I always hate to see the church dragged into the headlines for conflicts that we should probably stay out of. But sometimes it can’t be helped. A recent Wall Street Journal article took me by surprise; it described an element of civil strife in our nation, and it included a quote from an Episcopal priest right in the middle of the piece. A priest by the name of Jordan Trumble was quoted as saying, “I would say that no one is beyond the reach of God’s grace and mercy, but also, I just don’t understand it.” A powerful theological statement, to be sure.
It’s also a tricky thing to say about a large and growing number of Americans, among whom I count myself: those who drink Coke Zero. Yes, a priest weighed in on what the WSJ describes as a civil war between Diet Coke drinkers and Coke Zero drinkers, and apparently, The Rev. Trumble does not understand those of us who drink the superior product. I suppose I’m always grateful to have God’s grace and mercy; I just wasn’t aware my soft drink of choice triggered such affection from our Lord.
This is not the first time I have been made aware of the passionate debate around Coke’s zero-calorie offerings. Christ Church is a house divided: I drink Coke Zero, and Mother Ashton drinks Diet Coke. Yes, it’s true, she can also claim the Presiding Bishop as being in her camp, a truth I learned during his recent visit. I guess I shouldn’t put people on pedestals, but at least I didn’t let it ruin a perfectly lovely visit from Bishop Rowe in April.
Actually, I am not a strong soda partisan. I prefer Coke Zero, but I will happily drink Diet Coke if that’s what’s available. Although I will sometimes skip Pepsi altogether, Diet, Zero, or otherwise. So, I guess there is some partisanship on my part. Regardless, as I read about the ridiculous infighting about sodas, I couldn’t help experiencing a moment of sobriety about how we must appear in the Church to outsiders, or at least those who aren’t part of our various religious tribes.
The Church is divided in so many ways by things that come down to preference. That’s not to say there aren’t very important theological differences within our Christian family, but in my experience, a lot of folks aren’t thinking about the big theological questions on a day-to-day or Sunday-to-Sunday basis. They are choosing their churches based on preferences as unique and personal as the soda we drink. What tastes good, what makes us feel good, and what we crave play a role in where we sit when we go to church, if we even go to church at all. Once we’ve made our choice, we tend to defend it.
For those outside the church, they don’t understand why there is so much “brand loyalty” and division between two denominations that are so similar – like Episcopalians and Lutherans, which to outsiders are often indistinguishable. But for adherents of those two faiths, there is no question that each is superior, respectively. Even worse is that if someone is far enough outside of the Christian world, they lump us all together and essentially laugh at our infighting. I am always shocked (as an insider) when a non-Christian can’t see any daylight between a Southern Baptist and me. I suspect that my iced-tea drinking family would read the WSJ article and just shake their heads at us soda drinkers, wondering if there isn’t something better to fight about?
The Church is far more important than soda, to be sure, and I don’t want to take the metaphor too far. But if Coke is good at one thing, it’s messaging. They are good at helping people feel something about their product, usually something positive, which leads to customers giving it a try. While they have run teasing campaigns to differentiate themselves from competitors, their typical strategy is to build positive reactions to their products rather than spend most of their time criticizing other sugary carbonated beverages.
The reason the Diet Coke-Coke Zero debate is of interest at all is that “zero” products are growing in market share (Diet Coke has plateaued). People’s motivations for seeking out a soda have changed, and tastes have changed, too. In a world where fewer and fewer people even care about what the Gospel is all about, it may be time to be as savvy as marketers in trying to focus on what we truly have to offer, what differentiates us, and how we convey those realities to people who haven’t already discovered it for themselves. The traditional ways aren’t in need of abandonment, but there is work to be done to get people’s attention. The Gospel of Jesus Christ is still the best thing any of us could offer to others, but we can easily get distracted by followers who don’t do it the way we do, who have different ingredients in their worship and beliefs, and who waste a lot of energy pointing those differences out.
I’m not suggesting we advertise a new “Church Zero.” I don’t think that’s a great marketing ploy for us. But when someone thinks that our infighting is silly, maybe some of it is. Perhaps we would benefit from taking a step back, focusing on what’s most important, sharing the good news without apology or caveat, and letting people discover whether they find it refreshing.
