Menu Close

“You are going to feel like hell if you never write the stuff that is tugging on the sleeves of your heart — your stories, visions, memories, visions and songs. Your truth, your version of things, your own voice. That is really all you have to offer us. And that’s also why you were born.”
Anne Lamott

“You are going to feel like hell if you never write the stuff that is tugging on the sleeves of your heart — your stories, visions, memories, visions and songs. Your truth, your version of things, your own voice. That is really all you have to offer us. And that’s also why you were born.”
Anne Lamott

Category: THE CHURCH

Church and the Battle for Attention

George 0 Comments

…the Church is not on the right path so long as it adapts itself to the present; nor is it on the right path as long as it holds fast to the past. 
How do we know the Church is on the right path? — … the Church is headed in the right direction when, whatever the age in which it lives, the Gospel of Jesus Christ is its criterion..

Hans Kung – The Church

For years I’ve been concerned church is headed in the wrong direction. Church is an easy target, so it is not difficult find others willing to get on the bandwagon. We identify many problem but with no clear consensus on THE problem or WHY. I recently came across an essay entitled The Great Malformation: A personal skirmish in the battle for attention. Riffing on the article, I believe it connects some dots that help, in part, to explain why church is on not on the right path. Not THE problem, but a problem and perhaps insight to why.
In the article The Battle for Attention caught my attention (pun intended) and is the subject of this post. I encourage you to read the entire essay, however “The Battle for Attention” section is available below

The-Battle-for-AttentionDownload

Introduction
Western civilization, experienced a transformation in which economy, the pursuit of profits, engulfed and disfigured the culture. The church was also engulfed and disfigured. The engine for that cultural transformation has been: human attention.
Pursuit of profits has made attention exceedingly valuable and hotly contested. It is hard to think of any other “commodity”— that is as crucial to success in contemporary culture.
It is, then, a matter of no small consequence that human attention is now so heavily exploited.
Churches no longer enjoying “market” domination and compelled by FOMO; recognizing the power of attention and its crucial role in their “success”, joined the battle for attention.

The Battle for Attention – Marketplace examples of the battle for attention:

As marketers, we face a difficult task. It is up to us to ensure that the company’s brand awareness increases, that leads are generated and turned into sales and customers understand the products and services that the company provides.
At the same time, we have less opportunity to gain the customers’ attention as the amount of information increases.
Twenty years ago, Microsoft conducted a study that showed a person’s attention span, on average, was about 12 seconds before becoming distracted. 5 years ago, this time span was down to 8 seconds.
A  study from DTU  concluded in 2019 that people’s attention span will continue to decrease as we are bombarded with more and more information.
We have become accustomed to the fact that there are always new things, stories, and updates that we need to keep an eye on. It goes beyond our ability to concentrate and our ability to stay focused on what is right in front of us.
And that does not make our task as marketers any easier.

https://marketingplatform.com/resources/the-battle-for-attention/

How to win the battle for attention – despite distractions that bring instant gratification
Kirsten Back (MBA, MA)
Last week, I heard it again: “your audience has an attention span that only lasts a few seconds!”
Let me put that into context for you with regards to the content that you create and want your audience to read, remember, and act upon.
Your ideal scenario is that your ideal clients, notice your post, read it with focus and intention, remember the points you are making, and then reflect and act upon your content.
For that, you need to draw their attention, keep them engaged, understand your message, process your message, remember your message, take an action or get a positive outcome from your content that carries into their future.
That’s a lot that you expect from your audience (and that your audience expects from your content).
In this post, I am going to look into what your content is competing with and how you can win that competition with better content that your audience finds valuable and desirable enough to consume with their full attention.

https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/how-win-battle-attention-despite-distractions-bring-back-mba-ma-

Church and the Battle for Attention .

Churches’ decision to engage in the battle for attention carries significant risks and consequences:

Loss of capacity for sustained attention
Paradoxically, subjects of intense competition for their attention may suffer a loss of capacity for sustained attention. Because of increased screen time, it appears competition for attention contributes to increased diagnosis of ADHD. Eventually, people subjected to perpetual assault for their attention will disengage and zone out.

Risk of distraction / redirection/ backlash
Rather than addressing spiritual needs, leaders in a battle for attention assume responsibility for creating desire.
Commitment to a battle for attention inherently redirects priority for worthy goals to the task of creating better ad content to capture people’s attention. Creating desire, at a minimum, is a distraction, at worst, can become a substitute for the core mission— means become the ends.
Battle for attention influences every facet of church life
Some want mitigate the risk of engaging in the battle for attention by arguing if we can get people’s attention the gospel can be shared. Assuming “click bait” that grabs attention of post -modern people will make them open to the gospel is not wise. When “click bait” churches employ is in tune with secular desires, it can produce a ” bait and switch” backlash when the gospel is presented.

