DanSheffield

a million boring little things

Last fall I read a book referred to me by my friend Evan Garst. Stranger God: Meeting Jesus in Disguise by Richard Beck. I read a lot of books related to Christian theology and the practice of ministry. This one will stick with me for a while. One of the lines from the book:

Being like Jesus is a million boring little things -- things like waiting patiently in line at the grocery store, being patient with your kids, listening to your spouse, being a dependable friend.

The premise of the book is rooted in Matthew 25 where the disciples are told they are actually meeting Jesus in the beggar looking for a cup of cold water. God is the Stranger; we meet him when we welcome, extend hospitality to, those who are outside our natural circles of relationship. 

Beck addresses the first thing that comes to many of our minds -- "I don't have time for more people." He says "People are exhausted. Our schedules are totally maxed out. We have no margin. So where are we going to find the time and energy for all this hospitality... our lives are dominated by those feelings of scarcity." Beck is a professor of psychology at Abilene Christian University; he says, "I think our busyness and our exhaustion are rooted in a spiritual sickness that runs throughout our society." But he quickly says that addressing that issue isn't the purpose of this book! He suggests that while we figure out how to address that bigger issue, we just work at our practice of hospitality. 

Hospitality is welcoming and being with the people already in our lives: the people we live with, the people we work with, the people in our neighbourhood. 

If we don't have time to be present and welcoming with the people already in our busy lives, we will never be able to greet the strangers around us. [His premise, though, is that when we learn to practice being welcoming and present with the people already in our lives we start to have margin for strangers.]

That's the first half of the book. Good stuff. Then Beck introduces us to Therese of Lisieux and her, "Little Way" and things get really interesting. I won't say much more about Therese (read the book). But Beck wants us to know that Therese's Little Way could be revolutionary (his says atomic) to our practice of the Christian faith. 

Noticing/Seeing Others - nothing can be accomplished by way of welcoming until we notice others. Paying attention, seeing others, is the practice of kindness. 

Slow down, stop, practice being interrupted. When Blind Bartimaeus called out to Jesus, Mark 10 says, "Jesus stopped." If you follow Jesus, he will make you late.

Approach, seek out, offer a smile, a kind word to someone who isn't being noticed, who you might tend to make a detour around. 

That's it?! Yes.

We will "widen the circle of our affections" (hospitality) by the intentional and disciplined practice of seeing, stopping for, and approaching people whom we otherwise would avoid or ignore.

... a million boring little things.

Advent -- Where is this ‘coming’ he promised?

My friends at New Leaf Network have put together an Advent Reader with daily devotionals from a number of different authors. This was my contribution for Monday Dec 3. You can SIGN UP to have them delivered to your mailbox each day.

Lectionary Texts: 2 Peter 3:1-18; Numbers 17:1-11; Psalm 90

I’m not an athlete and have never really felt an inclination to jog mindlessly, or to run a marathon. But I am inspired by people who “just give it a try.” Not the athletes, or the people whose names will go in the record books, but the people who keep on running when the winners crossed the finish line 2 hours earlier. I’m always fascinated by the shots of family or friends waiting for “their” runner to cross the line. The media are gone, the crowds looking for the thrill of “the win” are gone. It’s just people who love or care about the runner standing around, waiting patiently for their friend to “complete” the distance.

Advent is the season of preparing for the coming of the Lord. After 2000 years of preparing for the second coming of Jesus, we might be inclined to express our sentiments in the same way “the scoffers” did in the first century (2 Peter 2:4). “They say” nothing has changed, everything just goes on as it has since the beginning of time. That may be a similar sentiment on the minds of many of us this Christmas. Enough already, when are You going to wrap this up?

Kind of like the media or the race thrill-seekers. They might stay around for 15 or 20 minutes after the winners and front-runners have completed the race. But they aren’t going to wait around for another 2 hours while Joe or Mary complete the run. They have no personal attachment or concern.

