IN THE early days of religious broadcasting on BBC radio, a regular listener "wrote for months after every Sunday morning service to the clergyman who had conducted the service to tell him: "This morning you preached to the largest congregation you will ever have in your lifetime. And how miserably you failed!"
This neatly encapsulates a problem the churches have had with the news communications technology. We don't realise the revolutionary changes in this technology and are ill prepared to use them. In particular, there is no strong commitment to and no cohesive church policy on broadcasting. On the level of theory, successive church leaders have talked often about the importance of the church "utilising the many new pulpits our age provides" (Pope John Paul II) and "preaching the gospel from the rooftops of the world" (Pope Paul VI).
In Ireland, there has never been the very substantial commitment by the churches to radio and television in terms off production and broadcasting facilities, generous resources and professional personnel that many other national churches have seen as important in modern conditions.
In fact, if anything, there is more suspicion of and a greater tendency to retreat from mainstream media by church personnel today. There are fewer people trained and working full time in communications than there were 20 to 30 years ago. This is an unfortunate and short sighted attitude, which closes off dramatic opportunities for the church to communicate in new ways.
IN fairness, one glorious exception should be mentioned the imaginative, progressive and professional role of the Radharc team over the last 26 years.
Local radio, too, has seen phenomenal growth, impact and immediacy over the past eight years. Its main objective is to get the community in all its rich diversity to talk about itself to itself. It is a perpetual dialogue of controversy and achievement and that, more' than anything else, explains the huge growth in listenership.
Right across the country volunteers from the different churches have cooperated in successfully producing and presenting programmes, but unfortunately often without adequate support or resources from the churches or the community.
I see three significant opportunities for the church in this context. Radio and television in many ways have replaced the pulpit as the source of ideas and information, and as the major shaper of attitudes and values. They are channels for restored dialogue. Because the media cross boundaries of understanding, culture and science, they can bring the church back into meaningful interaction with the rest of the world. Too often the church retreats into a cultural enclave of its own and uses a language that is often specialised and obscure.
In the second place, involvement in broadcasting provides a compelling and forceful opportunity to preach the Christian Gospel. In this, it can make a valuable contribution to the lives not only of those who never or cannot go to church, but also to all believers who are on the faith journey to becoming Christians.
Thirdly, the media provide an important PR opportunity for the churches to create a sense of church by making people aware of the activities, the plans, the needs of parish, diocese and church agencies. I believe, for example, that there is a great deal of enlightened, positive, and participatory development in the "church at local and diocesan level which rarely gets covered in the media.
There is still too much stereotyped thinking about the church and too many stories are about "churchy" events and happenings. The media needs to be more fresh, more thorough and more reflective about church life and issues.
But we church communicators must bear some of the responsibility for failing to communicate our message. What often may strike the onlooker about our efforts is sectarian bickering or preoccupation with trivia. For example, church reaction to the legitimate media interest in clerical scandals over the last five years has been hesitant, haphazard and at times confusing.
My own experience over the past 12 months with the Brendan Comiskey saga has highlighted both our failures as a church to communicate effectively and the ways that some sections of the media trivialised, distorted and misrepresented elements of that story.
Engagement with the media means learning to change. It will mean greatly increased accountability on the part of the church and willingness to take the consequences publicly of its words and actions, silences and omissions. Transparent and regular communication also means being willing to let failure and disagreement be revealed.
THE tele evangelists and the "electronic church" in many ways represent a terrifying development, and are rightly criticised for providing trivial and superficial religion and a quick fix to people's anxieties. The Christian right in the US has moved from being a fringe sect to being the dominant religious conglomerate in the print and electronic media.
This underscores the communication opportunities and the importance of a broadcasting policy for the Irish church. It requires the treating of religious broadcasting as a key priority in terms of dramatically increased commitment of resources, facilities and personnel and a media connection for all church programmes and activities.
Media training needs to have a much higher priority in the churches' personnel, training and pastoral policies. Effectively preaching the gospel means years of theological study - study of the message. Surely, the same period should be devoted to communication skills? For every thousand who study theology professionally are there more than a handful who study the media professionally? How many who have a talent for the media are encouraged and facilitated in using it?
