The faith to convert: Stories of switching faiths a 'very common occurrence'

Willie Hall wasn’t seeking a new religion that summer day in 1986, but one came knocking anyway.

The Madison resident had just bought a house when a Jehovah’s Witness stopped by. Hall, disillusioned by the poverty he’d seen on a recent military stint overseas, was open to explanations for the world’s suffering.

He began weekly Bible study meetings with a Jehovah’s Witness, and within six years converted to the faith, leaving behind the Catholicism of his youth.

While Hall’s spiritual path has its unique aspects, switching religious affiliations is not unusual, according to a new study by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life. About 44 percent of American adults belong to a faith tradition or religious denomination different from the one in which they were raised. Another 9 percent have returned to their religion of birth after trying something else.

Read it all.

Posted in * Culture-Watch, * International News & Commentary, America/U.S.A., Religion & Culture

23 comments on “The faith to convert: Stories of switching faiths a 'very common occurrence'

  1. LogicGuru says:

    I’m one of that 54% raised unchurched who joined a church. I would like to “witness,” if you will, to how hard it is for unchurched people to find their way into mainline churches and make the case that you should be making it a little easier. Speaking from my own experience you should be aware of the following:

    (1) Many seriously unchurched people don’t even know that you can join a mainline church. Growing up I just assumed that you either had to be born into a religion or marry into one. Later I got the idea that there were some religions you could join, e.g. Mormons, Jehovah’s Witness, etc. because they came door to door recruiting. And you could of course become a Buddhist because that was just a matter of reading The Way of Zen and declaring yourself one. But I assumed that while it was technically possible it would be completely weird to join a church you weren’t either born into or married into.

    (2) Seriously unchurched people are uncomfortable going to church services, and churchgoers with the best of intentions don’t make it any easier. Unchurched people are afraid church is one of those ostensibly public events that are really just for regulars so that it will be like crashing a party. They’re afraid there will be strange rituals and people will notice that they don’t know how to do them. They’re afraid of being noticed, and well-intentioned members trying to be friendly to visitors who want friendliness assume that all visitors want friendliness. They just don’t get that there are people who just don’t want to be noticed and certainly don’t want to be identified as visitors, but just want to blend in at an impersonal, public event to check it out church without making personal contact. Seeker-sensitive megachurches recognize this.

    (3) Church members fail to recognize the importance of impersonal mechanisms for making contact–forms to fill out, advertisements, flyers, hardcopy and internet announcements of schedules, times, places, events, and just instructions about how to join. When I was involved in the church growth business locally I was amazed at how insensitive insiders were to how mechanically difficult it was for even motivated outsiders to get in or just to get more information. The assumption was that getting people in was a matter of social networking: people would be brought in by friends and if we each brought one friend everything would be fine. But lots of unchurched people aren’t hooked into a social network that includes churchgoers. I certainly wasn’t. The absence of formal mechanisms for making contact, the failure of most mainline congregations to get it across that there’s any expectation that anyone will just, without any social hookup, simply want to join the church.

    Walk in the moccasins of someone like me as an undergraduate, who didn’t know any churchgoers at all, or anyone else like that today–and that includes an increasing number of people. Think of how much more difficult, embarrassing and just puzzling it is to join the church than it is to join, e.g. your local health club.

  2. Soapy Sam says:

    What an excellent comment by LogicGuru! Especially this bit:

    [blockquote] They just don’t get that there are people who just don’t want to be noticed and certainly don’t want to be identified as visitors, but just want to blend in at an impersonal, public event to check it out church without making personal contact.[/blockquote]

    But also this:

    [blockquote] I was amazed at how insensitive insiders were to how mechanically difficult it was for even motivated outsiders to get in or just to get more information.[/blockquote]

    A church should have written on the outside of it [something like] ‘Worship God here, Sunday 10 a.m. [or whatever time]. Anyone is allowed, and it’s free.’

  3. Just Passing By says:

    Greetings.

    Brava to [b]LogicGuru[/b] [url=”http://new.kendallharmon.net/wp-content/uploads/index.php/t19/article/24854/#390332″]1[/url]. Not to make too much of it, but even if one has booked up and knows, intellectually, more-or-less what’s going on, it’s still a whole new set of informal structures and folkways to learn. Never mind the dynamic that Everything We Know About Reality May Be Wrong.

