Buddhist Catholic Contemplative Evangelical General Christian Hindu Jewish Latter-day Saint Muslim New Visions Progressive Christian

Beliefs

Topics

Columnists

Resource Library

Research Tools

Video

Podcasts

Thought Readers

Faith In Media Tracker

Newsletters

Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In Subscription Support

Follow Patheos

Home
Progressive Christian
Starbucks, Inclusivity, And The United Methodist Church

Starbucks, Inclusivity, And The United Methodist Church

Last updated on: May 30, 2018 at 3:36 pm by Christy Thomas

Starbucks, Inclusivity, And The United Methodist Church 2018-05-30T15:36:00-05:00 Christy Thomas

LOGO Patheos Explore the world's faith through different perspectives on religion and spirituality! Patheos has the views of the prevalent religions and spiritualities of the world.

Starbucks has some things to teach us about inclusivity, but ultimately, like my plants, the United Methodist Church must split to regain health and vitality. It’s more complicated than we think it is to practice inclusivity.

Fences keep us safe; inclusivity is not safe On Tuesday, May 30, 2018, Starbucks ran full-page ads in several major newspapers (I saw them in both the Wall Street Journal and the New York Times) explaining why they were “starting a new chapter in our history.”

Executive Chairman Howard Schultz offers the philosophy of Starbucks that he formed while observing the cafes and espresso bars in Italy.

I returned home determined to create a similar experience in America—a new “third place” between home and work–and build a different kind of company. I wanted our stores to be comfortable, safe spaces where everyone had the opportunity to enjoy a coffee, sit, read, write, host a meeting, date, debate, discuss, or just relax.

An incident in Philadelphia recently convinced Schultz that they were falling short of that goal. The day’s training was meant as a reset, a time to regain that original goal of what we in the church often call “radical hospitality.”

Schultz concludes the ad with these words, “To our customers: I want to thank you for your patience and support as we renew our promise to make Starbucks what I envisioned it could be nearly 40 years ago–an inclusive gathering place for all.”

“An inclusive gathering for all.” And we in The United Methodist Church, the church of “Open Hands, Open Hearts, Open Minds” a tagline that certainly sounds inclusive, are realizing that an inclusive church probably can’t happen.

The church is not a retail establishment, of course. Yes, there are commonalities with the coffee chain, but we operate from different financial and organizational principles limiting any real comparisons between the two.

Nonetheless, inclusivity is an issue both places and brings up many questions. How far can Starbucks go with its goal of this inclusive gathering space? At what point will too much inclusivity end up eroding profit as paying customers may choose to speak with their feet and go elsewhere?

For The United Methodist Church, the call to “inclusivity” started with racial issues which did cause a split between northern and southern churches. Then we moved onto full acceptance of female clergy–which caused enormous complications with many churches still refusing female clergy. Now we face how to embrace the full humanity of those who sexuality does not fit a rigid male/female binary.

Each move toward inclusivity both strengthened our witness and weakened our numbers and influence. In each case, there have been many who have said, “That particular outgroup does not have a place in the ingroup.”

Although I am and have long been an advocate of a far more inclusive United Methodist Church, I am also aware that, should we make this move, the UMC will shrink even more.

Why? Because it is ever so much harder to have an inclusive gathering than an exclusive one. People need and want boundaries. Those walls and borders bring safety on multiple levels.

The old adage, “good fences make good neighbors” carries much wisdom. This is mine and that is yours. This fits and that doesn’t fit. This is right, and this is wrong. These communal standards make it possible to live in healthy societies.

Let’s go back to the Starbucks situation: at some point, they have to draw a line as to what is acceptable behavior on the part of their patrons and what is not. Will it be acceptable for a group of people to come in, monopolize most of the tables for most of the day, and order little or nothing during that time? Check out what happened at a McDonald’s in New York which faced that very problem.

It’s more complicated than we think it is to practice inclusivity.

Let’s push it a little further. Suppose there is a good paying, well-behaved customer who also decides that eating and drinking fully unclothed is the preferred mode. Then what? Has a line been crossed?

Again, it’s more complicated than we think to practice inclusivity.

Back to the UMC: to be truly inclusive, we have to be inclusive of the exclusivists. Otherwise, it becomes a discriminatory church in its own right. But the inclusivists are as appalled at needing to embrace their sisters and brothers who oppose their very presence as the exclusivists are of embracing those whom they see as directly violating the Bible.

Again, walls make us feel safe. Our houses have them for a reason. Ideally, they protect us from the weather, from intruders, from a lack of privacy while still giving us the option of inviting others in. AND inviting them back out again.

