Shouting into the vacuum has gotten me the attention I deserve.

If you don’t read Slate’s Dear Prudence column, you should. However, please take a minute to read this week’s, especially the second letter from “Church Newbies”.

Something about her advice seemed right, but not right. I sent a reply, and with her permission I’m posting here the exchange.

Dear Prudence,

I started reading your column a few years ago when I was a new pastor. Your thoughtful and considerate manner of approaching questions has helped me develop into a better problem-solver. As much as I enjoy your column for its own sake, it has been a wonderful professional tool for me, as well. So I am thrilled to be able to offer you a perspective that you might have missed in your advice to the Church Newbies in your August 28 column. As a pastor, I understand that the perception of the church by the outside world (and by many within it) is as a place to serve its members. Such inappropriate behavior from the older couple would be tolerated in most churches because “oh, that’s just how they are and you’ll learn to ignore it.” Perhaps this would even be the advice the priest gives. (If so, I would definitely suggest that the Newbies find a new church.)

However, we live in a world that is very different than it was twenty or even ten years ago. Many churches (and, if this church is reaching out to enough unchurched people that they have a new member class, it might be one of these churches) are taking hard and often uncomfortable looks at themselves to identify what turns away prospective members. Often, these churches understand that long-tolerated inapproproate behavior from well-loved members has to change. Of course, the Newbies need to begin by letting the older couple know how uncomfortable their actions make them, but even if it ceases, I would urge them to let the priest know. There are two main reasons this needs to be known. First, if this older couple might one day serve in some sort of an official capacity, their actions might leave the church open to lawsuits. Second, if I were in the priest’s position, I would want to know so I could keep an eye out for the older couple and try to help them understand the detrimental effect their behavior is having on the church’s attempts to reach out to new members. If the church is serious about evangelism, then it will want to address exactly these kinds of issues, even if they are this uncomfortable.

Many churches are working hard to change the perception that they are a place to serve their members, trying instead to be seen as institutions ordained by God to change the world. If even the sweetest, kindest, longest-standing members of that church are doind something to damage that effort, then I think the priest would want to know. Sorry for being so long-winded, but I thank you for your time in reading this and for all the work you put into your column.

Blessings,
The Rev. Joshua Williams

Dear Rev. Williams,
You are right (no surprise!) and I am wrong. I do think the younger couple should first seek to deal with this themselves. But you’re right, one way of finding out if this church is right for them is seeing how the priest deals with it — not just leaving.
Thanks for the enlightenment,
Prudie

Dear Prudence,
I didn’t mean to imply that your were wrong in your advice. I don’t know if you have any church affiliation, but the assumptions you had are fairly common ones, among the churched and unchurched, and, in most cases, fairly accurate. Many churches, however, are trying to change that perception, and I hope that this is one of them. Thanks for your reply. It really perked up my day.
Blessings,
Joshua Williams

Dear Rev. Williams,
I do think you are right and that the couple should deal with this both themselves and with their priest.
We do belong to a synagogue — fortunately when we joined none of the older couples gave our rear ends a squeeze!
I usually do an end-of-the-year wrap up going over my responses that readers took issue with. Could I quote you by name (absolutely no problem if you don’t want me to) on this question?
Thanks
Prudie

That lengthy exchange was pretty cool. (Be sure to check out her year-end wrap-up for more of the same Joshy wisdom.) As I tried to say in the e-mails, this seems like such a common (mis?)perception about the church. Prudie thought of churches as places that honor their members. If a long-standing member is doing something to make new members uncomfortable, then the new members better either shut up and learn to deal with it or leave. This is similar to the situation at my last church, where it was my fault that I wasn’t capitulating to the psychosis of life-long member. (Gotta bring everything back to me, huh?)

I’ve read several books about this, but this really hit home. A very well-informed, “churched” or “synagogued”, professional giver of advice, perceives churches completely wrongly. Of course, the sad thing is, she doesn’t. It really shows you what we’re up against. The failure of the church in this culture is because enough people now are unchurched that we don’t get the benefit of the doubt.

If you’re a big David Bowie fan, like me, you can look at one of his lesser albums, let’s say Reality, and see what he tried to do with it. You can still see it as a work of art, even if it isn’t avery good one. If you aren’t a Bowie fan, and you just happen to pick up Reality bcause it’s in stock and you want to see what all the fuss is about Bowie, you’ll listen to it and think he isn’t very good. (Check out Pharyngula for some very good, very harsh, and sometimes over-the-top criticism of Christianity on similar grounds.)

The same is true with the church. Those of us within the church can look past its foibles, such as the weirdness of the older couple in the story, and look at how they proclaim or fail to proclaim Christ, and take steps to recify that. However, those not familiar with the church will see their actions as typical of church people and will not be surprised if the priest fails to do anything about it. I suspect those few of you who read this blog would be horrified if someone assumed this about you.

But why would people be unsurprised by this? Because it is what we have said we are at least sine the rise of Christendom in the US following WWII. There are enough people out there who have never heard of David Bowie that if all they hear is Reality or Hours they’ll think he’s a bad musician, and with somewhat good reason. We have become an institution committed to saying “peace, peace” where there is no peace.