Many of you who know me personally know that I am spending a lot of time thinking about food. I’ve been looking into self-sustainable farming and local eating. I’ve been weighing the pros and cons of a vegetarian diet. I’ve been spending a lot (read: probably too much) searching the unending supply of websites and articles about growing food in Colorado. I’ve been cooking and baking and canning food in a effort to eat out less and purchase less food at a grocery store. Today I came across a website called Sustainable Table, and from there I went to the Eat Well Guide. After doing some initial browsing I went to the About page and found the FAQ section hoping to find out a little bit more of their philosophy and theory for what and why they do what they do. This question and answer caught my eye:
Q: While searching the guide, I noticed some retail outlets that definitely offer factory farmed food. How can such establishments be included in the Eat Well Guide?
A: The Eat Well Guide is an inclusive resource. It’s a resource for everyone, especially the non-converted (those who know very little or nothing about sustainable food). So, we include any store that sells sustainable food, even if only a few products. Our hope is that these conventional stores will start selling more sustainable food as demand increases.
What caught my eye was their use of the phrase “non-converted,” and their explanation of it. As I read this I thought about church, specifically, our church. How do we come across to those who are “non-converted?” I suppose that the label “non-converted” could apply to a few categories of people: Those who haven’t “converted” to Christianity (that phraseology makes me cringe) or those who haven’t “converted” to a house/simple/organic/naked church. I think that the people in either category have two options. They can sit and watch, or they can participate. I think that we can make the mistake of assuming that the non-converted would be much more comfortable sitting and observing our services. I have thought, in the past, that this is the best way to “ease someone into the community.” I welcome them to sit back and relax and enjoy the show. Our services can be filled with Christianese and familiar rhythms that might seem foreign to the outsider, and I don’t want to overwhelm them with the details of everything. If they have a question, I assume they’ll ask it, either to me or the person who brought them.
The other approach is the participatory approach. This one is a bit harder. You know those things that are familiar and expected, we have to explain them. And that takes time. Time that takes away from the usual, familiar rhythm. We explain why we take a moment to quite ourselves before we begin, and invite the new person to quiet them self too. We explain why we sing, or don’t sing. It can be awkward.
My thoughts went back to the questions I have about food, and I asked myself, “which of these approaches would lead me to a place of better understanding the food I eat, sitting and watching, or participating.” I would learn so much more from going shopping with someone if I was standing next to them as they look at produce, pick up a squash and ask question about what to look for in a good squash, rather then if I was following them and just looking at what they were picking up and putting into their basket.
So a question or two for you:
Are we welcoming to the “non-converted?” How?
What are ways that the “non-converted” can participate with us?
in response to the necessity of explaining specifics to the “newbies,” i actually find the process helpful for myself. i need to be frequently reminded of why we do the things we do. and i think the process of you wording it aloud ensures that we all (including you, yourself and any personal assumptions) are on the same page. i personally listen closely to those little explanations. i appreciate it when i visit churches. i want to know why we’re doing what we’re doing. when i went to lookout mountain cc, they would explain every week why we were having communion and what the significance is of the wine and bread. i think that’s important because it can become so second nature that it loses its significance.
y’know, i actually didn’t notice the little explanations until you pointed them out. i mean, i noticed them, but i didn’t notice why you were doing them until just now. an probably the best way for the “non converted” to participate with us is to just do it… if they want to. i honestly feel, however, that doing what we do probably feels better and more natural to someone who’s never done it before than a standard church service would.