I remember a scene from the classic film Dr. Zhivago when Zhivago returns to his wife’s parent’s giant mansion after his war service. There he finds that the newly instituted governing forces have commandeered their home as public housing. Zhivago’s family, now confined to one small room, watch the uninvited new occupants slowly dismantle the rest of the house.

How many of us want to see our living spaces taken over like that? But that’s also inclusion taken to its tragic logical end.

Exclusion also has a tragic logical end. At some point, the fences get so high, the walls so impenetrable, the insiders so insular and cut off from other ways of thinking and seeing the world that the overly protected space becomes a cult and a prison.

That process sums up the tragic history of much of Christianity after the Reformation and the splitting off from Roman Catholic hegemony. The church splintered into hundreds of thousands of tiny little groups, all sure they are right, all building tighter and tighter boundaries around their belief structures or racial groups or gender identities.

As the exclusivists well know, human beings are inexorably drawn to high-boundary groups with defined in-groups and out-groups. Again, such structures give a sense of safety for those inside–they know they belong, they are “saved” so to speak, that all those around them share mental and spiritual commonalities.

Those on the inside can relax, and periodically invite those on the outside to take the necessary pledges and go through the initiation process and come in. It can be a desirable proposition to those on the outside.

An inclusive church demands much interpersonal trust, trust that the weaker boundaries won’t be improperly breached or destroyed. That trust takes a lot of mental and spiritual energy. The nature of inclusiveness and greater diversity does not offer the assurance of the commonality of thought and beliefs.

Maintaining that level of trust with those who hold differing ideas and ways of perceiving the world drains energy. We might compare it to ongoing sojourns in areas where the languages and customs are not our own–fascinating but often tiring. Nothing can be done by rote. Everything takes extra effort.

The exclusive church or organization has a lot more freedom to innovate within the boundaries it has built. The inclusive church has to continually re-think where those boundaries need to be built.

As I meander down this torturous thought path, I find myself in sympathy with both “sides” fighting the battle for the soul and future of The United Methodist Church.

Each has excellent arguments. While Jesus was clearly an inclusivist–he did eat with sinners, after all–he also had a small group of intimates. That in-group experience provided them the safety they needed to abandon their previous lives for the sake of this unusual itinerant preacher who called them into lives of sacrificial love and extreme service.

The early church leaders had to form their own inclusive/exclusive balance as they dealt with the influx of those who didn’t fit their preconceived ways of being religious. In the end, they appeared to agree to disagree, to stay loosely connected but to contextualize their specialized ministries.

Their advantage over us? They didn’t have an impenetrable Book of Discipline or even a set of scriptures as we know them as their law books. With persecution around every corner, they had to have each other’s backs to survive.

It’s different for us. Our exceedingly complex structure and cumbersome way of making decisions (have you ever tried to explain the purpose of General Conferences to outsiders? I have–and the look on their faces is a wonder to behold) wraps chains around any hope of flexibility. The decision-making process, combined with confusing structures, also exacerbates tensions that we might otherwise resolve over cups of coffee or a bottle of wine and a hunk of bread shared around the table.

I celebrate what Starbucks is doing. I also know they are walking in a possible minefield of corporate disasters.

I celebrate what The United Methodist Church has done over the centuries. It has been a profound force for both personal and societal good. And our minefield is blowing up all around us.

Plants need to be divided periodically to be healthy I garden for mental health and for the delight of nurturing plant life. Periodically, I must pull overgrown perennials out of the ground or pot and forcibly break them up. Their centers get too hard, too ingrown for any more healthy growth to take place.

I often wonder how the plants “feel” about what I am doing to them. If the centers are severely ingrown, I’ve been known to take a hatchet to them to break them up. I then replant the pieces some distance apart. A few of the split apart pieces inevitably die. But most thrive, freed to send their roots deeper and their leaves and branches higher.

I’ve fought and fought and fought against reaching this point for the UMC, but I think its time. May we find a way to do this as gracefully as possible so all of us can thrive. It’s the only way I see to find the balance between the biblical mandate for an inclusive church AND to recognize that some exclusivity is necessary for health and well-being. I hope that we will all learn from the pain and use the memory of the pain to go forth most freely.

Starbucks has some things to teach us about inclusivity, but ultimately, like my plants, the United Methodist Church must split to regain health and vitality.

