Abstract
This article argues that, alongside ethnicity, gender and age, psychological type theory offers a distinctive lens through which to assess the inclusivity agenda of the Anglican Church. On this criterion, empirical data indicate that cathedrals are achieving greater inclusivity than parish churches.
Keywords
The challenge to be inclusive
The Church of England takes seriously the challenge to be an inclusive church. If God’s invitation is open equally to all, that invitation should be extended equally to all. Are there perhaps some sections of society more resistant to respond to the invitation, or is perhaps the Church less well equipped to tune the invitation to their ears?
While the issues of ethnic diversity and racial inclusivity are properly a matter of core concern, are there other visible criteria of inclusivity that may be matters of concern? The imbalance of men and women occupying the pews in Anglican churches has been recognized for many years. In our careful congregation survey conducted throughout the Diocese of Southwark a decade ago, with responses from over 30,000 churchgoers, David Lankshear and I found that, within each of the three very different episcopal areas (Woolwich, Kingston and Croydon), men accounted for 34 per cent of adult churchgoers.1 The challenge to be an inclusive church properly focuses on growing a church that is more accessible to men.
An imbalance among age groups is also visible. Drawing on the Diocese of Southwark survey, Albert Jewell responded to the weighting towards older people by emphasizing the importance of distinctive ministry among this age group.2 At the same time, the challenge to be an inclusive church properly focuses on growing a younger church.
This article aims to explore a less visible aspect of inclusivity than revealed by ethnicity, gender or age. What may be less visible to the naked eye is the psychological type profile of congregations. If God’s invitation is open equally to all, is that invitation being extended equally to all psychological types? Are there some psychological types more resistant to respond to the invitation? Or is the Church perhaps less well equipped to tune the invitation to their ears?
In this article I explore that question in five steps. Step one introduces the notion of a theology of individual differences and distinguishes between the two concepts of personality and character. Step two introduces three models of personality proposed by psychologists and suggests that, while some of these models conflate personality with character, psychological type theory keeps a clear focus on personality. Step three discusses what is known about inclusion and exclusion within churches from studies exploring the psychological type profile of church congregations. Step four widens the discussion by introducing Walker’s fourfold model of belonging to God and relating to the Anglican Church, through activities, events, people and place. And step five explores how Anglican cathedrals are reaching a wider range of psychological types, not only through activities, but also through events and through place.
Theology of individual differences
Andrew Village and I grounded our development of a theology of individual differences in a strong doctrine of creation. The biblical basis for this doctrine of creation is informed by Genesis 1.27: God created humankind in the image of God, in the image of God, God created them, male and female God created them.
In contrast with the narrative concerning Adam and Eve, a doctrine of creation grounded in Genesis 1.27 is committed theologically to recognizing that both men and women are created equally in the image of God, and to arguing that individual differences that are created equal (male and female) need to be accorded equal value and equal status. If such a theology of individual differences holds good for sex differences, then, by extension, such a theology should also hold good for other differences equally grounded in creation – that is to say, in the intentionality of the divine Creator. Such differences may well include ethnic differences and some psychological differences. Before examining the implications of such a view, the Christian doctrine of creation needs to be set alongside the Christian doctrine of the fall.
The key point made by the Christian doctrine of the fall is that the image of the Creator seen in the human creature is no longer unsullied. The image has been corrupted. The task to be undertaken by a sound theology of individual differences is to attempt to untangle those differences that can reasonably be posited to reflect the fall and those that persist as proper indicators of the image and of the intention of the divine Creator. Those individual differences that reflect the corruption brought about by the fall must rightly be subject to the saving and transforming power of Christ (the doctrine of redemption) and the perfecting power of the Holy Spirit (the doctrine of sanctification).
In this context, a theology of individual differences makes an important distinction between the concepts of personality and character. On this account, the concept of personality is rooted within the doctrine of creation while the concept of character is rooted in the doctrines of fall and redemption. While the distinction between introversion and extraversion is conceptualized within the domain of personality, the distinction between pride and humility is conceptualized within the domain of character.
In the light of a doctrine of creation grounded in Genesis 1.27, the individual difference of sex (male and female) may be properly seen as reflecting creation rather than fall. In the development of our theology of individual differences, Andrew Village and I argued that it would be appropriate to conceptualize individual differences in ethnicity and in personality (but not character) in a similar way. On this account, in the eyes of God, being male is neither of more nor less value than being female, being white is neither of more nor less value than being a person of colour, and being introvert is neither of more nor less value than being extravert.
Now, if this theory holds good, we may well expect a Church concerned with inclusivity to give serious consideration to imbalances within its membership (and clergy) related to gender, ethnicity and personality.
