain).

I do fast, but not necessarily during Lent.