They teach that people should love their neighbour but a major new study shows that churches are one of the few places most modern Britons might even meet them.
Ground-breaking new analysis of the friendship networks of almost 4,300 people aged from 13 to 80 has identified churches and sporting events as the last bastions of neighbourliness and integration in Britain.
Overall, it found that churches and other places of worship are more successful than any other social setting at bringing people of different backgrounds together, well ahead of gatherings such as parties, meetings, weddings or venues such as pubs and clubs.
But while places of worship proved most potent at mixing people from different social classes and races, spectator sports were the most successful at bringing people of different ages together.
The conclusions emerge from new findings, seen by the Sunday Telegraph, from the Social Integration Commission, a unique social experiment which has attempted to map thousands of people’s social networks to determine how closely people of different classes and generations mix in modern Britain.
Initial findings published earlier this year analysed how closely different groups of people mixed. They raised questions about whether decades of efforts to promote multiculturalism have gone into reverse, by showing teenagers are no more likely to meet people from other racial backgrounds in a social setting than those 40 years older suggest.
The study also suggested that class could be a more enduring source of division than race in the UK.
The latest findings analyse how or where people of different backgrounds meet.
Matthew Taylor, Chair of Social Integration Commission, said:
“Institutions play a huge role in determining how and with whom we interact. Our research shows that, perhaps contrary to perceived wisdom, activities such as attending a place of worship or a sporting event can bring people from all sorts of backgrounds together.
“These institutions could play a leading role in promoting social integration. Sporting and religious bodies should explore what more they can do to build a better integrated society.”
Using a technique developed by experimental psychologists at Oxford University, statisticians analysed information provided by a sample of 4,269 people about their own social lives.
Each person was interviewed by Ipsos MORI and asked to describe recent social gatherings they had attended and give detail about who else was there and how they knew them to build up a subjective picture of their friendship circles.
Statisticians then analysed the lists and compared them with the profile of the area in which they lived based on findings from the census to give each person a notional score, depending on how closely their networks matched the profile of their neighbourhood. The same process was then applied to different types of gatherings people attended.
The different settings were most successful at bringing people of different generations together. Sporting events led the way with an integration score of 59 per cent on this measure, just ahead of places of worship on 57 per cent. The other settings scored around 46 per cent for bringing generations together.
On ethnic lines, churches were given an integration score of 25 per cent – twice the average level and far ahead of sporting events which averaged just over seven per cent on the racial mixing measure.
Similarly on social background, churches led the way with a score of 27 per cent, well ahead of the average of 18 per cent.
A spokesman for the Church of England said: “There are no bars of entry into the family of faith.
“This heartening research reflects the reality of church life across the nation with people from all ages, races and backgrounds united by their faith into a wider welcoming family.”
In response, Jon Kuhrt wrote the following (http://resistanceandrenewal.net, 7 December 2014):
Why are churches ‘the best social melting pots in modern Britain?
Today, the Daily Telegraph reports on the findings of research by the Social integration Commission about the places where people from different backgrounds meet and mix with each other. The article, with the headline ‘Churches are the best melting pots in modern Britain,’ states;
‘Overall, it found that churches and other places of worship are more successful than any other social setting at bringing people of different backgrounds together, well ahead of gatherings such as parties, meetings, weddings or venues such as pubs and clubs.’
This may come as a surprise to many. From the incessant media coverage of its sexuality rows, the church is often conveyed as somewhere with a fundamental problemwhen it comes to embracing diversity. But this research asserts that that the very opposite is true: that the church is one of the best places where people from different backgrounds come together.
Diversity cherished
The findings resonate with my experience. The church my family and I are part of, Streatham Baptist Church, is incredibly diverse. A while ago, the minister leading the service asked to have one representative from every nationality present that morning to come up to the front. So, along with a person who was actually from South London, over 50 other people, each from different countries across the globe, came up to the front of the church and stood together. It was a moving moment and a powerful visual illustration of ethnic diversity.
And at the church where my work is based, Hinde Street Methodist Church in central London, over 200 people a day come into the building for 12-Step ‘anonymous’ groups which meet each day from 7.30 a.m. to 9.30 p.m. at night. As well as Alcoholics Anonymous (AA), there is Narcotics Anonymous (NA), Sex and Love Addicts Anonymous (SLAA) and a wide range of others relating to eating disorders, debt, gambling and other issues.
Those coming into the building each day could not be more diverse – ranging from those who are street homeless to famous celebrities.
In both of these different contexts, diversity is something that is cherished, celebrated and invested in. In short, diversity is believed in because it is acknowledged as something fundamental to what it means to be a church.
Member’s Club
Of course, there is no room for any complacency. Congratulations can easily become inward looking and cliquey. Whether it’s large or small, it’s tempting to adapt attitudes more like a Member’s Club and lock themselves into styles of service and activities which simply provide what the current members want.
I remember running a workshop a few years ago on ‘connecting with the local community’ at a church with a tiny congregation. To nods of agreement, one older lady said:
“Oh, I can’t see anyone wanting to join us here. We’re not very friendly you see.”
Needless to say, that congregation no longer exists.
‘God does not show favouritism’
Despite the exceptions, why are churches better at bringing a diverse group of people together than other institutions? As I have written about recently, it’s not because churches are full of intrinsically nicer or friendlier people. I think a key reason is that the imperative to include others who are not like you lies at the heart of the gospel message.
Just consider Jesus’ example. The twelve disciples came from an incredibly diverse spectrum, including both nationalist zealots and their sworn enemies, the tax collectors. Jesus deliberately spent time with those despised and excluded and challenged the exclusive tendencies of the religious communities of his day. And the early church diversified even further with non-Jews welcomed into the Christian Church. As both Peter and Paul declare bluntly: ‘God does not show favouritism.’ (Acts 10: 34 & Romans 2: 11)
Oneness and unity
So, despite its failings and struggles, the church has within its DNA a commitment to be diverse and inclusive. It’s a commitment which is anchored in a belief in everyone’s value before God. This runs deeper than the fashions of political correctness or the fuzziness of good intentions. It is a commitment, and challenge, summed up well by Martin Luther King:
“Worship at its best is a social experience with people of all levels of life coming together to realise their oneness and unity under God. Whenever the church, consciously or unconsciously, caters to one class it loses the spiritual force of the ‘whosoever will, let him come’ doctrine and is in danger of becoming little more than a social club with a thin veneer of religiosity.”
Comments