Peter counters the scoffers’ argument by suggesting that just as God spoke at the beginning of time and created, by that same word God has promised a day of reckoning, a day of judgment. It’s as sure a reality as creation itself. But why this inexorable wait for that day of reckoning? Peter tells us it’s not that God is slow, or has forgotten, but that God is patient, “not wanting any to perish, but everyone to come to repentance.” God is not toying with us, instead God is extending compassion to the n-th degree.

I think we need to see God as the spouse, parent, or friend of the runner who is still running the marathon. He’s not tapping his toes impatiently; he’s not checking his watch, saying “the heck with this, I’m packing it in.” God is genuinely concerned, perhaps agonizingly concerned, that all who will complete the race have done so, before things are wrapped up. Because, in the case of God, and the culmination of God’s intentions for this world, there are consequences for not finishing the race.

Our Lectionary passage in 2 Peter 3 goes on to say a number of other things about this day of reckoning (judgment, destruction, perishing, fire). Peter uses language, and suggests “advent” outcomes, that we may be uncomfortable with in our “everybody-gets-a-ribbon-for-participating” times.

The Lectionary framework is intended to help us reflect on the whole counsel of God, the length and breadth of the Scripture record. That’s why Numbers 17:1-11 and Psalm 90 are included with our 2 Peter 3 reading.

The story in Numbers 17 is the culmination of several incidents of grumbling and rebellion by the Israelites wandering in the desert. They feel that promises made about a land flowing with milk and honey have not come to fruition. And this journey to the promised land is just taking way too long. Moses and Aaron become their target in this dissatisfaction. God isn’t happy and says “let me just wipe them all out and start over.” But Moses and Aaron plead with God that that doesn’t seem fair; as a result God only punishes the ring-leaders not the whole nation.

In reaction the people are now angry with God, not just Moses and Aaron. This time God sends a plague and 14,700 people die, before Moses and Aaron’s intercession succeeds in changing God’s mind. Finally in Numbers 17, God confirms to the nation that Moses and Aaron really are the leaders they should be listening to. In essence, this waiting and preparing for the entry into the promised land is all part of God’s purposes, don’t be impatient.

In Psalm 90, (a prayer of Moses the man of God), we get a glimpse into how Moses understands all that has transpired. This Exodus is God’s project from beginning to end. Moses understands that God’s timeline is not the same as an Israelite trekking through the desert (“a thousand years are like a day”). He has seen the anger of God, a consequence of the rebellion of the people, and he has seen the compassion and unfailing love of God relenting in response to Moses’ prayers. Moses says he wishes people understood what God could do if he chose. In conclusion he asks God to teach the people the value of their short lives, in history’s vast timeline – that wisdom might be gained from that insight. He asks that knowledge of the true character of God would be passed to the next generation.

And that’s the final takeaway from Peter as well. Since this Day is coming, “what kind of people ought we to be?” Peter urges his readers to “make every effort to be found spotless, blameless and at peace with God.” There is a promised new heaven and new earth, where righteousness dwells, but justice and the righting of wrongs precedes that desired outcome.

In these days of Advent, as we wait and prepare for the Day of the Lord, the Second Coming, we should recognize that many people had given up waiting for Messiah and the First Coming. Many people were disappointed then, as are many today, that God seems to have forgotten the plan. Scripture’s word to us is that it is God who is waiting. God is the long-suffering parent waiting for their child to cross the finish line, even if its hours beyond expectation.

Conversations that Change Us

More than a decade ago, Dr Joyce Bellous and I collaborated in writing a book, Conversations That Change Us, as an extension of several years of work together, leading ministry reflection seminars with theological students. We mostly dumped our class teaching notes and exercises into a book format and found a publisher. Although we did a lot of work developing the materials, we didn't spend much time on crafting, editing and formatting a readable book.

For the past decade, however, several seminaries have used our book as a text because it touches on issues not necessarily addressed elsewhere (and probably because we were Canadian authors for seminaries who pay attention to CanCon). As time went by, students would regularly comment: "great content, very hard to read." So we decided to completely reorganize, edit, craft, update diagrams and reformat the book. I think Joyce and I are both happier to have our names on this version of the book :)

Comments from back of book:

Theological reflection is conversation that’s personal as well as collaborative. It’s not a monologue. Thinking itself is dialogical. In order to learn the arts of theological reflection, we must first understand that when theological reflection is working, it’s effective because the conversation is dialogical. We may begin by engaging in conversation, but it only becomes a theological dialogue under certain conditions.

Bellous and Sheffield introduce the notion of theological reflection as a conversation with God, with oneself, and with the Christian community. It’s a conversation in which we encounter the humanizing gaze of God breaking into our alienation. As we converse, we stop and listen to ourselves and our own assumptions and allow others to listen and serve as witnesses to the story we are telling. That story is a personal narrative each one of us has been gathering since childhood that shapes how we understand ourselves, God and the world.

In the book you hear us engage with Piaget & Vygotsky, with Freud, with Freire, with Gendlin, with Eastern Orthodox monks, with the Prodigal Son. We talk about Lectio Divina, focusing, generative themes, etc.

Part One

• Theological Reflection as Dialogue
• Practicing Healthy Theological Reflection
• Speaking the Truth in Love

Part Two

• Generative Themes and Personal Inquiry
• Narrative Inquiry and Theological Reflection
• Spiritual Types that Influence Theological Reflection

Part Three

• Collaborative Inquiry
• Theological Reflection and Representing Meaning
• An Approach to Collaborative Theological Reflection

For those who choose to order/read the book, feel free to put a review on Amazon or Good Reads!

 

Faithful presence -- church as living embodiment of Jesus

David Fitch's new book, Faithful Presence: 7 Disciplines that Shape the Church for Mission, finally got off the press and available in Canada, but not before I digested Kreider's Patient Ferment of the Early Church, which I commented on a while back. These two books are very complementary -- Kreider lays the historic groundwork for Fitch's application to our current context. 

Fitch has been talking about these ideas for some time -- to anybody who would listen -- and then, "but don't really run with these ideas, cause I need to get them published." And I've been waiting, patiently, cuz I think there are some very helpful thoughts and images that he uses to convey his points.

To summarize briefly, Fitch talks about 3 circles in our lives as Christians -- Christian community, home & neighbourhood, and "the world." We are called to acknowledge the presence of Jesus in our midst as Christian community (the embodiment of Jesus' continuing presence) and then to extend his presence into the increasingly outward dimension of our lives, home & neighbourhood and the world. He uses a very helpful construct of "host & guest." In the gathered community Jesus is host and we are guests; in home & neighbourhood, we are host and friends are guests; in the world, others are hosts and we are guests. These notions should help shape our posture in each space -- humility, hospitality and respect.

Then throughout the rest of the book, Fitch helps us re-imagine what we should be doing in those 3 spaces -- his 7 disciplines.

• The Lord's Table
• Reconciliation
• Proclaiming the Gospel
• Being with the least of these
• Being with children
• Fivefold gifting
• Kingdom prayer

So, I thought Fitch's ideas had such a graphic, imaginable feel to them, that I did up this animated illustration. [please let me be clear, this is my take and some of my phrasing of Fitch's stuff -- he may disagree with a point here or there, as I have represented things; so, unauthorized, but I clearly acknowledge him at the end]

Fitch helps us think through what it looks like to practice these disciplines in each of the 3 spaces. To those of us in the Wesleyan tradition 5 of these seem like no-brainers, cuz we recognize these as inner and outer disciplines of "the means of grace" -- acts of piety, acts of mercy. "Fivefold gifting" is a bit unique as a discipline, but if you have been following this whole discussion over the last decade or so, around polycentric leadership, and the recovery of apostle & evangelist etc., you can see that where he is coming from is helpful.

