Content trumps style every time...

The always insightful - and often inspirational - writer, Diana Butler Bass, posted an article on FB this morning re: the growth of religious progressives in the united states. (check it out @ http://publicreligion. org/2013/07/the-growth-of-religious-progressives-and-the-future-of-the-american-religious-landscape)/) This certainly resonates with my experience in our small New England city where more and more people self-identify as "spiritual but not religious." They may have started life being raised in the religious tradition of their parents, but life circumstances and political realities have pushed them out of the fold and into the desert.

A recent survey conducted by PRRI and the Brookings Institution finds that Millennials (Americans age 18-33) are much more likely than previous generations not only to identify as nonreligious, but to be religious progressives.  (Even) younger Republicans are also less likely than older Republicans to be religious conservatives. More than two-thirds (68%) of Republicans 65 or older are religious conservatives, compared to less than half (46%) of Republicans under 40. Younger Republicans are twice as likely (15%) to identify as religious progressives or nonreligious than their older counterparts (7%).

My hunch is that this is as true among "millenials" as well as "gen-xers" - and this holds some challenging implications for our churches as Ms. Bass notes.

If millennials are religious progressives--as new research indicates--are churches and synagogues READY for them?  My take is "not quite." Too many churches are afraid to put progressive theology and social concerns out front. In addition, millennials twin their progressivism with what I'd call "open" ancient liturgy. And too many churches confuse their interest in liturgy with convention. But theirs is a beautiful, inventive combination -- geared toward the future while grounded in a hospitable rendering of the past.

In our on-going experiment in church renewal, I bump into this all the time -especially with those who choose to confuse style with liturgical content and function. Two examples come to mind:

+ After six years, on any given Sunday, there are now more people in worship who began their spiritual journey in liturgical churches - or no church - than those raised in traditional New England congregationalism.  This emerging majority seeks understanding, community and engagement during worship in contrast to liturgies emphasizing passive participation and/or quiet intellectual abstractions.  They want worship to be both God-centered AND useful in their ordinary lives rather than merely pretty and quiet.  

Two weeks ago, when we celebrated Eucharist by inviting people to come forward and gather with me in the Chancel around the communion table, the look of joy on the congregation's collective face as we sang was ecstatic.  Not only were we all physically close to one another - rather than spread out across a massive Sanctuary - but we could hear one another, too.  We could look in one another's eyes as we passed the bread and chalice to our neighbor.  We could touch and hold real hands as we prayed.  In fact, we could speak to one another, too.  Afterwards, most people told me how moving and important sharing Eucharist was in this way - we could actually feel like we were part of the Living Body of Christ - they said.  And, as I expected, after most had left someone else told me that there was no beauty to this Eucharist - there's too much bumbling and interaction - to which I said, "Why do you think we call it communion?"  There is a division between style and content that we must continue to address and resolve if our churches are going to be places of true hospitality and welcome to the next generation.

+ Reading scripture in worship:  why do we do it?  Many people who don't have much background in the Bible are perplexed both by the number of readings we share each week (usually the 4 from the Common Lectionary) as well as the actual words proclaimed.  That's why for the last five years we've been using more of Eugene Peterson's "The Message" than the New Revised Standard Version.  Some old timers like to remind me, however, that they miss the elegant poetry of other versions and wish we could return to the words they know and love so well.  Again, the challenge of style over content, yes?  So I've experimented - reading fewer lessons and pairing the NRSV with the Message, inviting people to bring their own Bibles with them to read along with me, etc. - but over time have found that this, too is a no win situation.  So, I've opted for content over style and emphasize texts that contemporary people can easily grasp.

This Sunday, I will be using St. Luke's retelling of the Lord's Prayer with the main point being:  Jesus gave us an OUTLINE for creating our own prayers rather than a formal POEM to be recited.  I am actually going to go through the outline's form and then invite us to rewrite the Lord's Prayer using the outline offered in scripture.  It isn't likely to be a pretty as the refined prayer handed down in King James language, but I hope it will be useful as people learn how to create and write their own prayers to the Lord.  We shall see...
There are a LOT of hungry and hurting people all around who want to be a part of a community of compassion.  Last night, listening to Mary Chapin-Carpenter and Marc Cohn in concert, I heard a vulnerable and wounded soul growing strong after facing the valley of the shadow of death - and inviting us to own our wounds, too.  It was a little bit of church in an old Berkshire theatre.  Her songs - and those of much younger artists, too - are one way of sharing the love of God and the hope of grace with those who are hurting and searching. 

The way I see it, in all things, content trumps style every time, just as grace trumps karma.