Silver Adept (![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
silveradept) wrote2010-12-13 04:54 pm
silveradept) wrote2010-12-13 04:54 pm
Horseshoes and Hand Grenades Department: The Tribe of Young Unbelievers
This particular opinion column piqued my interest - and I'm not sure I'm going to be entirely hostile to it, but more in the "It was going so well, and then the wheels fell off" kind of manner.
The Tribe of Young Unbelievers is about how so many young people start off in a Christian type of household and then fall away from the religion of their parents into having "No religion" when asked. This is supposed to be a lamentable problem, as anyone who believes that G-d will judge on the final day dependent mostly on whether you said magic words declaring your fealty to him or not is usually very interested in making sure that everyone says the correct magical words before they die. It's nothing as sophisticated as Pascal's Wager, but it is a rather effective way of getting your garden-variety proselytizer out into their world to convert the lost souls. For now, though, we'll set aside that point of contention and move on.
Ms. Crouse informs us that the standard church responses to that supposedly-disturbing statistic are: "Eh, it's just a phase. When they get married, they'll come back.", "College is evil and strips kids of their faith!", "This secular society pulls children away from their faith and there's no gravity or weight to get them back", or, the so-far-most-persuasive of the lot, "Christianity is seen as being intolerant, and specifically so about matters of sexuality." It's a fairly good amount of Done the Research so far, which is good. The article she draws her column from concludes, though, that the thing that's really keeping kids from sticking to their faiths is that they've never been exposed to true unshakably deep Christian faith from the adults in their lives. Because the adults don't take their faith seriously, the kids leave the faith, looking for something to fill the void that Christianity would normally have taken care of.
The recommendation as to how that faith should look, however, is where you realize that Calvin has chosen to jump the ledge. Instead of the feel-good, "impostor" religion of "Moralistic Therapeutic Deism", designed to make people feel good about themselves, True Christians should promote the faith that comes from "by confessing a creed, belonging to a community, and pursuing God's purpose and hope". Or, in other words, saying the magic words, going to church, and evangelizing to others while trying to convince oneself of the truth of the faith, the very things that produce the superficial faith they are decrying. They were doing so well, and then...
Wouldn't it make more sense to address the concerns brought on by that research? If most teenagers and college students think that your church is too restrictive or discriminatory towards sex or toward people of different orientations, wouldn't it be better to re-evaluate that stance and consult the teachings to see the relative importance of the issue compared to the other major themes? Like, say, the one where the priests, Levites, and the social elite are regularly castigated for looking down on others they consider unclean, for example? Truthfully speaking, a lot of these kids are getting their first real exposure to how intolerance has effects when they and their friends start making decisions about who they are and what they want to do with themselves. If you're the fire-and-brimstone, gays-must-die church and a teenager just had three of their best friends come out to them as gay, who are they going to choose? You, or their peers? Brain chemistry and studies of adolescent thinking processes say that peer acceptance is an almost over-riding need for teenagers. They're going to spike the church and go with their friends.
If it's a worry that the evils of secular life are pulling children away from their religions and there's no reason for them to come back, (and the cause is not related to the sex thing above, or there's more to it than that) then maybe it's worth looking into why those children are spinning away and not coming back into the orbit. Do they get anything fulfilling out of it? Is it just saying the magic words, doing the motions, being in the place at the appointed time and nothing else that's relevant to their lives? Are they expected to sit in their sanctuary and listen to Old Dudes preach at them about what they should be thinking on issues that are important to the Old Dudes? University is often the first place where the idea of "Think, Dammit! Advocate, research, defend, and learn" really has credence. (There's nothing saying that our required schooling couldn't achieve this as well, but class sizes make it difficult - a discussion section of 30 does not really allow for in-depth conversation because merely getting everyone to participate takes the time.) Perhaps the things on the pulpit and in the sermons are things that don't appeal to those young adults. What might happen if you let one of them deliver a sermon on the topic of their choosing? Or plan and deliver a full service, composed entirely of their peers, from selecting the music and the readings, to delivering the sermon, collecting tithes, and any events that don't specifically require someone ordained to do. What would that kind of service look like?
Furthermore, the average teenager-to-university student is highly scheduled as it is. Sunday morning services? So totally not working with their biological rhythm or their desire to have actual downtime on the weekends in between studying and going to courses. Move your services to those times when you are likely to get them to come, and you might have better attendance. I note that a lot of study groups and small informal settings meet during the week at those late night times. It certainly seems to have all the right hallmarks that would attract young adults - small sizes, discussions, at least the sursanure that teen opinions will be respected and their research and thought rewarded, and the possibility that topics that wouldn't normally be on the docket at the sermon will be talked about in a safe setting. To a teenager that already has two sport practices during the week, still has to get their homework done nightly, and wants to have enough time left to hand out and do nothing with friends, trying to capture some of their limited time in a discussion of God and religion is unlikely to succeed, unless you can make that discussion worth their time. Maybe you can find a way of making your bible study group count as part of the requirements for a community college class, for example?
An oft-quoted definition of insanity is "doing the same thing multiple times and expecting different results" - Ms. Crouse's column exemplifies this in its advice on how to rejuvenate churches and make them meaningful enough to young adults that they actually stay on with their faith through the times when they are most likely to drop it for having no relevance to their lives. If that means they bail from the wagon before they crash down into the ravine, then they'll jump. Trying to force them to stay in the wagon won't do any good. Saying the magic words isn't enough, no matter what denomination or faith you belong to - you've got to figure out what people want from religion and spirituality and offer them a way of achieving it, whether that's the insight of Zen, the Moralistic Therapeutic Deism that lets people feel good about being saved while not actually having to exert effort, or the deep and personal connection with $DEITY or #DEITIES that many religions with gods are aiming for.