What really grabbed my attention, however, was "being with children" as a discipline that shapes us and our communities. YES! Something our churches are not doing well, if at all. I think that if we paid more attention to the children in our midst this would lead us to reshaping our corporate gatherings in a profound way -- more gentle, more playful, more willing to listen -- all things that "the world" is saying we have a problem with. And if we talked about the life of faith in Jesus in a way that kids can make sense of it, a lot of adults would do a lot better as well.

Fitch's disciplines can be acted upon anywhere -- they aren't culture-specific, although each of them, by being acted upon, become particular and embodied expressions in specific places and times. As we engage in mission/extension there is the potential for colonization in our particular forms -- he starts with how we act out these disciplines in our faith communities. There is something about "sentness" or apostolicity, that in mission practice, allows the receptor community - the world -- to have a feedback role in shaping what those disciplines might look like in practice, as Jesus continually becomes incarnate in new spaces. Fitch is a declared Anabaptist, and functions in the "missional" paradigm, (as do I essentially) which Bevans wants to describe as "counter-cultural" (which Goheen and others want to disagree with). Are we willing to let Galatia help us rethink the received traditions/expressions of the essential disciplines?

My thoughts. You need to read this book.

Yahweh watches over you (2nd Sun, Lent A)

This week's Lectionary readings that struck me were Psalm 121 and Genesis 12:1-4. The psalm is part of the group referred to as "songs of ascent" -- the psalms that were sung or reflected upon while the Israelites journeyed up to the hill country where Jerusalem and the Temple were located. The psalm starts with the well known phrase, "I lift up my eyes to the mountains -- where does my help come from? My help comes from Yahweh the Maker of heaven and earth." There are two classic interpretations of this phrase.

One interpretation suggests that the person is looking toward Jerusalem and the Temple mount -- the dwelling place of God on earth, the One who watches over us on our journey. That's good, but limited by the notion that eventually the city and the temple are destroyed, which sends Israel into a century of exile and depression, wondering why God left them?

Another interpretation thinks in terms of the pagan worship locations still present in the mountains along the way that were perpetual locations of temptation for Israelites, to turn away from the one true god, Yahweh. This interpretation suggests that we don't pay attention to the temporal, human-made, objects or aspirations that distract us from our Creator, but refocus our attention on the One who is not "located" but is present wherever our journey takes us.

When I turn to the Genesis 12 passage, I note that it tells the story of Yahweh's call to Abraham -- "go from your country... and I will bless you, and... all peoples on earth will be blessed through you. So Abram went, as Yahweh had told him." It strikes me that the second interpretation of Psalm 121 is the one that Abram could sing. Don't trust in what you know and are comfortable with, or the distractions that seem "reasonable," but "Go and I will be with you." And it was Abram's obedient response that stands as the biblical turning point in God's personal engagement with the human project.

Way too many personal applications to even begin...

formation for the wilderness (1st Sun, Lent A)

My normal process in preparing for Sunday gathering reflections is to read through the Lectionary readings for my devotional times in the week before. This morning I read Matthew 4:1-11, where Jesus was led by the Spirit to spend 40 days in the wilderness. I've reflected on this passage, taught on it and preached from it many times over the years. Lots of insights to be gleaned here.

But today I paused again on Jesus' responses to the tempter. There's no discussion, debate, just simple responses from scriptures that he would have been raised with, taught and had memorized. Jesus understood clearly what the tempter was asking in each movement of this passage. He understood because he had a deep picture of God's purposes from the beginning, and he knew there were forces at work trying to dislodge those purposes. Jesus rooted his responses in what God had already said to his people through the writers of Israel's scriptures -- "it is written." When the tempter tried to get Jesus' mind onto human, self-centred possibilities, Jesus refocused on the God of human history.

I think we have to pay attention to the formation of Christian identity and worldview if we want to survive the wildernesses that will come. I engage with lots of Christians who have little or no intentional formation of Christian identity and worldview and see them swinging from one extreme to another in the current social media polarization over so many issues in the public square. We don't get to the place of responding as Jesus did, without deep formation and rootedness.

