We must face the fact that in America, the church is still the most segregated major institution in America. At 11:00 on Sunday morning when we stand and sing and Christ has no east or west, we stand at the most segregated hour in this nation.

Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.

Bethany and I had an interesting discussion yesterday about how this generally isn't just true of race, but of class as well. One of the most tragic casualties of the Protestant Reformation and the wave of schisms that followed it is that, particularly in the US, we no longer worship next to our neighbors. In the old Roman Catholic system, you lived in a parish, and though there were exceptions for the very rich, you generally worshipped next to people of all socioeconomic classes; you kneeled next to a butcher or a tailor or a banker. It was truly a catholic church experience. Today, we worship next to people who generally look like us, talk like us, and spend like us - and everyone knows which church is the "establishment" or "elite" church in their town, and which is the church for the working class.

This isn't to say that the establishment or elite churches don't try, or that they're uncharitable or don't care about the poor. If one talks to people in those churches, one understands that they care just as deeply about issues like the bad economy, world poverty, and war just as much as the people in the workers' church. They're just as worried about being laid off, just as worried about their kids' education, just as worried about the state of their community.

So why is it that the one thing we don't talk about in church is the thing Jesus talked about the most - money? I mean, sure, we'll talk about how to have a budget and how to make sure you set aside 10% and how to handle your money, but we don't talk about the broader picture - the haves and have-nots, and why our society is set up so that the have-nots generally tend to descend from other have-nots. We don't talk about class. And we still segregate by class - a de facto segregation that hurts the church's witness to the world.

The problem is that it isn't as easy as just inviting some poorer people into the establishment church. No matter how nice you are, no matter how welcoming you are, there's still a gulf there. I've seen this in person at several churches - the gulf of the underdressed.

I remember a wedding I went to in Athens with Bethany where I discovered this firsthand. My flight had just gotten in the day before, but in typical Delta Airlines fashion, my luggage had yet to make it - so I was stuck with what I'd worn on the plane. What I was wearing wasn't too informal - a button-down shirt and a nice-looking pair of khakis - but at this wedding, which was at Athens's "establishment" church and featured three-piece suits, I stuck out like a sore thumb. No matter how much people pretended not to notice, I knew I was other - so Bethany and I made a brief appearance at the reception and got out.

Now, this was just a wedding and I was a guest, so it wasn't too big a deal, but our churches are like this too. We as a society - and especially we in middle- or upper-middle-class churches - are far too blissfully unaware of the effect of conspicuous consumption on the subconscious (or conscious) mind of our churches. What does it look like to a man who can't afford a nice business suit when all the men are wearing them? What does it look like to a woman who has one or two nice outfits when all the women come in a new-looking dress every week?

I wonder what it would look like if the church not only stopped encouraging conspicuous consumption in dress, but started encouraging its members to be mindful of what the community's consumption patterns say to those who don't have as much. I'm not talking about the "come-as-you-are" fantasy, which just substitutes $75 Banana Republic jeans for $75 slacks, but about openly encouraging church members to come dressed inconspicuously so as to be more welcoming to working people.

I'd imagine it would get some people thinking about what it means that they can afford (and buy) $75 jeans while someone in their community is struggling to pay their bills. I'd imagine it would get some people to think about how their external communication of their socioeconomic status alienates them from the very people whose welfare Jesus seemed most concerned about. And I'd imagine it would get some people talking about what kind of influence the church could be - on culture, on government, on business - to make our world a more just place for haves and have-nots alike.

That could be the start of some very interesting conversations.

Labels: Christianity, Class, Religion