youth-group, marketing, place-of-worshipWhat techniques have you observed churches or other institutions (including religious youth groups) employing to attract new people, especially teens or younger? In what specific ways are guilt, music, food, and fun used to increase attendance?
The subtext being are these fair methods and are they acceptable if used by secular-minded organizations?
I don’t know about churches, but when I was a muslim, it was a very ‘masculine’ thing to go to mosque since only men went to mosque and women prayed at home. Every friday and on special occassions such as eid all men from the family went to the mosque, and because I wanted to be like my elder brother, I went along with him.
I think that it’s possible to over-estimate the cynicism with which things such as social activities, music, food and fun etc are used to attract people. These are common features to any sort of social function, and while they inevitably create a sense of cohesion that encourages people to stay within them, it’s not necessarily being employed in such a nakedly cynical way.
Skeptics in the Pub could be said to use all of those things too. People are generally social by nature and gravitate towards such things.
Guilt - and I would also add ‘fear’ - by contrast, is used explicitly to manipulate people into behaving in certain ways, such as remaining within groups. Apostasy in Islam is the classic example.
From what I’ve seen, religious groups will use any possible way to attract believers. The younger, the better.
It can be, as you mentioned, by creating an environment for social activities around common interests and then mixing it with religion, it can be just by preaching guilt and fear, or using the ignorance of the people to tell them about how (their) religion is the only true way and etc.
Whether it’s fair? I guess it’s a matter of your moral convictions and beliefs. As an atheist, I personally have no problem with secular organizations trying to promote the truth of the natural world in the same methods because after all it teaches (or supposed to) critical thinking, reasoning and gives information about the real world, as we best know and can explain it.
When religious organizations do the same, I would be against it because in my mind, they are teaching the wrong things.
I know that this might seem to be a double standard for some, but it’s all a matter of what you believe the truth to be - the scientific/naturalistic method, or the indoctrination into your own truest-of-them-all religion. And then, we’re back to the core discussion about faith vs. reason.
One technique used within the evangelical community is to bring in fiery, controversial speakers who are on the preaching circuit. These guest stars whip up lots of attention and debate. Another method is through faith healing and in-church miracles. Another is the ‘testimony’ of the ministerial staff that they’ve sponsored in Africa or somewhere else.
“Make sure you come in this week! We have a guest speaker, Rev Bob Hairpiece from the United Gospel First Church of Christ Undivided in Batshit Arkansas where over 300 chimpanzees spontaneously became saved children of the lord! Also, we have a riveting report in from our missionary to Tijuana, Rev Dr. Itou Ch-children! His work with little orphan boys is soooooo inspiring. Also, we have a mens only pancake breakfast this week titled ‘Women submit yourselves’ led by reformed sinner Lucy Spanks.”
Modernizing the music. They got me when I went to an Easter service and they sang “Always Look on the Bright Side of Life” from Monty Python’s Life of Brian. True story. Christian rock and folk music from the 60’s have worked well for the last generation, but even that seems out dated for people who are having children now.
Is it acceptable? Sure, nothing wrong with singing together to express ourselves. John Lennon made great use of it after the Beatles.
A method I would say is unacceptable is watering down the message. Get people to listen to your message about love and forgiveness, take their money and use it in less than moral ways. Practice what you preach, atheist or not.
I have seen many methods being employed consciously. From those the following I have also seen employed by companies:
The following I only saw in churches
score: 1
I think the biggest attraction is a sense of community/comradery. By becoming a member of the in-group you gain the benefits of a readymade community of people who consider you as a worthy human, whom they are likely to try to help. I think even some non-believers attend church, and fake it for this reason alone.
Free food, drink and clothes.
Ostracism and marginalization of apostates and non-believers seem to be mainstays of most churches the world over.
As for subtext it is very effective in reinforcing adherence and curbing controversy by promoting an opaque, closed social structure. As this structure is contrary to scientific inquiry and free thought they are not appropriate for a democratic society or group. These tools are suitable for hegemony and authoritarianism.
My son occasionally finds himself attending a church or temple service of some kind.
Usually I ask him what the service was like, what kind of rituals they do, etc.
And then ask: Was it boring? (Because I know it was, and because “boring” is the worst indictment he is likely to hand down on anything.)
His response has almost always been: Yeah, but it was OK, they had free donuts/bagels.
All content is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.