I've also been reading N T Wright's, Scripture and the Authority of God this past week or so. 

Reading and studying scripture has been seen as central to how we are to grow in the love of God; how we come to understand God and his truth more fully; and how we can develop the moral muscle to live in accordance with the gospel of Jesus even when everything seems to be pulling the other way. 

Wright goes on to say that many denominational groups have written "massive treatises or doctrinal compendia on every possible issue, as though to close things down and relieve ordinary Christians of the need to read, think, and pray with a fresh mind." He suggests that our churches need to insist that reading scripture remains the focal point of our public worship. If the majority of people in our worship communities don't read any scripture during the week, and only have a few sermon text verses read on Sunday, we are not engaging in intentional formation of Christian identity. And our people will be overwhelmed by the wilderness times we are living in.

 

transformation of patience

Just about finished The Patient Ferment of the Early Church by Alan Kreider. Toward the end of the book, he draws a contrast between the practices of the early church in regard to formation and witness, with the emergence of imperial influence (Constantine) on those practices.

When Roman Emperor Constantine began to identify with the Christian faith (around 312AD) subtle shifts emerged in Christian theology and practice which have continued to be factors to the present day. Constantine refused to submit to the normal catechetical practice of the Christian community -- a process of formation, over several years, which focused on reformation of behaviour to match the teachings of Jesus, then baptism and entry in the faith family via the Lord's supper, when biblical teaching and theology moved to the forefront of the ongoing formation process. Constantine said, "thanks, but I will figure it out through my own study." Effectively moving belief to the forefront and behaviour as optional. Constantine was only baptized shortly before his death because he felt the submission of his behaviour to Christian community and teaching might be incompatible with the tasks required of an emperor.

So what changed because of the influence of Constantine and the emergence of Christendom? Kreider suggests 5 areas.

1. Control. Christians had long experience of trusting God for the future. They were reluctant to engage in any kind of strategic thinking about mission (it's completely absent from early church writings). There was no need to manipulate people or events -- it was the exemplary life of Christian communities that attracted people to Jesus. Constantine, on the other hand believed and encouraged church leaders to use means to obtain their desired outcomes. He thought about planning, control and instrumentality all the time, as emperor, why shouldn't church leaders think the same way?
2. Use of Power. Early Christians had no temporal power, so couldn't imagine its use as an instrument of conversion. Any "power" they had was in their own financial resource base and sacrificial service to the needy. The development of generosity and service came about as the result of Christian formation, without the intention of wielding them as a power base. Constantine, on the other hand, offered the power of the state to promote conversion to Christianity. State funds were given for the relief of the poor "as an incentive to turn to the Saviour's teaching." State funds subsidized the construction of Christian worship facilities.
3. Religious coercion. Early Christians didn't believe that worship could be compelled. Tertullian said "compulsion is not God's way of working." Lactantius, an early teacher of Constantine, emphasized, "we teach, we show, we demonstrate." Constantine, on the other hand, used force to crush Christian minority (heretical?) groups and used legislation to intimidate, purify and reject dissent. 
4. Urgency. Early Christians trusted in God's goodness, were relaxed and patient about God's purposes coming to fruition. Christian formation took place over time (up to 3 years of intentional development) to reform behaviour and worldview according to Jesus' teaching and practices. Then seekers were baptized and admitted to the Lord's supper as well as the full Christian community. Constantine, on the other hand had a sense of urgency to standardize, to bring conformity or "homogenization" (perhaps he felt this was necessary for stability in the empire). He was too impatient for the normal catechesis process and baptism. By this impatience he set a precedent, that baptism was not necessary to enter into life as a follower of Jesus, but only to avert eternal damnation. Behavioural formation was not as significant as right belief.
5. Conversion. Early Christians were convinced that conversion was a process that took place over time, it was not an instantaneous or speedy thing. It went deep, it was not superficial. Constantine set the precedent for adhering without submitting to the Christian community or the Christian life. You could pick and choose which parts of the Christian faith fit your lifestyle.