    Also, some few of us are Myers-Briggs Introvert types. This does not mean we cower in the corner or can only stutter at you with downcast eyes. On a good day I can work a room like a politician — but socializing with strangers is [i]work[/i], and sucks energy out of us. Once we know you it’s much better, but until then too much energetic [i]bonhomie[/i] can be difficult for us. [url=”http://www.introvertedchurch.com/”]This fellow[/url] gets it.

    [b]LogicGuru[/b]’s point 2 is also worth emphasizing. I honestly don’t know well [i]anyone[/i] who goes to church. There are a few people at work of course, but we’re not close enough for either of us to comfortably make or fish for an invitation. I don’t know any Anglicans at all — and I live in the Northern Virginia metro area.

    I don’t mean to be tedious on this subject (I’ve mentioned it before), nor do I suggest that churches need to tailor their efforts to yet another [i]What About [b]ME[/b][/i]? ™ dynamic, but the world in which you move easily is more alien to some of us than you may realize.

    regards,

    JPB

  4. Just Passing By says:

    [quote]I don’t know any Anglicans at all—and I live in the Northern Virginia metro area.[/quote]

    Actually, that’s not true. One of the ladies in Marketing — who is from upstate New York — once identified herself as “C of E” (“C of E? Really?”). I once asked her what I [i]thought[/i] was an innocent question about her church, and was coolly informed that that was not a proper topic of conversation (“Um, no. Of course not. What was I thinking? Sorry.”) Of course, she shows horses, so I suppose I should not be surprised.

    I say this not to pull your nose or be gratuitously critical … it’s just an illustration that what I “know” about Anglicans is not the same as what you know. Most of my acquaintances have similar stories of one kind of Christian or another.

    regards,

    JPB

  5. Pageantmaster Ù† says:

    Difficult isn’t it? If no one speaks to you or welcomes you when you step into a church is that worse? So many things seem to develop when people are offered a cup of coffee, but I have been to church as long as I can remember, so I am probably not the person to ask.

    What things can churches do to encourage the unchurched to explore further?

  6. Katherine says:

    JPB, thank you so much for that reference. I second LogicGuru’s suggestion that written materials about how to join or how to inquire are very helpful. I also think that extroverts at modern-liturgy parishes would be kind to remember that introverts can be totally overwhelmed by the “passing of the peace.” Like JPB, I have learned to do small talk and can function well in business settings, but when people say “Peace be with you” and then fail to give a polite brief greeting after the service it can be devastating. If you must do this bit during the service, you ought to take the time to speak briefly and pleasantly to the stranger whose hand you have shaken previously. (Good morning, I’m …, good to see you here” should be sufficient.) Even worse is when the introvert finally works up the courage to go to the coffee hour and no one approaches.

  7. montanan says:

    Fascinating; thanks to all. I’m afraid I’m like Pageantmaster (#5) and need the guidance of those who are/have been in this situation.

  8. Philip Snyder says:

    Dean Kevin Martin of St. Matthews Cathedral in Dallas often says: “What organization, in its right mind, starts it’s main service on page 355 of book that is over 900 pages long?”

    Let’s leave aside the whole issue of introvert v extrovert or of someone getting up the nerve to come to an Episcopal/Anglican congregation on Sunday. Let’s look at the mechanics of our worship (which I dearly love!). We juggle two (or more) books. Hymn number 1 doesn’t start on the first page, it starts somewhere after Hymn S200 something. Everyone else seems to know when to stand, sit, kneel, etc. They all know the responses. It can be a little off putting. Sometimes I think that liturgists stay up night wondering how they could make the service more difficult for visitors.

    YBIC,
    Phil Snyder

  9. Just Passing By says:

    [b]Philip Snyder[/b] says:

    [quote]Sometimes I think that liturgists stay up night wondering how they could make the service more difficult for visitors.[/quote]

    A good point, particularly for someone walking in cold. But again, people respond differently. I can book up on the liturgy, and in some ways it’s actually the easiest part. It’s like a sacred computer program … correlate system time with the .ini file(s), initiate, branch here, loop back there, monitor realtime environmental variables and gracefully (tee hee) shut down … no big. And I’m not even a programmer.

    It would take me a while to be as familiar with it as the good deacon is, but for some odd reason [i]that[/i] doesn’t bother me.

    Let me say again that this is [i]not[/i] to say that everything needs to be designed around me Me ME; just that you’re not always reaching out to people just like who’s already there.

    regards,

    JPB

  10. Pb says:

    There is a lot of good information out there for a church that wants to grow. I believe many churches are as big as they choose to be. We print our services and/or use power point. It offends some but we get 2 or 3 new families every week.

