Why are Churches of Christ Shrinking? - Part 2: Failure to Understand that it is an Increasingly Unchurched, Post-Christian World

[James Nored]

Here is the second in a series of blog posts on why Churches of Christ are shrinking. The first post,"A Left-Brained Fellowship in a Right-Brained World," has gone viral. While not everyone agrees with everything in the post, from the new members that joined the network, it would appear that a high percentage of these new members are people who agree, who are dealing with this issue, or who are ex-Church of Christ members. I don't have all the answers, but I am always glad to stimulate thought and discussion. 

 

(It is perhaps ironic that the previous post, which focused primarily on our assemblies, went viral, as I write about outreach and mission. But of course, if the church is truly missional to its core, then we are always thinking about every aspect of the church and how we can collectively and individually reach people for Christ.)

In this post, I want to put forward a second reason why Churches of Christ are shrinking, which is, we have failed to understand or adjust to the fact that we are living in an increasingly unchurched, post-Christian world. While we have issues that are particular to us and other modern era churches, the fact is that no Christian fellowship in the United States is growing. "Community churches" are the only "group" that is growing, and this is not a fellowship, but a collection of different churches (though they have some elements that they tend to have in common, including cultural relevance and experiential factors). 

 

What proof? Read Thomas Olson's work The American Church in Crisis. Olson's research shows that weekly church attendance in the US is 19-21 percent and shrinking. And this number is only held up by the older generations. A recent study showed that the percentage of "nones"--those that claim absolutely no religious affiliation in the US is now 20 percent--and among 18-30 year olds, this is an astounding 30 percent. So almost 1 out of 3 young adults are rejecting not just Christianity, but ALL religion. Part of this is due to the bad press of religion in general, events like 9/11 (which was motivated by religious extremists), parents who dropped out of church and did not raise their kids with a religious foundation, and the pushing out of religion and spirituality from the public square.

 

Furthermore, what religious strength remains in the US comes in part from non-Christian religions. Wicca is the fastest growing religion in the US. Second is Islam (immigration factors in this), despite all the bad press from 9/11. Third is Mormonism.

 

So, not only has the culture changed on our fellowship (first blog post), but even if the same things worked today that worked in the 1800s (and they don't), there is vastly reduced pool of people who are interested in Christianity. And yet, while the evidence and stats for this is widely available, somehow, our people do not seem to know or understand this.

 

Want evidence? As recently as 12 years ago I went to a conservative lectureship and I heard time and time again that the greatest threat to the church was denominationalism. Really? I used to go on Let's Start Talking trips for years to Europe. I love Europe. Wouldn't mind living over there for a few years. But it is a terribly post-Christian culture. Over there, if you find someone who believes in God and Jesus, you cling to them like white on rice. You appreciate them and thank God for them. Even the Catholics. (Ironically, the recent public disputes between our government and the Catholic church and the growing endorsement of immoral lifestyles and practices has made people gain a new appreciation for the Catholic church and their strong stands against abortion and homosexuality.)

 

I imagine this was much like it was in the early church. If you were being persecuted by the Romans and in danger of being eaten by lions, if you found someone who believed that Jesus Christ was the Son of God who lived, died, was buried, and resurrected, you thanked God for that person.

 

More evidence? Look at our "evangelism" training classes and Bible study material. Most of it is STILL geared entirely towards a highly churched, Bible-knowing audience who knows all that stuff about Jesus and that just needs to be taught better about baptism--and of course, the right church with the right name, structure, etc. As if these are the questions that people are still asking. Trust me, most are not.