Kreider's summary thought is that it became very difficult for Christian leaders to maintain their beliefs, values and practices once they were presented with power, resources and legitimacy.

...for those with ears to hear...

dwindling demand and Christian formation (Thiessen III)

Recapping my first post on "The Meaning of Sunday" -- It is no surprise to most Canadians that Christian religious presence is dwindling in our society. In fact the fastest growing sector in Canadian society is those who identify as having "No Religious Affiliation" -- now at 24% of our population (Census 2011). Over the pastcouple months I have been digging into the research of Canadian sociologist Joel Thiessen in his book The Meaning of Sunday(2015). Thiessen's work is based on qualitative social research that he conducted with 90 participants, 30 each of whom he describes as: "active affiliates" (those who regularly participate in a Christian community), "marginal affiliates" (those who rarely participate but still identify as some sort of Christian), and "religious nones" (those who have no involvement in a religious community). 

While some in the Christian community want to make the issue of dwindling numbers a matter of "supply" -- that is, if we had a better product, whether preaching, music, programming, spiritual vitality, etc. -- numbers would return, Thiessen's research encourages us to take a broader look.

Although reported almost as a sub-text, Thiessen gives us a glimpse into why "active affiliates" pursue their spiritual convictions so ardently, and, also a glimpse into why young adults might remain as "active affiliates" when their generation is increasingly identifying as having no religious affiliation. 

Active affiliates gave the following reasons for why they feel "rewarded" by active participation in a faith community:

1. the greatest benefit is the sense of community they experience with fellow believers -- things like: encouragement in common beliefs and practices, honesty, vulnerability, emotional and physical support, accountability, mutual aid
2. a sense of meaning, direction and purpose that they receive from their faith; common belief, public and private practices, provide a source of meaning in life. A dependable God and a dependable faith community are mutually affirming in staving off anomie and alienation
3. allows for development and affirmation of their faith via ongoing learning opportunities, corporate worship experiences and commonly invoked prayers -- there is something about collective activity that maintains and sustains this perspective differently than solitary religious expression.

Thiessen uses the language of "master status" to describe this kind of religious expression that informs all aspects of one's life.

Thiessen identifies religious socialization as the key determinant in whether a young adult identifies as a "none" -- i.e., no religious affiliation. This makes sense in the increasing number of young adults who have been raised in families which likewise have no religious affiliation. For several decades now (1960s-2010's), each generation has raised more children who have no religious identification in their family of origin (and therefore no formation in any particular beliefs or practices). The result becomes exponential at a certain point (hence 2001/16% -2011/24%). 

What is perhaps most challenging about Thiessen's findings (again, as a bit of a sub-text) is the number of marginals and nones who were raised in "active" homes but chose to leave the faith expression of their parents. He firmly places the essential cause as "lack of religious socialization" -- parents did not form their children in the beliefs and practices of their faith. "Lack of religious transmission in the home is an important contributor to declining levels of religiosity across cohorts..."

When parents share the same faith, they are more likely to pass on their faith to their children... Young people are prone to maintain the faith when their parents are actively involved in their religious group, when parents bring their children to religious services, when young people are actively involved in a religious group and maintain personal religious practices, when they have good relationships with older mentors who are religious and when they are given responsibilities in their religious group.

Thiessen goes on to describe a few more societal factors that have shaped the worldviews of even "active affiliates" that have led active, believing Christians to fall prey to practices and viewpoints that produce the outcomes now being described in statistical terms as "dwindling demands" for what churches offer.

In my view there are clear "takeaways" from Thiessen's research that impact:

1. our disciple-making practices (Christian formation) for the adults/parents in our congregations.
2. our support for parental Christian formation of their own kids; rather than "out-sourcing" that responsibility to local churches
3. our understanding of corporate worship and gathered community -- does this experience pay attention to, and include the participation of, the children and teens among us?