The Tribe of Young Unbelievers is about how so many young people start off in a Christian type of household and then fall away from the religion of their parents into having "No religion" when asked. This is supposed to be a lamentable problem, as anyone who believes that G-d will judge on the final day dependent mostly on whether you said magic words declaring your fealty to him or not is usually very interested in making sure that everyone says the correct magical words before they die. It's nothing as sophisticated as Pascal's Wager, but it is a rather effective way of getting your garden-variety proselytizer out into their world to convert the lost souls. For now, though, we'll set aside that point of contention and move on.
Ms. Crouse informs us that the standard church responses to that supposedly-disturbing statistic are: "Eh, it's just a phase. When they get married, they'll come back.", "College is evil and strips kids of their faith!", "This secular society pulls children away from their faith and there's no gravity or weight to get them back", or, the so-far-most-persuasive of the lot, "Christianity is seen as being intolerant, and specifically so about matters of sexuality." It's a fairly good amount of Done the Research so far, which is good. The article she draws her column from concludes, though, that the thing that's really keeping kids from sticking to their faiths is that they've never been exposed to true unshakably deep Christian faith from the adults in their lives. Because the adults don't take their faith seriously, the kids leave the faith, looking for something to fill the void that Christianity would normally have taken care of.
The recommendation as to how that faith should look, however, is where you realize that Calvin has chosen to jump the ledge. Instead of the feel-good, "impostor" religion of "Moralistic Therapeutic Deism", designed to make people feel good about themselves, True Christians should promote the faith that comes from "by confessing a creed, belonging to a community, and pursuing God's purpose and hope". Or, in other words, saying the magic words, going to church, and evangelizing to others while trying to convince oneself of the truth of the faith, the very things that produce the superficial faith they are decrying. They were doing so well, and then...
Wouldn't it make more sense to address the concerns brought on by that research? If most teenagers and college students think that your church is too restrictive or discriminatory towards sex or toward people of different orientations, wouldn't it be better to re-evaluate that stance and consult the teachings to see the relative importance of the issue compared to the other major themes? Like, say, the one where the priests, Levites, and the social elite are regularly castigated for looking down on others they consider unclean, for example? Truthfully speaking, a lot of these kids are getting their first real exposure to how intolerance has effects when they and their friends start making decisions about who they are and what they want to do with themselves. If you're the fire-and-brimstone, gays-must-die church and a teenager just had three of their best friends come out to them as gay, who are they going to choose? You, or their peers? Brain chemistry and studies of adolescent thinking processes say that peer acceptance is an almost over-riding need for teenagers. They're going to spike the church and go with their friends.
If it's a worry that the evils of secular life are pulling children away from their religions and there's no reason for them to come back, (and the cause is not related to the sex thing above, or there's more to it than that) then maybe it's worth looking into why those children are spinning away and not coming back into the orbit. Do they get anything fulfilling out of it? Is it just saying the magic words, doing the motions, being in the place at the appointed time and nothing else that's relevant to their lives? Are they expected to sit in their sanctuary and listen to Old Dudes preach at them about what they should be thinking on issues that are important to the Old Dudes? University is often the first place where the idea of "Think, Dammit! Advocate, research, defend, and learn" really has credence. (There's nothing saying that our required schooling couldn't achieve this as well, but class sizes make it difficult - a discussion section of 30 does not really allow for in-depth conversation because merely getting everyone to participate takes the time.) Perhaps the things on the pulpit and in the sermons are things that don't appeal to those young adults. What might happen if you let one of them deliver a sermon on the topic of their choosing? Or plan and deliver a full service, composed entirely of their peers, from selecting the music and the readings, to delivering the sermon, collecting tithes, and any events that don't specifically require someone ordained to do. What would that kind of service look like?
Furthermore, the average teenager-to-university student is highly scheduled as it is. Sunday morning services? So totally not working with their biological rhythm or their desire to have actual downtime on the weekends in between studying and going to courses. Move your services to those times when you are likely to get them to come, and you might have better attendance. I note that a lot of study groups and small informal settings meet during the week at those late night times. It certainly seems to have all the right hallmarks that would attract young adults - small sizes, discussions, at least the sursanure that teen opinions will be respected and their research and thought rewarded, and the possibility that topics that wouldn't normally be on the docket at the sermon will be talked about in a safe setting. To a teenager that already has two sport practices during the week, still has to get their homework done nightly, and wants to have enough time left to hand out and do nothing with friends, trying to capture some of their limited time in a discussion of God and religion is unlikely to succeed, unless you can make that discussion worth their time. Maybe you can find a way of making your bible study group count as part of the requirements for a community college class, for example?
An oft-quoted definition of insanity is "doing the same thing multiple times and expecting different results" - Ms. Crouse's column exemplifies this in its advice on how to rejuvenate churches and make them meaningful enough to young adults that they actually stay on with their faith through the times when they are most likely to drop it for having no relevance to their lives. If that means they bail from the wagon before they crash down into the ravine, then they'll jump. Trying to force them to stay in the wagon won't do any good. Saying the magic words isn't enough, no matter what denomination or faith you belong to - you've got to figure out what people want from religion and spirituality and offer them a way of achieving it, whether that's the insight of Zen, the Moralistic Therapeutic Deism that lets people feel good about being saved while not actually having to exert effort, or the deep and personal connection with $DEITY or #DEITIES that many religions with gods are aiming for.