  11. Billy says:

    And we used to print our services entirely in the bulletin, with directions for kneeling, standing, etc. and were losing members each week. We now print page numbers and are back to using the books and get 2-3 new families a week. So not sure it has anything to do with liturgy.

    More likely has to do with what Logicguru is talking about – reaching out to people on their own terms and recognizing what those terms are when you do the reaching out. I think that means truly caring about the people to whom we are reaching out, as opposed to trying to set up a system of one size fits all or having as our main goal to grow our churches, and losing the real goal of bringing others to Christ through our churches. I truly believe that if we keep this last goal in mind – the real goal – then all secondary goals, like growing churches, fall into place. But I have no proof of that – I just try to have faith that is right.

  12. Pb says:

    I did not mean to be simplistic and there is no quick fix. But there needs to be, in the words of Rick Warren, a purpose driven church. Many of our churches have lofty mission statements which are not understood or aseented to by the laity.

  13. Katherine says:

    Phil Snyder, introvert or not, that’s something I do pay attention to, and if I see someone fumbling with books I will quietly open the Prayer Book to the right page and take it to them with a smile and a finger on the right spot.

  14. LogicGuru says:

    Phil Snyder, introvert or not, that’s something I do pay attention to, and
    if I see someone fumbling with books I will quietly open the Prayer Book to
    the right page and take it to them with a smile and a finger on the right
    spot.

    I can guarantee that if anyone did this to me I would never, never come back. Some people appreciate this kind of attention; others don’t. Recognize that to some of us these attempts to help are embarrassing–you think you must look like a klutz and feel embarrassed that you’ve been spotted as an outsider.

    It isn’t just a matter of introversion/extroversion: it’s a matter of what people come to church for. Unchurched people as distinct from churchgoers who are visiting or looking for a church after having moved into the area, are checking out church as such and might appreciate it if going to church were more like going to the movies or going to the supermarket, where you don’t expect or want others to make contact. Of course you want visitors to have a route to get in socially or make contact if they choose, but you also want to recognize that visitors should have a choice.

    Another remark about “2 or 3 families” joining every week also hit me. Families? What about single people or people who come without a spouse and a kid or two in tow? Lots of church growth literature is on and on about attracting “young families”–very much a 1950s model. The take when I was involved was that we needed to present the church as a community facility with “activities” in which people would get family memberships. Again, it’s difficult to accommodate diverse interests and people in different situations, and some people are looking for this, but others aren’t. And lots of churches, for all their good will, are not really welcoming to people who come alone or who otherwise don’t fit the profile of “potential church member” that churchgoers have in mind.

  15. Katherine says:

    LogicGuru, I didn’t think of it that way. I worship in a small parish in a rented Methodist church, and so there are Methodist hymnals, Prayer Books, and a variety of sizes of Anglican hymnals in the pews, and it is very confusing for visitors. I can see that in a parish which owns its own space and can control what’s in the pew racks, you would be right. Often we have seen someone trying to find the right hymn in the Methodist hymnal.

  16. LogicGuru says:

    Katherine, I understand what you’re saying, I understand how confusing this would be to visitors, I know you mean to help and that many people would greatly appreciate your help. But others, like me, would not–no matter how confusing the whole thing was. Really, truly. If there are Methodist hymnals and other confusing stuff in the pew racks then there should be a note in the program explaining all this and/or the priest should announce it so that everyone is, as it were, in the same boat and there’s no need for visitors to get special attention. If visitors want help they can ask. If they don’t ask the safest thing is to leave them be. People are different and some people–not all, and maybe even not most, are embarrassed and really, really turned off by this kind of thing.

    Sometimes I think that as religious practice becomes increasingly a matter of personal choice, church members are increasingly self-selected for certain personality types and churches become increasingly uncongenial to people who don’t fit. Some people are genuinely friendly and outgoing, like to help and be helped. Others want space and don’t want unsolicited help. The church should be welcoming to these other sheep too.

  17. Ross says:

    I’ve observed something similar myself — there are people who, when they visit a church for the first time, are completely turned off and will never return if they are not greeted warmly by someone and “taken in hand,” as it were. There are other people who will be completely turned off if someone does approach them; they want to sit in the back and observe quietly until they feel that they’ve gotten a handle on what’s going on.