 

practice gives the words their sense

Just about finished reading Wittgenstein's biography by Ray Monk. Some thoughts from the last year of his life...

Actually I should like to say that in this case too the words you utter or what you think as you utter them are not what matters, so much as the difference they make at various points in your life. How do I know that two people mean the same when each says he believes in God? And the same goes for belief in the Trinity. A theology which insists on the use of certain particular words and phrases, and outlaws others, does not make anything clearer (Karl Barth). It gesticulates with words, as one might say, because it wants to say something and does not know how to express it. Practice gives the words their sense.

Dwindling demand for what churches provide (Thiessen)

It is no surprise to most Canadians that Christian religious presence is dwindling in our society. In fact the fastest growing sector in Canadian society is those who identify as having "No Religious Affiliation" -- now at 24% of our population (Census 2011). Over the past month I have been digging into the research of Canadian sociologist Joel Thiessen in his book The Meaning of Sunday (2015). Thiessen's work is based on qualitative social research that he conducted with 90 participants, 30 each of whom he describes as: "active affiliates" (those who regularly participate in a Christian community), "marginal affiliates" (those who rarely participate but still identify as some sort of Christian), and "religious nones" (those who have no involvement in a religious community). 

While some in the Christian community want to make the issue of dwindling numbers a matter of "supply" -- that is, if we had a better product, whether preaching, music, programming, spiritual vitality, etc. -- numbers would return, Thiessen's research encourages us to take a broader look. He suggests 8 reasons why people have left active involvement in church community or were never interested to started with. These are weighted in that the first 4 reasons were most significant, while the last 4 descend in significance rapidly.

1. The attitudes and behaviours of religious groups are seen as too exclusive -- a separation of "us" and "them." Thiessen frames this concern within the larger dialogue in Canadian society that continues to shape citizens around tolerance, and social and religious pluralism. As civil society builds these approaches through legislation, education and media, they become the underlying message that affects most Canadians values and decision-making practices. Some of Thiessen's subjects left religious involvement as an act of rebellion against "staunchly conservative" home environments, or adopted more inclusive and tolerant approaches after leaving such homes when going off to university, etc.
2. Life transitions -- a move away from a setting where a family or individual was actively involved in a church community, the death of a parent or spouse who was more actively committed, divorce in a family and break with a faith community, struggle for meaning following a death or divorce. Just never returned to active involvement after the loss of a sense of community.
3. Opportunity for teenage choice -- typified by "my parents said I could choose, so I did, I walked away." Again Thiessen frames this as thoughtful parents wanting to echo societal values of independence, choice and tolerance. Some viewed this as demonstrating the marginal significance of religion to their parents.
4. Too busy with other things. There are so many options for children, extracurricular activities, a 24/7 lifestyle that active faith community involvement takes a marginal role, again suggesting that faith involvement was not too deeply held in the first place, so leaving isn't a big issue.
5. Scandals and hypocrisy play a role for some. Inconsistencies between teachings, words and actions in parental homes, among church members and on the part of church leaders.
6. Intellectual disagreement regarding place of science over religion, questioning the existence of God, and religious pluralism -- how can there be one true god?
7. Interpersonal tensions mostly on the part of adults who were once actively involved but through offence or church conflict left.
8. Lack of social ties -- no one in social circle is involved, active family members move or die, leaving no meaningful connection to a faith community.

Thiessen's point is that most of these reasons that people give for their lack of involvement, or actually having left active involvement, don't have a lot to do with issues of "supply" or a certain kind of attractive product, they have to do with broader societal issues, personal choice, religious socialisation in families and subjective responses to factors largely beyond what churches can control.

This is a simple glimpse at several of Thiessen's observations. Not particularly hopeful on the surface... But there are several other issues Thiessen discusses that offer some insight: what would be attractive to "marginal affiliates" and "religious nones?" and how could "religious socialization" (disciple-making/discipleship) be conducted differently in home and church communities? Stay tuned for posts on these topics.