Church Rejection Hurts…
As I was Googling “Christianity” and “Church” last night I stumbled across www.RejectionHurts.com, “an online community where people can share their personal stories of how they felt unwanted or alienated by organized religion.”
The site is produced by the United Church of Christ and includes all sorts of testimonies from the Church-Burned.
One post reads…
“…one Sunday, my mother convinced me to go to church with her. Everything was fine until the sermon. It was about the ’signs of death in the church’. According to the sermon, the worst was divorce and that those that divorce are going to hell. I was furious. I had done nothing wrong, and I was being told I was going to hell. I turned to my mother, told her I was leaving and would never again set foot in that church…”
Another says…
“…we attended a loving church for over a decade, but when the congregation discovered my homosexuality, I noticed that I had begun to become somewhat segregated from the rest of the church community, and when the clergy began distributing propaganda about the “detestable wickedness†of homosexuals, and similar literature that was blatantly homophobic and hateful to lesbians and gays, I simply quit going to church and over a year I had adopted a rage-filled, agnostic approach to God and religion…”
I love the idea of this website and the tone it takes. However, after reading quite a few of the posts, I realized that almost all of the stories resolved with a “and then I found the UCC Church!” happy ending. Now, I can’t fault UCC for this evangelism tactic. In fact, I think it’s in pretty good taste. But what I love about ChurchRater.com (shameless self-affirmation here!) is that we’re not run by a church and we don’t demand happy endings. We acknowledge that for many, many (too many) people, the “church experience” ends with wounding and bitterness. Reality isn’t always rosey and I GUARANTEE there is no church or denomination that has found “The Answer” to not hurting people.
I’d encourage you to check out www.RejectionHurts.com and think about what is and is not affective or valuable for visitors…
Â
Comment by: Jim
1 10/12/06 5:09 PM | Comment Link |Marketers would argue that it would be more effective for UCC if they did not directly associate with the “happy ending syndrome” since it has been tried and found untrustworthy (too say nothing about being tacky and obvious) but rather leave the ending unfinished.
Everyone who reads the site can see for themselves that it is a UCC site
Comment by: NCxian
2 10/13/06 5:30 AM | Comment Link |Yes, it is clear that the site is a UCC site. Since they are being transparent about it, I think it makes it not offensive.
It is probably an effective way to advertise that your church/denomination has a wide Range of Acceptable Answers. It says to folks, if this is what you are looking for, then perhaps you should try UCC.
If I have a quibble with it, it is that there is a hint of “mudslinging” about it. Its appeal rests on showing how bad people are treated at other churches. I’m sure it is absolutely true, but this is not necessarily taking the high road. I don’t know . . . maybe it has to said, nonetheless. “If a wide ROAA is what you are looking for–and not the stuff found in some other churches–then come try UCC”.
The stories are a useful supplement to our discussion here–what is it that puts off people about church?
Comment by: Pam Sardar
3 10/13/06 9:45 AM | Comment Link |People hurt people inside of church or out and I include UCC…I guess I would say more than a hint of mudslinging and I find it a little distasteful. I think people are put off by church because it is usually a group trying really hard to look and be perfect when all of us know that none of us are.
Comment by: Peter Walker
4 10/13/06 10:07 AM | Comment Link |Yes NCxian,
I think it falls right in line with a lot of what we discuss here: “what turns you off?” Of course Mike O. reminds us to ask, “But what’s WORKING? What’s GOOD?” And that’s important, but there are plenty of self-satisfied Christian resources out there if we want self-congratulation. We have to present both sides.
I agree that the UCC is being somewhat creative in their approach, and I especially like the TV commercials they’ve produced. My evangelical side says they probably go too far in being as “inoffensive” as possible. Sooner or later, Jesus Christ wants to turn over our tables.
But for anyone who wants to bash them for being “too liberal” I would say that such extremes are merely products of the opposite pendulum swing. Conservative fundamentalism births liberal fundamentalism and vice-versa. If the Church created a healthy environment wrought with the complexity, mystery and (dare I say) gray area of Truth/Grace/Law/Freedom/Love I don’t believe we’d have to have such extremes. Humility would lead us to recognize the chaotic nuances of an existential reality - we could speak all these things (Truth/Grace/Law/Freedom/Love) at once and dying to ourselves, understand we’ll never completely “get it.”
But I’m a hopeless idealist…
Bonhoeffer would slap me.
Comment by: Peter Walker
5 10/13/06 10:18 AM | Comment Link |Pam, good point.
I think UCC and many churches on the left pendulum-swing lose site of real, genuine “health” and exchange it for all-encompassed enabling. Do we not deal with addictions or dysfunction because we’ve become obsessed with a false, idyllic environment of “tolerance”?
And I love what South Park (forgive me, showing my age here) says about “tolerance.”
Hmmmm, maybe that’s not particularly profound, but I felt like quoting “South Park.”
Comment by: KSG
6 10/13/06 11:27 AM | Comment Link |Peter, great comments in #4 & 5.
The problem with ‘fundamentalism’ is that it creates prideful reactionaries.
Where is the “truth in tension”?
Comment by: Brent
7 10/13/06 5:39 PM | Comment Link |I think UCC and many churches on the left pendulum-swing lose site of real, genuine “health” and exchange it for all-encompassed enabling. Do we not deal with addictions or dysfunction because we’ve become obsessed with a false, idyllic environment of “tolerance”?
Good truth here… for some reason I’m shocked you would say this.. haha… Mabey what you say here is the guage for swinging left to far. Denial soaking never promotes a person to seek help?
Comment by: Peter Walker
8 10/13/06 5:45 PM | Comment Link |Uh oh. Brent just “outed me.” Yup. I’ve had to admit lately that I’m on the liberal backswing of an early fundamentalist push. Sooner or later I’ll swing back to the middle - hopefully avoiding either extreme extreme.
Comment by: Jim
9 10/13/06 7:10 PM | Comment Link |I wouldnt worry about it Peter. Evangelical obsession with balance has stopped alot of great exploration.
Comment by: Helen
10 10/14/06 5:07 AM | Comment Link |Ok, let’s see…what I like and don’t like:
What I like:
I like giving people a place to share about being rejected, where what they say is going to be affirmed rather than rejected (again!) or invalidated
What I don’t like:
I expect there are people in all the churches these people left, who struggle with the tension of figuring out how to be kind to those whose lifestyle you believe is self-destructive.
It seems that the approach of the UCC site will not challenge those who left, rejected and hurt, to deal with the complexity and spectrum which was probably present in their former community.
The result will be that they are doing what they didn’t like having done to them - they are stereotyping and not going beyond the stereotype to look at the individuals they’ve stereotyped.