    So how should a church handle both types of people? Beats me. The only thought I’ve had would be something like a sign in the narthex saying something along the lines of: “Welcome newcomers! If you want to be greeted and guided through our service, please sit in this section on the left. If you want to just observe for a while first, please sit in this section on the right.” And have volunteer greeters in the section on the left, and extensive pre-printed directions in the section on the right.

    Don’t know if that would work, but it’s the only idea I’ve come up with.

  18. Just Passing By says:

    [b]Ross[/b] wonders:

    [quote]So how should a church handle both types of people?[/quote]

    I wouldn’t think it need be all [i]that[/i] complicated. Use greeters/ushers who are perceptive and have good social skills; give newcomers a short, friendly greeting, offer to be of assistance if they want, then see how they react. I would not think it would be too hard to know who wants more and who does not. It’s really no different than “reading” any other stranger who’s in a novel situation.

    It’s not about being “all things to all men” (though I think someone said something like that ), nor expecting that all visitors will necessarily be a good fit for any particular church. IMHO it’s more about letting people be comfortable with their own style — modulo couteous and proper behavior, of course.

    regards,

    JPB

  19. LogicGuru says:

    It is sticky because people have such marked different preferences. I like the “Welcome, Newcomers” sign thing. But as a variant, instead of separate sections what would be neat is a table underneath that sign staffed by volunteers with literature on the church, how to join, etc. If newcomers come over a volunteer with good social skills can feel out what they want, ask them if they want to sit with him/her, and act as a guardian angel to whatever extent they feel visitors want, introducing them to people at coffee hour or whatever. Visitors who don’t want to make contact will just go into the church and, presumably, others there will know that visitors who want contact are being taken care of and so not bother them.

    There is also the issue of institutional fit and in the end maybe you have to accept that some people just aren’t going to like your church because it’s too friendly, too unfriendly or too something else.

  20. adammchugh says:

    Hello everyone – I am enjoying the conversation about introverts and extroverts in churches (though I’m not entirely sure how it is that this thread became about that!). I’m an introverted Presbyterian minister who has done a lot of thinking and writing about introverts in Christian communities and how it is that we can navigate church life. I’ve actually written a book about the topic that will be published in October. It’s called Introverts in the Church: Finding Our Place in an Extroverted Culture. If you’d like to know more, you can pre-order it on Amazon here:
    [url=http://www.amazon.com/Introverts-Church-Finding-Extroverted-Culture/dp/0830837027/ref=sr_1_10?ie=UTF8&qid=1248316400&sr=8-10]Introverts in the Church[/url]
    Or you can read more about it on my blog (which someone above already graciously linked to) – http://www.introvertedchurch.com

    Peace!
    Adam McHugh

  21. Pageantmaster Ù† says:

    Thank you Adam McHugh – I must say this thread has opened up some thoughts I hadn’t had before. Do you have any wisdom to share specifically on some of the suggestions made here: welcoming tables for newcomers, not approaching newcomers, ignoring them etc. What do you rate as the prospect of success and the risk of turning away others by lack of engagement?

    ..and welcome to T19 – please stick around.

  22. Pageantmaster Ù† says:

    I hope my post #21 wasn’t too forward.

  23. LogicGuru says:

    It isn’t just the introvert/extrovert issue, though that’s certainly part of it. It’s also what individuals look for in the church.

    I just read Aidan Kavanagh’s On Liturgical Theology for a seminar on liturgy I was at, in which he describes Sunday Liturgy in urban churches in the 5th century. He notes that liturgy wasn’t confined to one church–it was a big public event lasting most of the day and involving the whole city, with large crowd scenes assembling in open areas processing from one church to another and so on. People dropped in and dropped out as they pleased during the day.

    Kavanagh also notes that at that period the idea of a congregation didn’t really figure. There was no idea of a congregation as a social group with which one was affiliated. Christians were members of The Church, which put on these public events in which they participated which, reading Kavanagh’s description, was rather like going to a street festival.

    I’m not saying that this should be the universal model–different people have different wants/needs, and this isn’t the 5th century in any case. But for me, and I suspect others, this is the kind of thing we want–not to be part of a congregation as a “church family” but just to participate in the church’s public liturgy. I was alluding to this when I said “institutional fit.”

    Even if you conceive of your church as a “church family” however, it seems to me that to be more visible and accessible to the world outside, and possibly attract people, why not do outdoor activities in public places like this, e.g. processions in the streets. Why not take the church out to the people as well as trying to get people into the church? Kavanagh’s book anyway is highly recommended.