Who is missing at your Church?

"The important study underscored the growing tolerance in many directions--gender, sexual identity, race, and ethnicity--as perhaps the most constructive and attractive element of change in American religious communities, along with growing ethnic diversity and compassion for those in need.  But the same study also noted political use of religion and divisions along political, class, and racial and ethnic lines as what continues to drive people from membership and activity in congregations."

  --Michael Plekon in "Church As Community, Community as Church"

In my current role as Superintendent, I have the privilege of visiting quite a few churches.  Within the conference of churches to whom I am responsible, there is an incredible diversity of contexts and communities: house churches, African immigrant churches, Hispanic family churches, traditional rural churches, suburban churches, urban churches, small, medium and large churches, all centered around the denominational mission but with diverse expressions.

Almost every church, regardless of its context or configuration, will rate itself as friendly and inviting if asked.  A couple years ago, we asked our churches to do a self-assessment and found that most churches felt that they were hospitable and welcoming to most people in their respective communities.  The exception were churches that spoke primarily Spanish or Swahili (despite having interpreters present) and recognized that the language barrier would inhibit English speakers from visiting.

Yet, when you look at churches, or even denominations that see themselves as inclusive and hospitable, we often see monocultural, mono-ethnic, and socially homogenous communities.  This suggests that despite the perception of being hospitable, the surrounding community does not receive the faith community that way.  Where there are diverse congregations, it is more often gathered collections of homogeneity, leading separate lives, and expressing themselves independently of one another.  Pastor Curtiss Paul DeYoung describes the process of creating a new culture and identification without diminishing the culture of identity of those who are coming together as "Creolization" (Becoming Like Creoles, 2019). The phrase comes from the fact that the distinction of the Creole culture is that it is made up of multiple cultures (African, French, African-American, Southern American, etc) that express a unique culture.  Each contributing culture is not only unique but critical to the construction of the new culture.

Sociologist Dr. Kori Edwards studied multicultural and multiethnic congregations and found that often the churches were a reflection of the dominant culture, where non-dominant persons accommodate to the existing culture and their cultural identity is minimized and its expression is nearly non-existent. (The Elusive Dream, 2008).  Her research suggests that often church are welcoming to the extent that those who are outside the dominant culture are willing to adopt and adapt to the prevailing values of the dominant culture.

Many church leaders feel strongly about church and denominational values.  They know that it is imperative churches interrogate their values in order to understand what is forming its current church culture.  However, often it is the assumed values, that are invisible to the congregation and its leaders that literally block the congregation's ability to demonstrate true hospitality to its community.

Theologian Kar Yong Lim (Metaphors and Social Identity Formation in Paul's Letter To the Corinthians, 2017) states that "Paul's goal for the communities he planted was the formation of an alternative community with a distinct ethos that served as a visible manifestation of the transforming power of the gospel."  This alternative community was one that specifically challenged the imperial hierarchies of favored ethnicities, patriarchy, and classism (Gal 3:28).   The ethos was one of the "transforming  power of the gospel".  What is interesting is not only the people but their relationships are transformed.  How they see and treat each other is the context of spiritual formation and the demonstration of its legitimacy as a movement of God.

In regards to developing these kinds of community, Adam Russell Taylor (A More Perfect Union, 2021) adds "Exquisite mutuality is tied to the understanding that our full liberation and wholeness are inextricably linked to those of others, particularly the marginalized."  It means that the communities of the early church were examples of creolization, transformed relationships, and anti-imperial mutuality and interdependence.

Early churches welcomed people who would contribute to the culture, not accommodate to the existing culture.  Often, contemporary churches welcome people who can contribute to the existing culture but are unwilling to surrender its sacred cultural idols that may cause discomfort for the current majority. This is what the community around most churches recognizes.  The surrounding community feels they  are sought for the appearance of inclusivity or to fulfill the need of the church to ease its conscience, but not to come into community where they are needed so that the community can be whole.

In the twentieth century, people often belonged to communities of faith because they believed in the tenets of the community.  Now, people come to communities of faith where they feel they belong, hoping to see the beliefs of the church in action in order to assess the church's creditability and relevance.  So, a church that says it loves everyone and all are welcome but displays coldness to the poorer neighbors, or to those who are ethnically different and places no resources in issues that effect them, undermines its own values and is not a place of hospitality.  

As Greek Orthodox Priest and Sociologist Michael Plekon notes above, people in the United States, particularly young adults, are finding that they are unwelcome to churches (of all kinds) based upon cultural and political affinities.  Several years ago, a church we worked with, posted a social media message that said that no "liberal" people were welcome.  While I know this pastor was seeking to honor the values of what he perceived to Godly, it immediately stated that his political agenda was more important to him and the congregation that he led, than inviting people into a gospel-centered community of liberated diverse people in transformed relationships.  

The question for churches is not who is coming to your church, but who is missing?  Who are your neighbors who are not welcomed into your church?  Who has come regularly but is outside your dominant culture and has not been extended an opportunity to lead or shape the practices of the church?The same questions apply for denominations; who is missing?  Who has been part of the denomination for years but has never extended an opportunity to lead at the highest levels or bring culturally different ideas to bear?

Scripture challenges churches to not allow their "good" or their well intentions to be spoken of as "evil" or harmful. Churches are known in their communities for what they oppose over who they are for.  People want to know that your church is a place they can belong. A place of belonging is a place of transformed relationships, where people experience acceptance, significance, and security within a community where they can contribute.  

That is what it means to be a welcoming community.

Providing a place for people to belong and believe!