Are there any places that only Christians can travel to or enter?

[Ruby]

@hajario

Crap. I hate it when people do that and now look at me. Sorry.

heh, I missed it in the OP too and was reading the thread ready to post the same thing. Thanks for taking that bullet for me.

[Knorf]

@Colibri

Moderator Note

Knorf, let’s avoid political jabs in GQ. No warning issued, but don’t do this in the future.

Colibri
General Questions Moderator

Ouch. My apologies.

[Tom_Tildrum]

Heaven (depending on who you ask).

[Hari_Seldon]

At least some monasteries allow anyone to make a short retreat (for a fee). I was once chastised for wearing a cap in a church, but that’s a little different. Once I went to a Catholic funeral and it felt funny, it really did, to be hatless at a religious ceremony.

[Bridget_Burke]

@robert_columbia

…I will say that this is within a broad scope interpretation of my question, but I’m more interested in places where the criteria is more just being a member of the faith or not. I’m guessing that, other than LDS, the only mainstream Christian groups that I would see doing this are Catholics and Orthodox…

So, which RC or Orthodox sites have you discovered that are forbidden to Others?

[robert_columbia]

@Bridget_Burke

So, which RC or Orthodox sites have you discovered that are forbidden to Others?

Other than the ones mentioned here, I’m not actually aware of any, but my understanding of how they consider that certain sites can be imbued with holiness (which Protestants don’t generally do) leads me to believe that this might be something that they would consider.

[Bridget_Burke]

I checked the Catholic Encyclopedia; most of it dates to the early 20th century, so it would hardly be too “modern.” The article on Pilgrimages is witty & worldly; one does not get the idea that the sites, themselves, are actually “imbued with holiness.” It’s worth further study; here’s a highlight:

Scandals effected by this form of devotion are too obvious and were too often denounced by the saints and other writers from St. Jerome to Thomas à Kempis to need any setting out here. The “Canterbury Tales” of Chaucer are sufficient evidence. But the characteristic ones: (i) excessive credulity of the guardian of the shrine; (ii) insistence upon the obligation of pilgrimages as though they were necessary for salvation; (iii) the neglect on the part of too many of the pilgrims of their own duties at home in order to spend more time in passing from one sanctuary to another; (iv) the wantonness and evil-living and evil-speaking indulged in by the pilgrims themselves in many cases. Not as though these abuses invalidated the use of pilgrimages. Erasmus himself declares that they did not; but they certainly should have been more stringently and rigorously repressed by the church rulers…

At least one Protestant has posted to the board for the Camino de Santiago. An Irishman reports that “I walked for several days with an intriguing orthodox Jewess.”

Religious communities (monks & nuns) may have parts of their establishments closed to those who are not members of the order. But, where visitors are allowed, all they ask is that you behave decently. Hey, and buy some of that wine!

And you probably can’t get into parts of the Vatican, for security purposes. But Saint Peter’s is open to the public.

[Little_Nemo]

There’s probably still a few country clubs.