A Young Adult On “The Rise of the ‘Nones'”

I am going off schedule to respond to this post by UUA president, Peter Morales, in which he talks about the number of Americans, especially young adults, who do not identify with a particular religious group. These people are spoken of by religious groups as “Nones”, for the common reply on surveys about which religion they identify with.

I am a Young Adult, according to the UUA categorization. I shall be for a another year and some months. I admit that I, as a parent in a stable relationship, am not typical of what the UUA is targeting with their category, but they define it only by age.

I am also an agnostic. Were I not a UU, and had I know idea (or the wrong idea, still) what UU was, I would likely be one of the Nones. I used the term “pagan” for quite some time, and it still fits as well as it ever has, but it is not really a very good label, as it is generally too broad and doesn’t link one with any actual tradition or organization. On any survey that asked for an affiliation, I would likely put “none”.

But, I was looking. I wanted a community that would support my search for truth. I wanted to be part of other people’s search, as well. Early in my 20s, I sought that in a Unitarian Univeralist congregation. It was the only one within 30 minutes of where I lived at the time, and it was not a very good fit. They were too humanist, and it felt to me like there was little searching going on, with the majority of the membership being on the other side of middle-aged.

I sought the congregation out again when I had children, to see if things had changed. They had, indeed, and I was very pleased to see it. It still wasn’t perfect for me, but it was still not quite right for me, though this time through no real fault.

The key thing to take away from this story is: I was looking. I kept looking. I was seeking something that Unitarian Universalism ultimately provides.

Not all people are. We can’t focus our efforts on trying to lure people to our cause by modifying the cause to suit them. We can’t worry about how to bring people into a religious community when those people aren’t looking for a community. We shouldn’t change who we are in order to gain market share.

I am a member of a small religion. It is a religion that has a lot to offer the world, but it is a young religion that hasn’t quite got its message in order. I am alright with all of these things, because it has created a community where I am loved for who I am, but I am not merely accepted; I am challenged to be better and to do more. Not forced. Not pressured. Challenged by people who became my friends, learned who I was and what I was capable of, and challenge me to be my best, while supporting me (as little as necessary) spiritually, emotionally, and on more than one occasion, financially. They encourage me on a free, but responsible, search. And that is what I was looking for. I love being a part of that.

I am not alone.

But I know plenty of Nones. Young Adults who know who we are. They’ve seen the Belief.Net quiz. They’ve read up on the web. Many have even visited, some frequently. They don’t join because we don’t have what they are looking for. Maybe it is just the local congregation. Maybe it is the whole movement. There are lots of reasons, but we aren’t a good fit for everyone. That’s part of being a liberal religion: accepting that people have different needs. We are not in a position to meet them all.

How can we honestly change that? First off, if you want to reach a new demographic, you have to do things differently. If you want to do that without loosing current members, it means starting new programs, embracing new ways of organizing, and maybe even new congregations with that demographic in mind. You want to reach Hispanics? You might consider Spanish language services. If you want to reach Young Adults, follow their lead and rethink your organizational structure to create better networking opportunities.

Still, there are people we cannot reach. We should not try to change to accommodate people who don’t want a religious community. One Facebook commenter said that he wanted swearing in services, and advised us to “Stop being so f-ing square and we’ll show up.”

These aren’t people who will feel at home in our congregations. They aren’t people we would feel comfortable having. We should welcome them to our events. We should invite them to social action. We should include them where they are comfortable. We should not try to change so that they feel more comfortable, because that would require us to further dilute our spiritual message of unity, love, and justice. It would require that we cease to be a religious community. Too many congregations have already gone that route, in my opinion, and we should be trying to work against the trend.

In short, most of the Nones are Nones by choice. I am sure there are a percentage that we can reach, by offering them a different congregational experience. We might have to be satisfied with more, smaller congregations, or with offering new services within current congregations. In reality, though, what is going to allow the UUA to grow is offering a powerful, consistent, and transformative message to those who are seeking religious community, but are dissatisfied with what they have found. We cannot be all things to all people; can we please focus on being something that we already claim? Let’s truly become A Religion for Our Time.


3 Responses

  1. “We should not try to change so that they feel more comfortable, because that would require us to further dilute our spiritual message of unity, love, and justice.”

    In light of just how diluted, aka Water Communioned down? 😉 . . . Unitarian Universalism’s purported spiritual message of unity, love, and justice already is. All I can say here is, God forbid that Unitarian Universalists do *that*. . .

  2. Thanks for posting my comment, which was automatically directed into your SPAM folder according to you, even though I had taken steps to prevent that from happening. I am in the process of responding to your recent comment on The Blog That Cannot Be Named.

    • Name it all you want, Robin. Use correct info when you log in, and link to any one of your dozen UU hate blogs.

      See, I just looked at your other comment, and it is very possible that it was marked Spam because you used a clearly fake email address. twitter.example.com? Come on, Robin. Doesn’t an email address come as part of Canadian citizenship, yet? Like healthcare, etiquette lessons, and special keyboards that make those funny French ç and ê?

      And If I delete a comment, I’ll own up to it. This is my blog, and I have every right to do so. But to imply that I am lying is pretty crass. I did go in and rescue it, after all, and I have approved other comments before. In fact, I asked you several questions about your last comment, but you never came back to respond. You opened up a really good line of thinking, and I was actually hoping that you would choose to be part of something productive.

      Your questions and your suggestions are welcome here. Choose to honor your own worth and dignity with thoughtful, or at least polite, comments, and I will gladly reply to them. If you ever choose to be a positive part of the conversation, then you will be welcomed. If you choose just to make your snide remarks and flee back to the ether, that’s fine with me; maybe (as last time) you’ll accidentally move the conversation anyway. Let’s be clear though: I will delete your comments if they become ad hominem attacks of if you post “facts” that you cannot support. You are free to complain about the “censorship” in your own corner of the web.

Speak your piece

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: