botched pilgrimage

On our last morning in Rome, we went to the Vatican. We considered going into the museums and seeing the Sistine Chapel, but the line was out the door and around the corner (even on a weekday in November). Instead, we went to St. Peter's.

I had been looking forward to coming here for a long time. I always felt like it was one of the five sacred pilgrimages any good Presbyterian should make (Jerusalem, Rome, Geneva, Edinburgh/St. Andrews, and, of course, Princeton). Regrettably, I found it to be a negative experience.

St. Peter's is an amazing structure. It felt good standing on the outside knowing that the most impressive structure in Rome was built to and for the glory of God. We went inside and it was still incredible, but different. There is a prominent statue in the nave of Ignatius Loyola with his foot on the back of a Protestant Reformer. The Reformer was looking up at Ignatius with fear in his eyes while holding up a book (a Bible?). And to the side, you could take communion and confess--but only if you were Roman Catholic. Suddenly, I was an outsider in my pilgrimage site. More than that, I felt like my tradition was the enemy to be overcome. At Vatican II, Protestants were elevated to the status of "separated brethren." I guess I just didn't realize how separate we really were.

As such, I'm thinking about removing Rome from the pilgrimage list. Possible replacements include Zurich, Heidelberg, Richmond (Va.), Westminster (London) and Seoul. Or maybe it should be Rome sans Vatican. After all, where would the Reformed faith be without Paul's letter to the Romans?