 

The reason that I wrote the Story of Redemption, which is an 8 part evangelistic Bible study, is that I could not find anything written for an unchurched, postmodern culture. The primary teacher of evangelism at my Christian college taught people primarily how to explain Church of Christ doctrine about church issues. The studies that were out there jumped all over the place, assumed a basic knowledge of the Bible, assumed a basic knowledge of Christ, and were totally off in form. Instead of being primarily narrative, they were fill in the blank proof texts. Instead of being visually attractive, they were printed on the worst paper with no pictures, only texts. Instead of starting at the beginning of the Bible, in Genesis, which explains who God is and why the world is the way that it is, they started in Romans--usually Romans 6! (Well, almost). Instead of going through Jesus' life and ministry, death, burial, and resurrection, and actually telling the story--which is powerful and moving--this story was reduced down to three points and a response demanded.

 

Imagine instead of telling the story of Cinderella to your kids, you instead gave three points: 1) Cinderella was a poor maiden (according to the Scriptures); 2) she was turned into a princess by a fairy godmother and met a prince at a ball (according to the Scriptures); 3) he found her and married her after she left a shoe at the ball (according to the Scriptures). Would it be true? Yes. Would it move people to laughter, tears, and joy? Probably not. Now, the Christ story is the best story ever told. Can people be moved by just a summary? Yes, they can. But for people who are far away from God, they need to hear the story. And this story is incredible. And powerful. And though I have gone through this story with people hundreds of times, I am always impacted by it. Have we gotten tired of the story? Romans 6:1-4 is an incredible passage. I include it in the last lesson of the Story of Redemption. But remember, Paul was summarizing this story for people who knew it intimately. He did not share Christ with non-Christians by giving them three verses and calling for them to respond.

 

The Story of Redemption has had a tremendous response rate, because it is God's story, told as he tells it, designed for today's unchurched, postmodern culture (watch the conversion story video below). If you don't have this type of study, you might be interested in it. But this is not about the Story of Redemption. It is about our failure to realize that we live in an unchurched, post-Christian culture--even in one of our self-viewed greatest areas of emphasis, the sharing of the gospel. We never even updated the Jewel Miller filmstrip, which was great for its time. We just transferred those 1960s filmstrip pictures onto video, showing the same pictures in still form. In 50 years we could not come up with something current? (I am in the midst of filming the Story of Redemption, even planning on filming some on location in Israel, to try to offer a humble replacement for this).

 

I talk with a lot of churches about outreach. And many of them want to reach out, but do not have a clue of how to do this. And just the most basic explanation of where our culture is spiritually seems to be very eye-opening. 

 

So, what can we do to respond to our increasingly unchurched, post-Christian culture? Here are some practical suggestions.

1. Continually educate and remind people about the (non) religious state of our nation.

2. Adopt a missional theology and understanding. The writers of Missional Church were missiologists who asked the question, how do we apply mission principles to North America--which is the 5th largest mission field in the world. Missional theology says that mission is not one of several things that the church does. The church is by nature missional. So all that the church does must be done through this lens and understanding. It is just like a mission team that is sent overseas on mission. Yes, they do many things. But everything that they do is done to help them reach the lost in their area.

3. Begin to think like missionaries. That is, ask, what are the areas of brokenness in this culture? And,  what would be good news for this culture? How can I share this good news? There are huge areas of brokenness for the gospel to break into in our culture. Abuse. Lack of community. Loneliness. Emptiness from materialism. Addiction. Poverty. There are biblical deeds and words that address all of these issues, and ministries can be begun to address these needs.

4. Budget like missionaries. The vast majority of churches in the US budget budget almost nothing for outreach. And with so many churches struggling financially due to the shrinking Christian population, this problem is exacerbated even more. And there was virtually nothing in local outreach at High Pointe when I came (both money and ministry wise). But they had a heart for growing in this. So we said that we would have our Harvest Sunday, which had gone almost entirely to foreign, go 50 percent to local and 50 percent to foreign outreach. The result? The congregation almost doubled their Harvest Sunday giving, and we have had between $75,000-$90,000 available for local outreach. Which has allowed us to do some really wonderful works in the community.