Psychological models of personality
There are a number of psychological models of personality that agree on including extraversion: for example, Eysenck’s major three-dimensional model, which measures extraversion, neuroticism and psychoticism;4 Costa and McCrea’s Big Five Factor model, measuring extraversion, neuroticism, agreeableness, conscientiousness and openness to experience;5 and Jung’s model of psychological type, as developed by the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, which distinguishes between introversion and extraversion, sensing and intuition, thinking and feeling, and judging and perceiving.6
These three well-established models of personality differ in important ways. Eysenck’s model merges normal personality with pathologies (neuroticism and psychoticism). The Big Five Factor model merges normal personality with aspects of character.7 Psychological type theory focuses entirely on normal personality. The differences observed by psychological type theory avoid value judgements, in the sense that extraversion and introversion, sensing and intuition, thinking and feeling, and judging and perceiving are all value neutral. It is for this reason that psychological type theory can be integrated into a theologically coherent understanding of individual differences, acknowledging the key doctrinal structure of creation, fall, redemption and sanctification.
Psychological type theory
Given this understanding of personality differences, psychological type theory may be of special interest to a Church committed to the gospel of inclusivity. What are the four components of psychological type theory? How do we recognize them? And what implications do they carry for church life?
Introversion and extraversion describe two different orientations. Extraverts are oriented towards the external world; they are energized by the events and people around them. Introverts are oriented towards their internal world; they are energized by their inner ideas and concepts. Extraverts tend to vocalize a problem or an idea, rather than think it through privately. Introverts tend to think matters through privately before they speak about them. Extraverts tend to enjoy company and social events, but are drained by solitude and silence. Introverts tend to enjoy solitude and silence, but are drained by social events and company. The Church shaped by introverts and the Church shaped by extraverts may function quite differently.
Sensing and intuition describe two different ways of seeing the world. Sensing types prefer facts and data; they build up the big picture gradually by exploring the details. Intuitive types prefer ideas and theories; they grasp the details slowly by fitting them into the big picture. The gospel proclaimed by sensing types and the gospel proclaimed by intuitive types may be shaped quite differently.
Thinking and feeling describe two different ways of evaluating the world and reaching decisions. Thinking types begin with the head and are driven by objective processes. Feeling types begin with the heart and are driven by subjective values. Thinking types strive for fairness and justice. Feeling types strive for harmony and peace. The community shaped by feeling types and the community shaped by thinking types may establish quite different priorities.
Judging and perceiving describe two different ways of relating to the external world. Judging types like their external world to be structured, tidy and predictable. Perceiving types like their external world to be flexible, open and spontaneous. Judging types perform best when they can plan well in advance. Perceiving types perform best when the deadline is just around the corner. The Church shaped by judging types and the Church shaped by perceiving types may work quite differently.
Church congregations
Building on research initiated in North America during the 1980s, three relatively small studies of Anglican congregations in England and Wales were published during the early 2000s, preparing the way for my study of 3,302 churchgoers drawn from 140 Anglican congregations.8 The findings from this study of churchgoers were set alongside the population norms published by Kendall.9 This comparison allows a view to be taken regarding just how representative Anglican congregations are of the population from which they are drawn. The data demonstrated over-representation in church congregations of introverts, sensing types, feeling types and judging types. Among women, those who preferred sensing, feeling and judging accounted for 50 per cent of churchgoers, compared with 37 per cent in the general population. Among men, those who preferred sensing, feeling and judging accounted for 28 per cent of churchgoers, compared with 13 per cent of the general population. The over-representation of some psychological types is inevitably reflected in the under-representation of other types.
Reviewing these findings, I advanced the hypothesis that, if introverts, sensing types, feeling types and judging types constitute the majority of Anglican churchgoers, extraverts, intuitive types, thinking types and perceiving types are least likely to feel at home in the churches they attend. I tested this hypothesis among a sample of 1,867 churchgoers who completed a measure of psychological type, together with a measure of frequency of attendance and an index of congregational satisfaction.10 These data confirmed that congregations were weighted towards preferences for introversion, sensing, feeling and judging, and that the individuals displaying the opposite preferences (extraversion, intuition, thinking and perceiving) recorded lower levels of congregational satisfaction. On the basis of these findings, I took the view that not only were extraverts, intuitive types, thinking types and perceiving types less in evidence in church congregations, but those who were there were expressing lower levels of congregational satisfaction and thus more likely to join the growing community of church leavers that I had explored earlier with Philip Richter.11
Ways of belonging to God
In his book God’s Belongers, David Walker drew together the fruits of his series of conceptual and empirical studies, conducted over a decade, to invite the Anglican Church to recognize and to appreciate the variety of ways through which people belong to God and relate to the Anglican Church.12 Through the presence and ministry of the Anglican Church, Walker argues that people value belonging to God in four distinctive ways, characterized as belonging through activities, through events, through place and through people.
For Walker, belonging through activities involves engaging with church on a regular and frequent basis. Participants are expected to engage with church activities, not just on some occasions but with the whole series. For example, engaging with Sunday services requires significant investment of time and energy and displays a sense of commitment week in and week out. Walker argues that commitment to such activities reveals a real sense of belonging to God.
For Walker, belonging through events embraces several different categories. Major Christian festivals, including Christmas, Harvest Thanksgiving and Remembrance Sunday, offer a recurring pattern through the calendar. The occasional offices, including baptisms, marriages and funerals, address particularly poignant points in the lifecycle. Walker argues that participation in such events reveals a real sense of belonging to God.
