• Home
  • About the Book
  • About the Authors
  • Blog
  • Religious Trends
A Church Beyond Belief

Changing Our Religion to Match Our Views

9/30/2014

0 Comments

 
Picture
We have always carried the notion that religious commitments shape our social and political views. But research shows the opposite may be true. We also change our religious identities to match our views.

Mark Chaves notes this phenomenon in American Religion: Contemporary Trends. This began when religion and politics became intertwined with one another, and the use of “Christian” became associated with those carrying a conservative political agenda. Chaves observes, “After 1990 more people thought that saying you were religious was tantamount to saying you were a conservative Republican.” When people began to feel that Christianity no longer represented their views, they began identifying as having no religion.

For millennials, this continues to impact their views of the church because they carry the perception that “Christians are primarily motivated by a political agenda and promote right-wing politics” (Kinnaman & Lyons in unchristian). Sadly, the legacy of mixing religion and conservative politics continues to shape religious identities as a new generation increasingly identifies as non-religious.

If congregations have any hope of engaging those who have left their religious identities behind, they need to communicate clearly that they’re interested in people’s lives, not their votes. It’s not that one’s faith can ever be divorced from one’s political views, or that at times people of faith need to seek political change. But when it seems the sole reason congregations exist is to support a political agenda, people have no problem leaving the church behind and self-identify in other ways. 


0 Comments

Why They're Leaving

9/23/2014

0 Comments

 
Picture
Steve McSwain made a provocative statement about why people have left the church. He said, “They have left, not to abandon their faith, but precisely because they wish to preserve it.”

There are trends that support his thesis. Gallup polls reveal that 78% of Americans say that religion is fairly or very important to them. And 75% say that if Americans were more religious, it would be positive for American society. While there remains robust support for religion, apparently the church’s role in this is becoming less important. Church attendance has continued to decline with fewer than 20% attending church on Sundays.

As congregations seek to stem the tide of membership loss, some things have been learned along the way.

People will never be shamed into the pews. They seek the space to explore faith.  

Worship service makeovers (bring in the band!) aren’t enough. As Rachel Held Evans wrote, “What millennials really want from the church is not a change in style but a change in substance.”

People aren’t looking for churches that are relevant—though intentional irrelevance isn’t helpful! People want to belong to a community that is real—a place where you’re accepted for who you are and where you are in life.

Perhaps the waning interest in congregational life isn’t because of a growing skepticism about faith itself. Maybe it’s because of the character of the communities that have formed around faith. If so, the challenge before is not rethinking the faith. It is the call to reshape our communities so that they better embody the way of Jesus.  



0 Comments

Can We Be Spiritual Without Being Religious?

9/15/2014

0 Comments

 
Picture
Sam Harris is at it again. He’s created a buzz about spirituality vs. religion in his new book, Waking Up: A Guide to Spirituality Without Religion. In doing so he’s tapped into the hot topic that captured headlines last year:  the rise of the “nones” and the growing number who describe themselves as “spiritual but not religious.”

What is intriguing is that there is much being said about this without defining what is meant by “spiritual” and “religious.” Without creating a debate about meanings, it seems at its core that “spiritual but not religious” is shorthand for “I’m done with institutional religion but haven’t given up on the idea of something that transcends us.”

This is understandable because institutional religion is often perceived as the perpetuator of dogma and religious obligations. And the perceptions of these two things by the public are not pretty, as Dallas Willard captures well: “Dogma is what you have to believe, whether you believe it or not. And law [religious obligations] is what you must do, whether it is good for you or not.” With this understanding, who would want to be part of a religious institution?!

However, being spiritual and being religious share something in common: they both involve relationships. “Religion” involves shared beliefs and practices among people, and “spirituality” involves a connectedness to one’s self and others.  Because of this, those who are spiritual but not religious are finding ways to be in community. And if this is done for any sustained period of time, new institutions will emerge that have "religious" overtones because of the norms that are shared. And so the cycle continues. In the end, it may be hard to be spiritual but not religious.

Perhaps the message being sent by those who are spiritual but not religious is that they are not interested in rigid institutions that care little about people’s questions and struggles. Instead they would rather leave the institution and create alternative communities that embrace people for who they are and where they are in life.

This should be a wakeup call for the leaders of the institutional church. The institutional church may not survive in its current form, but there will always be a place for communities that provide spiritual belonging. 



