We need a Steve Jobs of religion. Someone (or ones) who can invent not a new religion but, rather, a new way of being religious. Like Mr. Jobs’s creations, this new way would be straightforward and unencumbered and absolutely intuitive. Most important, it would be highly interactive. I imagine a religious space that celebrates doubt, encourages experimentation and allows one to utter the word God without embarrassment. A religious operating system for the Nones among us. And for all of us.My friend observed that most if not all United Church of Christ congregations would fit this criteria. From my experience serving a joint UCC/UMC congregation and having worked with other UCC churches in my ministry I would have to agree. The United Methodist Chuch has also struggled with brand recognition. For the last ten years the UMC has been trying to increase people's favorable views of our denomination through marketing campaigns and local church efforts. The results have been favorable as our "positive" recognition continues to rise.
Is this all enough? I personally believe that both the UCC and the UMC have a lot to offer people looking for a community of faith. I believe that both of these denominations have churches that fit the requirements from the NYT article. But I think that we miss the point if we simply shout back that we are here, that we are doing that already. The genius, in my opinion, of Jobs was not creating something new, it was creating it/marketing it/packaging it in a way people who needed it could get it. Where our churches often struggle is that we forget that not everyone recognizes how amazing our communities of faith are. Yes, I really do think they are amazing. We do not make our opportunities accessible to those on the outside, those who really need it. Our churches become like archaic mainframes or desktops, failing to realize that the world has moved on to different devices, even though we can provide the same services, if people just knew how to access us. I think we should see the sentiments of this article as a challenge. If we really believe we have something great to offer, how do we change so that people can take advantage of it. How do we adapt to the shifting needs of those who are lacking a spiritual community, who need a life-changing presence? How do we "think different" and make faith simple to access? How do we tell people we are here?
1 comment:
First of all, it strikes me as odd but not entirely surprising that Unitarian Universalism goes equally unrecognized in the article, and largely unrecognized in general, perhaps because it has had even more of an issue with brand recognition, perhaps because some would argue it is not a religion, perhaps because its identity is far too vague to be appealing to most people. In any case, if I were a UMC or UCC minister with a mind to share what I valued about religion with as many people as possible, I would try to think, from an advertising point of view, what pure elements of Christianity are essential and unique. Without having a clear grasp of this, there can't be any brand recognition, and everyone might as well be a Universalist.
Secondly, I would not describe my personal experience with the United Church of Christ as one of celebrated doubt and encouraged experimentation. In my experience, the main problem, and main lack of appeal with more forward-thinking Christian churches is that because they are so all-inclusive and welcoming of anyone, and because of the constant emphasis on being open to multiple points of view, they still tend to draw a majority that consider themselves fairly traditional family-oriented Christians. The result of this majority is that there is not an atmosphere openly tolerant enough of things like homosexuality, sex outside of marriage, divorce and non-traditional family arrangements in general. In other words, the church itself may have decided to be open and inclusive, but that doesn't mean its members automatically represent or project that state of affairs. I would guess this to be a turnoff to many people falling into the 12 percent of "Nones" described in the article. I don't have any personal experience with the UMC, but in my opinion the UCC at least has failed to make a real effort to be as outwardly tolerant and accepting as they claim to be.
I think the kind of move you're talking about is extremely difficult because you would have to figure out how, on the one hand, to be more aggressively open and accepting, and on the other hand to consider why people would specifically want to be Christian in a society that is becoming more and more religiously diverse and religiously vague. I would guess this would have to start with you thinking about what it is that you do find amazing about the UMC.
Elisabeth
Disclaimer: This comment was written by someone who owns absolutely no Apple products and is an apatheist, if anything.
Post a Comment