Photo on VisualHunt
Plant Photo by Christy Thomas

The United Methodist Church

Previous Post

May 25, 2018

Our Memories Make Us, And Memorial Day Makes The US A Democracy

Next Post

May 31, 2018 Paige Patterson Out; Paternalism And Male Supremacy Still In

Browse Our Archives

Select a Category " obedience abortion accommodation accountability administration adolescence Advent advice an ordinary death anxiety apology apportionments Ash Wednesday ask thoughtfulpastor baptism betrayal Bible bondage calling certainty change character charity children Christianity Christmas church church as garden clergy clergy credentials closure comfort compassion competition compromise Confirmation conservation conservative conspiracy theories consumer conversion coronavirua corruption courage covenant cultural context death Deconstruction discipleship discord divorce doctrine doing good drugs dysfunctional Easter Easter; Resurrection education election entertainment envy escape evaluation evil exclusive church exercise faith faithfulness family fasting fear feast featured film review finances first world problem food forgiveness fundamentalist garden gay marriage General Conference generosity giving thanks GLBT glory good government grace guilt habit happy harmony hateful acts healing health health care heaven hell hello/goodbye heresy hidden agenda holiness homelessness homosexuality humility hymn hypocrisy Imago Dei In training inclusive church indulgence injustice innocents insurance intolerance itinerancy joy Justice kindness Kingdom of Heave kingdom of heaven language laughter laundry lawsuit leadership Lent LGBTQ liberal life Little Things Matter longform meandering thoughts memories mercy metaphor metrics miracle misfortunes morality Mormon Muslim mystery worship natural disasters New Category Name nutrients older adults oppression pain Paleo paperwork partnered pastor peace pension pharmaceutical placebo politics poverty prayer privilege public schools questions quiet racism rain reason reconciliation religion repentance requirements rescue respect rest resurrection retirement Sabbath sacrament sacred salvation same-sex marriage sanctuary schism schooling science SCOTUS secrecy separation of church and state sexism sexuality short cuts silence sin sleep soil spiritual journey stillness suffering surgery sustainable church teacher technology thank you theology therapy thinking tolerance TOS trust truth Uncategorized welcome Why Easter? wisdom women worship

Select a Month October 2026 September 2026 August 2026 July 2026 June 2026 May 2026 April 2026 March 2026 February 2026 December 2025 October 2025 September 2025 July 2025 June 2025 March 2025 February 2025 December 2024 November 2024 August 2024 July 2024 June 2024 April 2024 March 2024 January 2024 December 2023 August 2023 July 2023 June 2023 May 2023 March 2023 February 2023 January 2023 December 2022 October 2022 September 2022 July 2022 March 2022 February 2022 January 2022 October 2021 July 2021 June 2021 April 2021 March 2021 February 2021 January 2021 December 2020 November 2020 October 2020 September 2020 August 2020 July 2020 June 2020 May 2020 April 2020 March 2020 January 2020 November 2019 October 2019 September 2019 August 2019 May 2019 April 2019 March 2019 February 2019 January 2019 December 2018 November 2018 October 2018 September 2018 August 2018 July 2018 June 2018 May 2018 April 2018 March 2018 February 2018 January 2018 December 2017 November 2017 October 2017 September 2017 August 2017 July 2017 June 2017 May 2017 April 2017 March 2017 February 2017 January 2017 December 2016 November 2016 October 2016 September 2016 August 2016 July 2016 June 2016 May 2016 April 2016 March 2016 February 2016 January 2016 December 2015 November 2015 October 2015 September 2015 August 2015 July 2015 June 2015 May 2015 April 2015 March 2015 February 2015 January 2015 December 2014 November 2014 October 2014 September 2014 August 2014 July 2014 June 2014 May 2014 April 2014 March 2014 February 2014 January 2014 December 2013 November 2013 October 2013 September 2013 August 2013 July 2013 June 2013 May 2013 April 2013 March 2013 February 2013 January 2013 December 2012 November 2012 October 2012 September 2012 August 2012 July 2012 June 2012 May 2012 April 2012 March 2012 February 2012 January 2012 December 2011 November 2011 October 2011 September 2011 August 2011 July 2011 June 2011 May 2011 April 2011 March 2011 February 2011 January 2011 December 2010 November 2010 October 2010 September 2010 August 2010 July 2010 June 2010 May 2010 April 2010 March 2010 February 2010 January 2010 December 2009 November 2009 October 2009 September 2009 August 2009 July 2009 June 2009 May 2009 April 2009 March 2009 February 2009 January 2009 December 2008 November 2008 October 2008 August 2008 July 2008 June 2008 May 2008 April 2008 March 2008 February 2008 January 2008 December 2007 November 2007 October 2007 September 2007 July 2007 March 2007

TAKE THE

Religious Wisdom Quiz