5. Train people to be missionaries. "Work as Worship" studies and training are huge right now. Raise people's awareness of God in their daily lives, and help them look for opportunities to serve, bless, and invite their non-Christian/unchurches family, co-workers, neighbors, and friends. Teach small groups not only how to nurture, but how to reach out. Currently we are training people to just be Bible students. Jesus said "teach people to obey" (Mt. 28:20). Training involves not just knowledge, though that is important, but hands on teaching. How do you start conversations with non-Christians? (Serve and bless them, and they will ask) What are culturally appropriate things to invite people to? Who can people start praying for to share the gospel with/bless?

6. Find a way to share the gospel and lead people to faith in Jesus Christ. This includes personal sharing, but it also includes things like seeker small groups and studies like the Story of Redemption. Most churches have no study that they use, and thus don't even convert the visitors that they have. I may have saved you some time in the Story of Redemption, or you may be able to adapt it and use your own. But please, find a way to share the gospel in a way that impacts an unchurched, non-Christian culture.

 

How many people are showing up to worship services in Europe? We are not Europe yet, and we have a spiritual vibrancy that may last, but we are headed down that path. If your church is not growing, that is not surprising. The vast majority are not, and those that are are often culturally relevant. Even fewer churches are growing evangelistically. And those that are, may still be losing younger generations on the cultural relevance issue. But if we take the above steps, this will go a long ways towards reversing or at least slowing the trend in our fellowship.

 

Here is part 3 in this blog post series: Why are Churches of Christ Shrinking? - Part 3: A Misplaced Identit...

Here is part 1 in a parallel blog post series: Why Do Churches of Christ Have Hope and a Future? - Part 1: A Reawa...

Thoughts?

[Darin Hamm]

I think you are on point and I would recommend your material. Own several sets and have recommended it to others.

[Jim Woodell]

Thank you for both of your recent posts.  Many of your comments resonate with me. Some give me pause, especially your comment about going all the way back to creation (Genesis 1) as a starting place to share the gospel with the lost.  No doubt with some this is necessary, but Paul addressed the unbelieveing in Romans 1 and said they were "without excuse" for not seeing the invisible God in the creation that is "clearly seen."  The Ethiopian in Acts 8 only had (as far as what is revealed) the 53rd chapter of Isaiah, but was brought to faith in Jesus, because Philip preached to him "Jesus."  In addition, Scripture tells us that the working of the Holy Spirit in conversion is like the "wind, that blows where it wishes."  We hear the sound (see the evidences) but don't know where it came from or where it is going.

As you likely know, I have used the Roman letter as a primary tool in my arsenal for conversion since the early 70's.  This message has been used by many to brings hundreds to Christ.  Why? Because the power is in the gospel.  Romans contains the message of the gospel.  When that message is shared people will respond.  The power is not in the presenter, nor is it necessarily in the method used to present, it is in the Person of Jesus and what he has done for our redemption that the power lies. 

No doubt there are some (perhaps many, if not most) who have not looked up or looked around to see that God is, but it is also true that there are people all along the continuum of faith that can be taught the gospel without going all the way back to the beginning.  I have witnessed a number over the years who have been brought to Christ after just one study.  We just need to present Jesus to the lost. 

Thank you for your blog and God bless your ministry.

 

[Don Payne]

"Why Churches of Christ Are Shrinking," has gone viral because it tends to be what C of C members are thinking about, yet in most cases we're not openly discussing these issues. I've been participating in a lively discussion on Facebook for two days about Part 1 in your series. Yet change is slow to come. There are still many churches in the metropolitan area where I live (Houston, TX) that still cling to the "us versus them" mentality. Several radio shows, EVERY SUNDAY still teach that denominations are the problem, that the C of C is the only scriptural church, we are the only ones with the truth, etc., etc. These programs rarely teach practical lessons on how Christians should be living in an increasingly broken, post-Christian society.

