Faith Works 5-1-2026
Jeff Gill
Religious literacy in the wider culture, and in church
___
Can we all agree that literacy is a good thing?
And that is an expansive use I’m intending for the term “literacy.” That extends from reading as a basic skill to awareness of basic concepts and stories and characters in a social setting. Literacy can be up for grabs in other fields: mathematics talks about “innumeracy” as their parallel, but most people just talk about basic math as well as financial literacy, and we know what they mean.
Where we may not agree: our culture is slowly but steadily moving backwards from literacy on a number of fronts. And again, I’m talking about the wider application of the term. You can read simple texts and be non-literate in the way I’m thinking about. People can scroll on their devices for hours, and mostly be reading as they go, reading headers or captions or prompts, but are they developing literacy?
Obviously, if you don’t engage with a field at all, you won’t know its terms or usages. I’m not literate in many sports, each of which have technical reference points a player or fan of the particular game will know without thinking about. In my youth, adults expressed sheer bafflement at the lexicon of soccer, while Chicago area folk mostly could explain icing in hockey to a child (“it ain’t on a cupcake, okay?”) and discussed why Stan Mikita wore a helmet while most NFL players then did not.
Religion has its own set of terms, and even related branches of Protestantism might have a vocabulary different from that of their cousins in faith. How you talk about salvation, redemption, stewardship, atonement (just to name a few) requires a certain level of religious literacy than you have to pick up if you’re new to that church.
Even individual congregations have a form of local literacy. Many churches I’ve served have main doors, sometimes even painted read, that almost no one used. Once you got involved, you learn where people park, and how they enter the building, let alone the fraught subject of: where can I sit? Literacy, familiarity, knowing the landscape.
Some folks in evangelism and seeker-sensitive outreach programs have suggested Christians should drop, or at least avoid in most public settings, the narrow technical terms which aren’t familiar to everyday folk. To speak of “being saved” takes some explaining if you’ve never gone to church before, however you understand that working out. And internal language of the church building, like narthex, nave, chancel: church growth consultants say “don’t use those words.”
Or, we find ourselves more aware of needing to teach as we talk. That’s been my orientation on all this as a minister, and I say that not certain I’ve always been right in how I work these questions out. Be aware of what’s “insider speak” and interpret as you go. Religious leaders are always needing to be aware of how they are called to teach as much as just preach.
An intersection of literacies is the largely concluded debate, at least in many quarters, about hymnals. Quickly, I’ll concede: hymnals in hand make people face down, sing out less, and are awkward for some to manage.
My musically literate friends are quick to cry out: no! Hymnals give us simple technology for a wide range of songs, and allow for harmony in our singing, four parts and sometimes even a descant!
To which I sadly say: but was there ever a golden age of most people singing parts during worship? I say it sadly, as my mother taught me from youth what it was, and how to do it. She sang alto, I (once upon a time) sang a high tenor as I learned how to follow the music, and when grandma visited she sang soprano.
Today, many churches have no hymnals in the seating… or Bibles. He said, sadly.
Jeff Gill is a writer, storyteller, and preacher in central Ohio; he’s got a bit more to say about religious literacy, musical and otherwise. Tell him what you read in your faith development at knapsack77@gmail.com, or follow @Knapsack on X.
Jeff Gill
Religious literacy in the wider culture, and in church
___
Can we all agree that literacy is a good thing?
And that is an expansive use I’m intending for the term “literacy.” That extends from reading as a basic skill to awareness of basic concepts and stories and characters in a social setting. Literacy can be up for grabs in other fields: mathematics talks about “innumeracy” as their parallel, but most people just talk about basic math as well as financial literacy, and we know what they mean.
Where we may not agree: our culture is slowly but steadily moving backwards from literacy on a number of fronts. And again, I’m talking about the wider application of the term. You can read simple texts and be non-literate in the way I’m thinking about. People can scroll on their devices for hours, and mostly be reading as they go, reading headers or captions or prompts, but are they developing literacy?
Obviously, if you don’t engage with a field at all, you won’t know its terms or usages. I’m not literate in many sports, each of which have technical reference points a player or fan of the particular game will know without thinking about. In my youth, adults expressed sheer bafflement at the lexicon of soccer, while Chicago area folk mostly could explain icing in hockey to a child (“it ain’t on a cupcake, okay?”) and discussed why Stan Mikita wore a helmet while most NFL players then did not.
Religion has its own set of terms, and even related branches of Protestantism might have a vocabulary different from that of their cousins in faith. How you talk about salvation, redemption, stewardship, atonement (just to name a few) requires a certain level of religious literacy than you have to pick up if you’re new to that church.
Even individual congregations have a form of local literacy. Many churches I’ve served have main doors, sometimes even painted read, that almost no one used. Once you got involved, you learn where people park, and how they enter the building, let alone the fraught subject of: where can I sit? Literacy, familiarity, knowing the landscape.
Some folks in evangelism and seeker-sensitive outreach programs have suggested Christians should drop, or at least avoid in most public settings, the narrow technical terms which aren’t familiar to everyday folk. To speak of “being saved” takes some explaining if you’ve never gone to church before, however you understand that working out. And internal language of the church building, like narthex, nave, chancel: church growth consultants say “don’t use those words.”
Or, we find ourselves more aware of needing to teach as we talk. That’s been my orientation on all this as a minister, and I say that not certain I’ve always been right in how I work these questions out. Be aware of what’s “insider speak” and interpret as you go. Religious leaders are always needing to be aware of how they are called to teach as much as just preach.
An intersection of literacies is the largely concluded debate, at least in many quarters, about hymnals. Quickly, I’ll concede: hymnals in hand make people face down, sing out less, and are awkward for some to manage.
My musically literate friends are quick to cry out: no! Hymnals give us simple technology for a wide range of songs, and allow for harmony in our singing, four parts and sometimes even a descant!
To which I sadly say: but was there ever a golden age of most people singing parts during worship? I say it sadly, as my mother taught me from youth what it was, and how to do it. She sang alto, I (once upon a time) sang a high tenor as I learned how to follow the music, and when grandma visited she sang soprano.
Today, many churches have no hymnals in the seating… or Bibles. He said, sadly.
Jeff Gill is a writer, storyteller, and preacher in central Ohio; he’s got a bit more to say about religious literacy, musical and otherwise. Tell him what you read in your faith development at knapsack77@gmail.com, or follow @Knapsack on X.
No comments:
Post a Comment