0 Comments

What If Everyone Won?

9/8/2014

0 Comments

 
Picture
Nearly forty years ago, Richard Dawkins published the highly influential book The Selfish Gene. In it he says, “Be warned that if you wish, as I do, to build a society in which individuals cooperate generously and unselfishly towards a common good, you can expect little help from biological nature.” The reason: “because we are born selfish.” Even though Dawkins eventually softened his views, the notion of the selfish gene remains popular and continues to fuel our imaginations about who we are destined to become.

Take, for example, the popular program “Breaking Bad.” In an early episode the main character takes an instant dislike to someone he does not know. Walter White, a high school chemistry teacher diagnosed with cancer, has become a producer of methamphetamine, an addictive illegal drug. “Why” is the haunting question that gripped huge audiences for five years.

The answer surfaces when twice Walter sees a BMW convertible with “Ken Wins” on the license plate. While Ken shouts into his phone, full of self-importance, Walter sets a windshield washer on the battery. This produces an explosion that incinerates the BMW. Walter leaves with grim satisfaction on his face.

Both his trail of destruction and the show’s appeal crystallize in that scene. While claiming to seek money he can leave to his family, Walter’s motivation is revenge. He is tired of seeing other people win. He is convinced that he is smarter and should have been recognized adequately. He won’t rely on anyone again. He will outsmart everyone and even use people. As he slowly dies, he will create drugs to destroy others. Such is the depth of his anger.

Evil takes root in isolation and in feelings of being overlooked and dismissed. As Walter’s evil grows, alongside his cancer, he hides the secret of his drug production. Human contact becomes incidental to his obsession.

Belonging, as congregations encourage it, can counter such isolation. Worship, prayer, group discussions not only shape personal faith, they shape character. Here there can be reality checks. Here people can be honored and welcomed. Here you no longer feel alone or overlooked. Here you can learn that your actions affect others.

In congregations you can be forgiven and healed, especially amid crisis. That is the magic of belonging. Everyone can win.


0 Comments

Collecting "Friends"

9/2/2014

0 Comments

 
Picture
According to the Pew Research Center, 57% of American adults and 73% of those ages 12-17 use Facebook.  This is probably no surprise to anyone, but the way we engage “friends” is quite interesting.

The Pew study found that “Facebook users ‘like’ their friends’ content and comment on photos relatively frequently, but most don’t change their own status that often.” This may be because 36% of us are annoyed by people sharing too much information, and we’re equally annoyed at people posting things or pictures about us without our permission. Between our dislike of oversharing and posting without permission, it is no wonder we “like” posts more than we create them.

This makes us wonder about the nature of our relationship with our 338 Facebook friends (the average number for an adult—teens have far more!).  Before the rise of social media, it was perfectly obvious who a “friend” was. Friends lived down the street and sat in the same classroom. You worked with them and met them when they moved across the street. You knew their family and they knew yours. You walked similar paths and shared similar challenges.

But social media have scrambled “friendship.” Now “friends” can be electronic discoveries. It’s great to see what media “friends” have grown, cooked or where they have traveled. Sometimes we discover similar causes or concerns. Through our daily Facebook check in, we stay up to date with our network.  

Yet something is missing from these posts and pictures: genuine presence. Friends must be present to each other, fully present. Not always in person, of course. But once made, true friendship endures. Hundreds of electronic friends can be “unfriended” with just a click.

Social media certainly helps to be in vivid touch with people already “friended.” And social media can help to expand the circle based on common commitments and convictions. But genuine friendship needs physical presence. That’s when people truly discover, truly share, truly wrestle with challenges and celebrate triumphs.

At their best this is what congregations do. They build strong ties based on shared experience. Even more, congregations can shape experience, building common commitments and sharpening shared values. Even more, congregations alone can build hope. 


0 Comments

    William L. Sachs
    Michael S. Bos

    Following the trends that impact our lives.

    Archives

    March 2015
    February 2015
    November 2014
    October 2014
    September 2014
    August 2014

    Categories

    All
    Atheism
    Belonging
    Church Decline
    Conflict
    Friendship
    Generations
    Millennials
    Religion & Politics
    Religious Affiliation
    Selfishness
    Social Media
    Spirituality

    RSS Feed

Powered by Create your own unique website with customizable templates.