While I agree with the vast majority of your article, and many of the changes you suggest, there is one action that we can take that is so obvious that we miss it. It's called, "Living Our Faith." In the classes I teach at our church, one of the most consistent complaints from 20-30 year-old Christians (and others I'm sure) is that we tend to practice a Sunday-oriented brand of Christianity. The rest of the week is secular "business as usual." A national witness of Christians living our faith in our families, in the work place, etc. in the midst of the storm would be a powerful testimony.

Although we can make many suggestions on how to educate people, think like missionaries, improve our methods of communication within our churches, everything loses its power if we are not living as we should be living. This is why I believe that recovery-oriented programs like Celebrate Recovery could be key to drawing more people into our churches. Once we concentrate on dealing with our behavior as Christians while admitting we have issues like everyone else, we become transparent to others who are looking for help - and believe me, there are many people, churched and unchurched who are looking for help. We don't have to sacrifice doctrine or the truth of The Word. In fact, such transparency might make us more attractive to those inside and outside the church as they see God transforming our lives. 

[Lynn S. Nored]

Those viewing this might wish to read the following:

http://mashupdiscussions.blogspot.com/2010/11/new-way-of-doing-chur...

[Adam Metz]

I am following you in these conversations to a point.  Our congregation has largely embraced a missional impulse and doesn't share in much of the baggage that you are weighing through in these posts (we are a Church of Christ).  There are a couple of things I see missing in these posts.  First of all, I don't see much in way of a kingdom-centered ecclesiology.  This, for me, has been one of the most significant transitions for our congregation.  Shifting from a church-centered to a kingdom-centered ecclesiology gets messy - a messiness I'm not sure you are coming to terms with in your critiques (if that makes any sense).  The fact that your first post was so centered on the Sunday morning event illustrates this.  For us, this is becoming less and less central to our identity.  We've said that for years, most people probably pay lip service to that, but when you actually begin acting on this impulse, the effects are far-reaching.  The institutional framework begins to really struggle.  We are asking with increasing regularity, "What is the church? Why do we exist?  What is the purpose of our congregation?  I like the language of missional outpost; but this calls into question much of what we understand of as the local congregation - a conversation very few churches (of any color) are prepared to have. 

It's ironic how "denominationally" organized we remain through our colleges and alumni bases.  It is a very difficult thing to move into a post-Christian paradigm of praxis.  Our congregation has been asking ourselves how prepared are we to work alongside the Hindu temple that was just built around the corner from our church and the Jain center that was just constructed a quarter of a mile away.  It's funny how a foreign mission project in India that our congregation began 25 years ago begins to take on a different flavor when Indian nationals become a large percentage of your local populace.  The churches that are growing fastest around us are very conservative in their theology - more than we are, but offer a host of goods and services.  I am convinced that few of them are wrestling with the more core matters in play in post-Christendom.  We remain serious about our theology; we don't do cotton candy sermons - but we work hard to illustrate how this stuff plays out in life.  Our regular prayer is that we are creating disciples, but little of that happens in the short time we are together on Sundays.  

I wonder if the fact that are churches aren't growing maybe give us the opportunity to grow them deeper.  I have seen nowhere that you distinguish between growing numerically and growing in another way.  Kingdom theology helps me here.  Our church seeks to be a kingdom presence in our neighborhood.  We don't baptize many folks.  Very rarely.  I'm not saying this proudly, it's just the facts, man.  When it does happens, it is proving to be an extremely long process that is very localized and individualized (it looks different for each person that connects with us).  If you study the early church, you see that it was common to have a 3 year catechism process prior to baptism - so are we really that far off by having a long road to baptism? 

Really embedding ourselves in this community is having drastic effects on our theology.  I have read widely in the missional conversation and missional theology and have struggled with its application in our particular tradition . . . I'm not sure I'm resonating with your application, at least in these few posts I've perused.  There still remains a heavily Bible-Belt, modernistic element to most of what I'm seeing.  I'm convinced that the church of the future will look nothing like the church today.  I spent a week in England last summer to learn of the Anglican's Fresh Expression initiative.  I believe the future of the church will look much more like that - pockets of people living out their faith the best they know - without much institutional support, awareness, or direction. 