Unplanned enculturation of children and re-enculturation of adults
Churches engaging in the battle for attention should recognize the power of winning attention to shape the culture, children and adults. They need look no further than the effects of social media, smartphones, virtual experiences including video games on our psyches . There is potential to penetrate every passing moment of people’s lives. It is a bad bet for churches to place their money on winning the battle for attention; particularly when winning results in sated consumers not converts.
Subjects of the battle for attention face “a hydraulic insistence on conformity to majoritarian standards”. Campaigns to sustain unreflective allegiance of people to the prevailing form of religious life; interfere with parents efforts to pass along their convictions and way of life to their children; essentially limiting their free exercise of religion.

Consumerist proslelytism (i.e. battle for attention)
The nature of consumerist proselytism does not require true believers. It does require attention brokers willing to convey a message that consumption is a centrally important pathway to the happy life. Their task is to provide a picture of the good life and an ideological justification for seeking it. They can make their messages maximally effective, even if they do not believe what they are peddling to be good or on spite of any distaste they might have for the process. Increasingly, criteria for hiring church staff’ include qualifications of attention brokers.

There is a lot to think about and certainly debatable, bringing attention to the “the battle of attention” will hopefully generate thought and productive conversation. Future posts will address the implications of abandoning “the battle for attention” and what church might look like as a “loser”.
Feedback is appreciated.

STILL ON THE JOURNEY

This post is a continuation of posts on THE CHURCH from 2021 and 2022. Some earlier posts were added to the category. All sixteen posts can be read HERE.

The Myth of a Safe Place

George 0 Comments

Myth of a Safe Place

“Do not trust in these deceptive words: ‘This is the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord, the temple of the Lord.’”  Jeremiah 7:4 ESV

I do not know anyone who is unconcerned about children’s safety. Safety is paramount in our society. What differs today from past decades is pervasive distrust. In the parenting phase of our life (60-80’s) there were places we trusted as safe places for our children — family, church, neighborhood, school — cautious, sometimes suspicious, our default was trust. Social and cultural changes in the intervening decades, shifted parental default, for good reasons, to distrust. Each default has negative consequences. Negative results of naive trust are obvious. Distrust, though less obvious, has negative consequences of a different nature. What both have in common is the misconception that there are safe places for children.  Safe places are a myth. Wide spread evidence clearly establishes occurrences of sexual abuse in places thought to be safe. A reality that can produce unhealthy paranoia and paralysis.
Of course, no organization would declare itself unsafe, but it is disingenuous to portray themselves as safe. Establishing policies and procedures to assure safety; all necessary t0 protect organizations in a litigious society, ultimately fail to achieve a 100% safe place. 

Thinking about commercial airlines may be helpful.  Flying is a risky business. I’ve never flown and not thought about the possibility of crashing, but I fly without fear. Airline procedures inherently communicate the possibility of crashing, pre-flight instructions — fasten seat belts — in case of emergency… et al. You can even buy life insurance at the gate. Passengers converse about the possibly of crashing. As far as I can tell, no major airline proclaims to be safe (except for COVID 19). No matter how low the probability, there is no question of their concern and awareness of the possibility of crashing. Measures to make flights safe are obvious. Risk is a part of normal conversations, as a result, passengers and employees are aware and vigilant.
Airlines are diligent about safety policy and procedures but do not claim, or imply, no risk.  Transparency prompts responsibility which gives passengers confidence in their safety. Risk can never be eliminated but can be minimized.

Sadly, human organizations… communities, neighborhoods, churches, families… cannot eliminate sexual abuse.  

Taking cues from commercial airlines, following are suggestions on how churches can become safer communities.

  • Educate leadership, staff and congregants on the prevalence of sexual abuse and its impact on individuals and society. 
  • Create a community ethos defined by concern for safety — offering reliability, honesty, and credibility.
  • Eliminate all pretense of being a safe place.
  • Understanding their limitations, develop and implement appropriate prevention policies and procedures.
  • Cultivate and reward communication that encourages consistent and healthy dialogue about sexual abuse.
  • When prevention fails, respond with transparency.
  • Always make compassion for victims the first priority.

In the course of thinking about the myth of a safe place and developing a framework for safer communities, there were numerous contributors of ideas and thoughts worthy of sharing for further consideration developing and maintaining safer communities. 

The bigger the church, the less transparency when things go wrong. And the greater the harm done.
Matt Redmond

Language has power.  How we speak to each other is the medium through which a more positive future is created or denied. As we engage in conversation the questions we ask and the speaking that they evoke constitute powerful action. The questions we ask will either maintain the status quo or bring an alternative future into the room. The Answer to How Is Yes – Peter Block

More than anything else, being able to feel safe with other people defines mental health; safe connections are fundamental to meaningful and satisfying lives. Being validated by feeling heard and seen is a precondition for feeling safe…
 
There is ultimately a (steep) pastoral cost to be paid for being a community that serves individuals and communities only in the aftermath of their wounding. The question that many victims of trauma ask the church is not “where are you now?” but instead ask “why didn’t someone protect me or prevent this from happening to me?”.