For Walker, belonging through place acknowledges that the unlocked door of the parish church or the unlocked door of the cathedral may feel invitational, and the threshold relatively easy to cross into the hallowed space. Walker argues that there are many ways in which individuals may feel connected with a specific church that reveal a sense of belonging to God.
For Walker, belonging through people or through relationships recognizes that local churches have associated with them key individuals who are seen as representing the face of the church more broadly within the communities with which they interact. Some of these key people hold a formal office, as priest, reader, churchwarden or member of a local ministry team. Others are recognized simply for being there and for doing things. Walker argues that engagement with such people reveals a vicarious sense of belonging to God.
Anglican cathedrals
Studies conducted within Anglican cathedrals have applied psychological type theory to three of Walker’s four ways of belonging, by exploring those who are part of cathedral Sunday congregations (belonging through activities), those who come to cathedral carol services (belonging through events), and those who come as visitors to cathedrals (belonging through place).
In terms of activities, David Lankshear reported on a study among 281 participants attending the Sunday service at Southwark Cathedral; he compared the psychological type profile of these cathedral attendees with the earlier study of 3,302 Anglican churchgoers.13 In Southwark Cathedral they found higher proportions of intuitive types and thinking types. This cathedral’s Sunday services were reaching people whom parish churches were finding it hard to reach.
In terms of events, David Walker explored the psychological type profile of 164 men and 239 women who attended two Christmas carol services in Worcester Cathedral in 2009,14 and again compared his findings with the earlier study of 3,302 Anglican churchgoers. Walker’s paper reporting his findings carried the title ‘O come all ye thinking types: the wider appeal of the cathedral carol service’.
Drawing thinking types into Anglican churches is a particular challenge in light of the fact that the preference for thinking is much higher among men than among women and men are a minority within congregations. According to Kendall, in the general population 65 per cent of men prefer thinking compared with 30 per cent of women.15 Not only that, the majority of Anglican clergymen also prefer feeling, with the consequence that church congregations are saturated by a preference for feeling that makes access difficult for thinking types.16 In the scientific spirit of replication, other studies have reported on the psychological type profile of 193 participants at carol services in Bangor Cathedral in 2013, 441 participants attending the Holly Bough services on the Fourth Sunday of Advent 2019 in Liverpool Cathedral, and 1,234 participants attending the two Christmas Eve carol services in 2019 in Liverpool Cathedral. All three replication studies confirmed Walker’s initial findings that cathedral carol services were providing events reaching people whom Sunday activities were finding it hard to reach.17
In terms of place, two initial studies applying psychological type theory to cathedral visitors reported on 381 visitors to St Davids Cathedral and on 157 visitors to Chester Cathedral. These two initial studies were followed by more substantial studies of 2,327 visitors to St Davids Cathedral18 and 1,082 visitors to a further four cathedrals.19 All four studies produced highly similar results. Like church congregations, cathedral visitors tended to prefer introversion, sensing and judging, although here once again cathedrals were drawing in a higher proportion of thinking types.
Set alongside the population norms, the major challenge posed by these statistics concerned encouraging more intuitive types and more perceiving types to cross the threshold. The report to the Association of English Cathedrals by ECORYS drew attention to the way in which visitor numbers had been impacted by ‘innovative exhibitions’ and events, drawing attention to the helter skelter installation in Norwich Cathedral and the crazy golf installation at Rochester Cathedral. Reference to these specific installations and events raises an interesting question as to whether such innovation widens the psychographic profile of those who cross the threshold.20
The potential for such innovation to widen the psychographic profile of cathedral visitors has been tested by a study conducted in Brecon Cathedral at the time when the cathedral was closely involved in the Brecon Jazz Festival. Drawing on data provided by 196 visitors, Simon Mansfield found that visitors to the cathedral during this period differed significantly from the standard psychological type profile of cathedral visitors in two ways.21 There were significantly more intuitive types (41 per cent compared with 28 per cent) and significantly more perceiving types (27 per cent compared with 20 per cent). These findings demonstrate that specific events have the capacity to widen the psychographic appeal of cathedrals. Replication studies are now needed to explore the psychological type profile of visitors to other cathedrals when they are hosting innovative exhibitions and events.
Conclusion
This article set out to test the thesis that empirical studies grounded in psychological type theory can illustrate how Anglican cathedrals reach beyond the constituency generally reached by parish churches. Drawing on Walker’s model that distinguishes among different ways in which people may experience belonging to God and relating to the Anglican Church, this study explored the psychological type profile of those attending Sunday services in one cathedral, those attending Christmas carol services in three cathedrals, and those visiting seven cathedrals. In all three contexts of activities, events and place, the data demonstrated a wider reach and greater diversity than found in the congregations of parish churches. Clearly, the significance of the research reviewed is limited by the small number of studies conducted so far within Anglican cathedrals. The challenge remains for the replication and extension of this research tradition.
Meanwhile, the existing research may be adequate to encourage the Church of England to appreciate the powerful and partially hidden resources within its 42 cathedrals. Indeed, it may be wise for a simpler, humbler and bolder Church to acknowledge and to equip this resource offered by cathedrals for a leading role in evangelization and mission, with a focus on growing a more inclusive Church.