Convergence of Media and Religion
By Frances Forde Plude
I would like to share some of the latest thinking on the question: “What is the status of religion in a media age?” Dr. Stewart Hoover, a noted communication-and-religion specialist, says the question ought to be: “What is the emerging religion of the media age?”
Cardinal William Keeler got us on the right track with the statement: “…the mass media cannot be understood only instrumentally, as tools which can make preaching the Gospel more effective and efficient. Their impact is also epistemological, psychological, and sociological. A new culture originates from the mass media which brings with it new languages, new techniques and a new psychology.
Cardinal Keeler continues: “To neglect the mass media is not simply to be deficient in the tools one employs in service of the Gospel; it is to risk rendering the Gospel unintelligible to at least a portion of humanity.”
Dr. Hoover also urges us to move beyond the traditional way we have thought about relations between religion and media. He notes “we need to understand the larger cultural questions of the location of religion in public discourse, and the role of the media as guarantors of that discourse, in supporting, shaping or challenging it.” This means looking closely at the reception of media messages by audiences. It is likely that a major reason youth are distanced from churches is that there is a disconnect between their use of media and the misuse of it by religious institutions.
Hoover notes implied in his research “is the extent to which the traditional sources of symbolic input – the church, the schools, the extended family, the community, the reference group – are now complemented by, integrated into, or even outpaced by, symbols, ideas, and values derived from the media sphere.”
Hoover concludes there is evidence religion and the media are coming together to occupy some of the same spaces in contemporary life. They are converging, so the boundaries between the ‘religious’ and the ‘media’ are breaking down. Due to changes in religious practice and media forums, in the media age people consider the secular as sacred and the sacred as secular. Hoover says:
churches must exist within existing media
media messages are received by active audiences who are religious
church media efforts must act as a mediator to the public sphere
church public relations must help clarify objectives/strategies
People are negotiating life’s meaning as they respond to TV, film, audio sounds, computer content and contacts. What can churches do?
By Suzanne Nelson
Faith communities are made up of people immersed in, and shaped by, our media culture. Parishioners respond daily to this culture by simply living in it. Most adjust to media saturation very well. Others try to escape from it or become overwhelmed by it. However, the media culture is real, and when we understand these media-culture roots we can shape our own leadership and become more effective at evangelization.
Three things rooted in the media culture impact greatly on our church life and evangelization efforts: choices, symbolism, and interdependence.
Choices. People immersed in media culture are inundated with many choices, from books, TV and radio programs, videos, movies and millions of websites. And Malls full of stores and telecommunications companies with still one more plan. The question for us is: how effectively do we provide for choice our parish programming? The Religious Education program, for example, can offer a menu of choices for every age category. For children programming might include: the traditional CCD, a Family Program, supervised home study, internet mini courses, Children’s Liturgy of the Word, RCIA adapted for children, vacation bible school, and so on. A faith community offering only one choice, one method of religious education, is not aware of the culture of their congregation and will seem to be out of touch. Giving people choices is necessary for effective evangelization.
Symbolism. People often make a specific choice because of its underlying symbolism. They may not be able or willing to articulate this, but they do it nevertheless. What does the choice of an individual car, home, vacation, or piece of jewelry symbolize? I personally think as parish leaders we need to ask people to articulate – and not presume to know – what specific things symbolize for them. A large home, for example, may symbolize hospitality for some, and status for others. Usually symbols carry several layers of meaning and can lead to rich discussions. Many people want to share their thoughts about life’s meaning with those who will respect their insights and opinions. In this sharing we are standing on the holy ground of sharing our faith.
Interdependence. Thirdly, at the root of our media culture is interdependence. Good structures can illuminate paths of possibility and opportunity and can stimulate creativity and initiative. Most parishioners no longer live in isolation; they live and work in an increasingly diverse society. How does a local church reflect that reality? By working together with people from other religious backgrounds on projects that serve the poor. By being aware of, and sensitive to, the many “doors” we have in our churches through which people enter looking for welcome. How does your parish minister in interfaith marriage preparation, for example? Or how do you welcome the “stranger” at parent meetings, graduations, funerals, building projects, nursing homes, etc. We are living in an interdependent culture. Sharing faith will happen there or not at all.