«
»

, , , ,

Unitarians and James Fowler

07.23.06 | 5 Comments

Yet Another Unitarian Universalist and The Journey recently put up series of posts about Jim Fowler’s faith development theory. The Journey’s post is a good summary for those not familiar with it. Yet Another UU’s post is a good summary of some of its shortcomings. What follows is something of a reply to both, en lieu of a long comment on either.

We UUs seem, as a tradition, to only be interested in “developing” Fowler’s fourth stage, the Individuative-Reflective stage that first pops up around high school or so. We believe in that stage. We seem to think that stage is faith. All other orientations toward faith are immature, we seem to think, and unworthy of us.

But whether you buy Fowler’s stages or not, children and youth cannot skip stages. Yet we tend to educate our movement’s children as though Individuative-Reflective faith is the only way of doing faith. Perhaps we teach them as though they’re already at that level. Or perhaps we teach them as though children’s RE is valuable only insofar as it’s an IR faith prep program.

Some of you know that I worked for Fowler for five years, until his retirement a year ago. He seemed convinced—from his personal experience, not his research, mind you—that UUs were stuck in an overly cognitive version of IR faith. (Keep in mind that his work is criticized for being overly cognitive, as Yet Another UU notes.) He seemed to think that UUs reached the IR faith stage, decided that IR faith was a completely radical break from status quo faith, decided that their original religious traditions were completely devoid of resources for IR faith, and left to focus on a devoid-of-religious-content humanism.

I tried to assure him that this was not the case, or at least that it was no longer the case, that it characterized mid-century, modernist UUism, and that present day UUism was much more open to religious experience and traditions. Pagans, Buddhists, and all that.

And yet it felt disenguous as I said it. Even though we flavor our self-congratulatory IR faith with heterodox spiritualities now, we are overwhelmingly a tradition committed to IR-faith-ism. It’s only natural that our children’s RE programs would follow suit. You can’t say we don’t practice what we preach.

Yet Another UU is on to something with his talk of Vygotsky’s work on child psychology and the power of high expectations. In the church I grew up in, the youth group sat on the front few pews, catty-cornered from the preacher. We passed notes and caught the occasional case of the giggles, but there’s only so much mischief you can get into on the front pews. Every couple or three months the preacher might drop a non sequiter “young people” into the flow of his sermon as a way of telling us we were getting out of hand, but mostly we behaved, Sunday morning and Sunday night. We participated in the worship life of our community. The adults appreciated us being there and greeted our teenage behavior with appreciative smirks.

I made my own youth groups do the same when I was a youth director. At first you’d think I was forcing them to hold hands with their parents in the mall, and the congregation was only a little less wary. Yet after a month, it was as though there was no other way to do it. The youth valued having their own space, and the congregation valued seeing their youth up there at the front, worshipping with them.

When I suggest doing the same at my UU congregation, it’s as though I’ve suggested the impossible. Youth are too involved with doing IR-faith-ism, I’m led to believe, to do something as extraneous as worship.

And so we are a religious tradition with upwards of 90% newcomers, not because we’re just that popular but because we can’t keep our children and youth around. Is it any wonder? They’ve been taught that faith is IR faith, and they’re smart enough to know they can do that well enough on their own.

5 Comments


«
»