Someone objected to the use of that term as being negative. Others agreed. The other term often bandied about is “nones”, i.e. those who would write “none” when asked their religious affiliation. We all agreed that those two terms were negative, even if not intentionally so, and that they tended to reinforce the us-them divide.
After some back and forth about those terms and how we might better describe those who have no faith background, it occurred to me that there is a very accurate, value-neutral term that describes them perfectly: “most people.” We laughed at the time, but I think using that term can help us find the layout of church walls in our own lives.
Although we can't assume that most people have an accurate knowledge of the Episcopal church in Western Washington, most people I know have a high regard for it. Most people I know, while perhaps they can't name specifics, have told me to the effect that the Episcopal Church has an excellent reputation.
Most people I know aren't religious. Or perhaps more accurately, most people I know aren't aware that they are. Religious impulses are human impulses, and if most people don't find an existing structure or mechanism for realizing those impulses, I assure you they will make something up. I've seen that happen at every so-called “civil” wedding ceremony I've attended.
While no one is suggesting tearing down actual church walls (that would be structural, and here at OCW we don't do structure!), I think it is vital that we communicate everything we do to most people. If we don't do that, we are expecting most people to read our minds. That's not only unrealistic, its passive.
This communication can be individual, as we interact with most people we know in our own lives. It can also be corporate, as we embark on community conversations throughout the diocese in our community conversations. It can also be by example, as most people we know will be evaluating the Episcopal Church based on how they see us living our lives within the larger community of this region and the world.
Merry Christmas!
Brad
Brad
Brad, I'd like to hear that elevator speech sometime...
ReplyDeleteSo you're having a training about how to hold these conversations. Are they going to be held elsewhere in the Diocese, or just more of the same Seattle-centric stuff?
ReplyDeleteHi Josefina,
ReplyDeleteSeattle is in the middle, so it is probably equally inconvenient for those who live elsewhere (I know because I live 90 miles away). If you or others at your parish need help with community conversations, an Outside Church Walls team member will come to you. Just let me know.
Hi John,
ReplyDeleteMy elevator speech varies with the audience, of course. Having said that, the following is from a letter I sent to the president of a large university's student body:
"I'm aware that 70% of the population of the Pacific Northwest are second generation with no church affiliation. With that in mind, here's the elevator speech: we Episcopalians value scripture of course, but also tradition and reason. Isaac Newton was an Anglican clergyman and theologian, as were several of the founders of the Royal Society, which was the earliest institution organized for the promotion of science. Charles Darwin studied at the University of Cambridge to become an Anglican clergyman. The Episcopal Church maintains this tradition, requiring its clergy to hold university as well as seminary degrees and supporting many university chaplains and lively debate. Our Presiding Bishop (national president) is a woman, a scientist, and an airplane pilot. The Episcopal Church has also taken the lead in social issues that matter to young people, such as calling for marriage equality."