We have a tradition of dressing up nicer than usual on Sunday. Like all traditions it can erode or become adjusted. Surely the "dress code" in churches has been modified to the point it really isn't enforced at all. A certain proportion sticks to the old standard and you'll see suits and ties. Many people, however, even affluent people with standing, will dress in a "casual Friday" manner. My generation of the boomers gave the world "casual Fridays." You can dress downright grubby and no one is likely to confront you about it, though many will have private skeptical feelings.
Young families come to church with their very young children. Some of these parents are thoughtful enough to at least make minimal gestures, to remove loud infants from the sanctuary. I have personally made this an issue at the church where I have attended in the past. You are at great risk of being rejected if you make comments about this.
The issue grated on me, so I brought it up with a friend in the congregation who I found agreed with me. Furthermore she contacted the pastor about it. The pastor whose own presentations had been practically destroyed by loud kids, was 100 percent non-receptive to my friend. I have a theory that students in seminary are coached to not confront the offending parents at all. Church leaders know there are valid concerns about this. But the church knows how to take care of its own interests. So the leaders weigh the risks - the risks of people like me being alienated by the noise, vs. the risk of alienating young families and their friends - and realize that deference must be made to the young families. More damage would be done in alienating them.
The arguments in favor of the young families are so strong: "Youth is the future of the church." Whereas, my argument would be that if I'm attending church and contributing money to it, I'd like to hear what the people are saying from the front of the sanctuary.
I will go so far as to say that many of the young parents are downright inconsiderate and they know full well the disruption they are causing. They must feel their own narrow interests override all others. They want their feel-good experience of getting all dolled up and bringing their precious little urchins to the sanctuary, just for the experiential benefit.
If someone like me is going to be offensive to them, well I surely don't have to be there. An ideal solution is to have a glassed-in nursery at the rear of the sanctuary. I really do value the presence of the young parents and their kids, as long as accommodations can be made for everyone. I won't state the name of my church here. It has been through cutbacks. It long had two services every Sunday but now it has one. The staff has surely been downsized.
It had a rocky experience with a pastor who didn't work out, not that there was anything offensive about his personality, just that he didn't seem to have his heart in being here. Strange. We had four short-term pastors in a row. All this began after an iconic pastor left us. I'd argue this is a problem: to have a pastor who everyone thinks is the greatest thing since sliced bread.
First off, no pastor should be placed this high on a pedestal, because really, "the people are the church." I would argue the pastor just facilitates, and this is surely important. The fellowship among parishioners is the prime element.
A proper nursery would enable the young parents with their urchins to come, not be disruptive and still feel like they're a part of the service. I'm sure many churches have this, or at least have a better nursery than in my church. Ours is essentially a small room across the commons area from the sanctuary. I am told that the audio hookup from the sanctuary to the nursery is not working. We had a prominent church member a few years back who died and bequeathed something like a half-million dollars to the church. What gives?
The Lutheran faith in the Morris community was disrupted a few years back by the creation of a new church, due to what was generally believed to be the revolt vs. synod policies on gay people. This was very unfortunate. It also seems like such yesterday's news, i.e. questioning gay rights. It was merely a matter of basic rights. The issue should have come and gone with recognition that the proper course was followed. Indeed a whole new church was formed for reasons that could be described as political.
And this underscores a primary issue for the whole Christian faith now. It came forward in spades in the last 24 hours with President Trump's spokesperson, Sarah Sanders, saying "God wanted Trump to be president." I would venture to say that most professional clergy cringed at this pronouncement. Professional clergy know full well about one of their key challenges today: to attract the interest of millennials, i.e. the future of the church. Many millennials are highly turned off by this perceived closeness of Christianity and right wing politics. It alienates a great many. The anti-gay effort was part of that. It's hardly worth talking about anymore.
When my church was in its search process for our current minister, we had a synod spokesman come and say we ought to consider a gay or lesbian pastor. "They have a lot to offer," this synod spokesman said. She also said we should consider someone with a foreign accent. She said seminary enrollment was way down. Is this because of the alienation factor caused by the perceived wedding of Christianity and right wing reactionary politics?
If this wedding is as real as it sometimes seems, as underscored by Sarah Sanders' comments, it makes me wonder if our public schools should continue honoring "church night" of Wednesday. Why should our public schools put its imprimatur on this? Is it a legal requirement? Is it just understood? I understand it's difficult to wedge in all the music concerts in a proper way amidst the sea of sports commitments on the school calendar. It would be advantageous to open up Wednesday and make it a day like any other. As opposed to making it a day when churches including the very fundamental ones can assert themselves with their agenda that can be anti-gay and pro-Donald Trump.
For the life of me, I don't see the connection between spiritual virtues and the character of Donald Trump. Am I in some sort of weird nightmare?
Do I even have to mention the travails of the Catholic church, the way this institution has been too passive while its clergy under the bizarre system of celibacy - crazy - have caused unspeakable harm to countless youth? I thought young people were the biggest treasure of the church.
A priest out in Boise ID was recently sentenced to 25 years in prison. Twenty-five years! Here's a man who was put on a pedestal of clergy. People give money to that church. The next time the Pope comes to the U.S., I would like to see the media totally ignore it. Who says the Pope speaks for Christians anyway?
So, you have 1) the politically right wing-associated element, 2) the perverse and outdated Catholic church, and 3) what else? You have the ELCA of the Lutheran faith which is really quite palatable. It can get decried as too "soft." That's part of the problem. So what is the solution?
I have to say that the atheists associated with our University of Minnesota-Morris are onto something. I think they'd argue that religion causes more problems than it can address in a positive way. Is it totally archaic?
Or, here's a better question: what would Jesus Christ himself say if he were to appear today and survey the Christian faith in the U.S.? How would Christ react to Sarah Sanders (Huckabee)? Would he tell the Catholics to toss out celibacy completely? How could he not? I think he'd say it's a shame his faith seems to foment so much conflict, conflict that would not exist if there were no religion. Religion is supposed to reveal our better nature. It is not achieving that at all.
Maybe we go to church because it just seems natural on Sunday, a day when we aren't inclined to "work." As time goes by, Saturdays and Sundays seem slowly to be blended into other days of the week. Professional services are easier to obtain on Sunday now than years ago. Perhaps as the popular notion of "weekend" fades, so will our inclination to go to church as a "natural thing." Working on weekends? It should be an option. But workers need protection from the abuse of overwork naturally. People's work schedules can be "staggered" of course. I'm sure many people have no issue with working on "weekends."
Faith? If this is important to you, it can be nurtured in ways outside of traditional churchgoing. Traditional Christianity can be totally acceptable. But Christians must be tolerant and gentle people, not oppressive and not with narrow political views that don't reflect scripture at all. A political "liberal," progressive or social democrat can easily invoke the life and teachings of Christ, right? Right, all you Apostolics? We all just need to wake up.
Of course, the crying and screaming infants in the sanctuary - what my friend refers to as the "screaming brats" - will surely keep us awake.
- Brian Williams - morris mn minnesota - bwilly73@yahoo.com