…ecclesial communities can pivot from being primarily the field hospital [reactive] towards becoming an exponentially impactful agent for the transformation of its own life and the larger society in which it is located. 
While moral injury is not a clinical diagnosis it is recognized in the clinical literature that there is a concrete need of something akin to forgiveness and remission of the things that to the individual are wrong or sinful. 
…by centering the traumatized and the vulnerable in our communities we are able to better identify with the God who meets us in our woundedness still bearing his wounds, and can come alongside those most susceptible to injury as defenders and interrupters that push back the darkness.
Theology of Prevention – Michael Hanegan

Assigning individual blame gives to the public an illusion of safety and preventability, whilst isolating an already often guilt-ridden traumatized individual.

The Christian community’s own response can socially exacerbate trauma, where, “religious and spiritual beliefs change from a possible source of healing to another weapon in an overwhelming onslaught
A true theology of compassion must embrace a theology and practice of lament, both for the traumatized individual and community. 

…friendship may be refused in the malaise of an individual’s trauma, it is better the offer be present than absent. Even from a distance it can be comforting to realize that a special community is orientating its practices because it acknowledges your pain; that fact alone can be immensely winsome for post-traumatic social re-integration.

Pastoral sensitivity to the needs of traumatized congregants will give apt direction to a form of worship which duly acknowledges the weight of burden that, some will feel, defies being translated into speech. Such sensitivity may avoid the pressure that most Evangelical forms of worship, requiring audible/cognitive participation for the worshipper to feel a co-participant, can create. This can be due either to incessant singing of praise choruses or a demanding cognitive focus on verbal preaching. 
“Trauma, Compassion, and Community” – Roger P Abbott

It is apparent to me that the challenge of building safer communities encompasses more than policies and procedures and will necessitate re-thinking fundamental assumptions. Churches will be faced with a need to examine assumptions about every aspect of their faith. Which, in part, explains the continued epidemic of sexual abuse in faith communities.   

STILL ON THE JOURNEY

THE CHURCH (10)

George 0 Comments

This post is a break from Hans Kung and Real Church to share a post by Richard Beck in which he suggest transitions he would like to see in the church.

Transitions for Church

I would like the church to begin making the following transitions:

  • Choice to Character
  • Rhetoric to Behavior Change
  • Trying to Training
  • Evangelism to Moral Formation
  • Missions to Social Justice
  • Moral Blame to Moral Luck

Choice to Character: I think the church makes mistakes when she is overly confident in her appeals to choice. The church should rather focus on the formation of character and the acquisition of virtue. 

Rhetoric to Behavior Change: Elaborating further, character is not formed by persuasive rhetoric (i.e., a weekly appeal from the pulpit to be a good person). Rhetoric is excellent for changing opinions and, thus, an excellent tool for improving doctrine. But it is a poor tool for transforming the lives in the pew. That is, we are NOT volitionally nimble. We possess characterological inertia and causal forces will need to be brought to bear upon us to form us into the image of Christ. The word form (as in mold or shape) nicely captures the idea. We don’t choose. We are formed.

Trying to Training: Thus, the focus of Kingdom living is less about “trying to be a better person” (via what William James called a “slow heave of the will”) than about “training to be a better person.” Church should be a kind of boot camp for Kingdom living.

Evangelism to Moral Formation: What I mean here is an evangelism that is volitionally-based, the traditional “Do you accept Jesus as your Lord and Savior? Yes or no?.” The move should be to what Jesus asked for in the Great Commission: “Make disciples.” Again, the word make gets at the idea very well.

Missions to Social Justice: These last two go together. Mission work should move away from “persuasion models” to actually changing the world. The question for missionaries should shift from “How many souls were saved?” to “How have you transformed that community into the Kingdom of God?” 

Moral blame to Moral Luck: We shift from seeing the moral landscape as populated by the “righteous” and the “blameworthy” to seeing the “fortunate” and the “unfortunate.” As Immanuel Kant said: “And how many there are who may have lead a long blameless life, who are only fortunate in have escaped so many temptations.”

If we make this shift, from strong volitional to weak volitional models, what gets lost? Actually very little. And the gains are enormous. By embracing causality and the contingent nature of will–by focusing on Character over Choice–the church might actually start being more effective (a nice causal word) in this world. We will rely less and less on God Talk and more and more on, well, actually doing things. You know, make a difference.

But what does get lost in this shift away from strong volitional models is a robust sense of moral blame or praise. In the contingent picture I paint you can’t take credit for your good character and neither can we “blame” others for poor character. Yet much of Christian theology seems to hinge on notions of moral praise and blame. Particularly soteriological visions of Heaven and Hell. 

Of course, Beck is not the final word on THE CHURCH, but I believe he provides some thoughtful and important insights into the nature and character of the church today. His suggested transitions are worthy of serious consideration.

Still on the Journey