Our church is experimenting.  We're taking chances.  We're swinging and missing alot . . . and when you are dealing with something that you can't quantify, it becomes all the more difficult to assess. 

All that said, I appreciate the conversation and the perspective, and, I'm learning to say this with a great deal of frequency . . . I could be wrong; and probably am about most of what I just wrote ;-)

[Joy Rousseau]

The beginning of faith is hearing (according to Scripture)...and what we have lost (if we ever had it) is the ability to mature our fellowship in the ability to communicate using what I like to call “faith talk”. Our reformation heritage put the “laity” in its place through a much misguided practice of “in decency and in order” not allowing members to express their faith opening in a non-hostile environment. Even our pre-baptismal confession of faith is a mere, “yes”…instead of “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God” –the great confession was never a “yes”. If we can’t stand up and declare Christ in the mists of believers, we certainly are not training our folks to do so in the mists of non-believers. Our first efforts should be to nurture “faith talk”…not a tight-lipped argumentative conversation, but a freely praise filled, spirit-directed, creative expression of our belief in the God that Provides All.

I was in a cab in New York city from the Javits Center to Macy’s. In that short ride the Muslim cab driver praised Allah at least 30 times for the weather, the traffic, his general well being, etc. Now, I realize they get “brownie points” for the amount of times they use his name in praise…..but this cab driver made me ashamed … If the non-believer can praise and proclaim his faith more than a true blessed child of the Living God…there is something really amiss.

If we can’t share our joy and give glory to our God and acknowledge Him in ALL our ways, who would want to be a part of our fellowship?  I was in a conversation with a man who did not believe in the indwelling of the Holy Spirit (and who attends a CofC). He began to stand over me and yell, “WHAT DO YOU HAVE THAT I DON’T HAVE!!!” He yelled it multiple times. My heart was breaking and I told him he was hurting my heart. What I wanted to humbly say was, “I have peace, joy, love, patience, and an abiding hope in the power of God.”

Learning to communicate our faith through a natural setting in relevant ways that give the glory to God in all things will go a long way of changing the way the world perceives those who believe in Christ. We (I am) are not as good at this…..as we should be. (Further thoughts: http://www.joyofbiblelearning.blogspot.com/2013/01/god-lesson-5-jeh... )

[Lynn S. Nored]

The above is "right on".  As one who has lived through "evangelism" via 2 week long meetings, Jewell Miller, Mid-McKnight and Robert Oglesby "charts", Personal Evangelism Training, various versions by different authors, leading eventually to Post-Christian studies in Europe with LST, and extensive studies of postmoderism both here and overseas, we must change our approach.

 The above comments by James lead me to postulate two questions:

1) How should the system of "Adult Education" be changed to adequate address these issues. ?

Changing the  label to "Spiritual Formation" will not solve the problem.  Another way to formulate this question is how do we change how we study the bible from acquiring "head knowledge" to "changing the lives" of members?

As a Professor Emeritus of Engineering at a Christian college, I have some thoughts on how to instill practical understanding and expertise as opposed to just "head knowledge" of principles.  But that is a subject of further writing.  

2) John Mark Hicks just posted a blog post entitled " "Peace? Not Always ( Luke 12:49-56)

My question is this:   Will the churches of Christ be able to change from their current "modern" mindset that results in a "fortress mentality to a "missional" mindset without conflict and crisis?

The decision to become "missional" is a critical decision.  Either one decides that that is the mission of the church or not.  Just as a decision for Christ or not divides families and friends does a decision for a congregation "divide" a congregation?   I am currently investigating  and writing an essay on the following subject: "Can the Church Have Unity in Diversity?" 

What are your thoughts on the above two questions??

Both of the above questions are fodder for separate blogs.  within themselves.  However, I would suggest their answers have a lot to say about how the church moves forward ( or not).