Baptists have a somewhat uneasy relationship to numbers these days. When we were growing and expanding annually, we pointed to our numbers as proof of God’s blessing. Our recent realization that our statistical decline is not a mere blip on the screen has been taken as a portent of evil in our midst. Dr. Frank Page’s response to the latest report was, “God forgive us and God help us.” There was much wailing and gnashing of teeth in Houston this year.
This is not a specifically Southern Baptist problem, of course. In a recent article, “Why Millenials Are Leaving the Church“, Rachel Held Evans references Brookings Institute research and concludes that “millennials” (loosely, those born in the 80s and 90s) are leaving the church in droves. We’ve heard anecdotal evidence about this exodus and seen it analyzed and bemoaned repeatedly. Ms. Evans response is typical of the self-centered, blame-game of this topic. She says, essentially, that people are leaving the church because it is too different from her and the solution is to become more like her (less conservative, more liturgical, more accepting of homosexuality, more open to other faiths and less concerned about issues of sexual morality). She describes evangelical Christianity as “too political, too exclusive, old-fashioned, unconcerned with social justice and hostile to lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender people.”
That is a boilerplate response to the decline of church attendance. We point the finger at those who are different from us and lay the blame at their feet.
- The decline of church attendance is based on a fault or flaw in the church. We are doing something wrong that must be fixed.
- The fault or flaw of the church is that it does not agree with my views on what a church should be. If I’m conservative, the church is too liberal. If I am liberal, the church is too conservative. If I’m Calvinists, its the non-Calvinists, if I’m not Calvinist, it’s those Calvinists causing the problems. The young blame the old, the old blame the young. I discussed this in a recent article.
- The solution to the fault or flaw of the church is to change to become more like what I think it should be.
An Example of Failure?
Let me tell you about a “shepherd” I read about. He was quite the popular man – charismatic, demonstrating spiritual power. He gathered a congregation estimated by some to be in the neighborhood of 20,000 to 25,000 people who listened to his every word and looked to him as their spiritual leader. But then, things changed. He began to say some unpopular things. The direction of his ministry disappointed the people who were following him and within a couple of years, the congregation which once numbered in the tens of thousands was now down to a hundred or so faithful followers.
What a failure, right? That guy should be fire. He must have done something wrong to drive all those people away!
I’m guessing you’ve already picked up on my satire here, right? The shepherd I referred to was Jesus himself. When he was doing miracles and feeding folks miraculously, he was followed by a crowd of 5000 men. If you add the women and children, the crowd had to be ten-thousand, twenty-thousand, perhaps more. He was the most popular man in Israel. But then he began to teach people that if they were going to follow him, they must “deny himself, take up his cross, and follow him.” Terribly strategic move, Jesus. When he claimed to be the Bread of Life whom each man must consume, they got offended and John 6:66 says this,
“After this many of his disciples turned back and no longer walked with him.”
Using Ms. Evans’ logic, and that employed by many who analyze these trends, Jesus should be judged as a failure because most of the people who ever followed him turned away. He must have done something wrong to cause so many to leave his “church,” right?
I have noticed two very distinct ends on the continuum on this subject.
- Some assert that the lack of numerical growth and results is a marker of spiritual failure in the church. If a church is not baptizing people and growing, it must be doing something wrong. Traditionally, Baptists have associated numerical size and growth with the blessing of God. Therefore, if people leave a church or denomination, there must be some flaw in that church or denomination.
- Others have argued that numbers have no place in discerning a church’s fidelity to the gospel. We are called to be faithful and if we are, it doesn’t matter how many numbers we reach. In fact, I’ve known a couple who seemed to take pride in reducing a church’s numbers! One man I know drove a bunch of people away and trumpeted that he was “purifying” the church.
It is my view that the biblical evidence on numbers and blessing is more subtle and textured than either of these positions. “Numbers show God’s blessings” and “Numbers don’t matter” – neither of them fully accounts for the biblical evidence.
The Bible and Numbers
- Numbers obviously matter in the book of Numbers, which is based on two countings of God’s people. Israel, after forty years in the wilderness, had dwindled slightly. Sin and rebellion had caused a numerical plateau or decline in Israel.
- On the other hand, David was judged for numbering the fighting men in both 2 Samuel and 1 Chronicles. The implication seems to be that this numbering is evidence of his arrogance and self-reliance. When we use numbers in a way that leads to pride and self-glory, there is clearly a problem.
- The book of Acts has several numerical reports. The number of disciples at the start was around 120. Then, there were 3000 saved at Pentecost, and not long thereafter, the number was up to 5000 men (or, in Jewish numbering, perhaps “heads of household”). Repeated, God adds to the church and sometimes, he even multiplies the church. Mathematics. Numbers. They seemed to be significant.
- On the other hand, we are warned that it is possible to build a church for all the wrong reasons. Paul warned us (2 Timothy 4:3) that people would abandon sound teaching and gather around teachers who would tell them exactly what they want to hear. You can build a big church the right way, doing biblical ministry. You can build a church the wrong way, as well. Give people what they want and they will tend to swarm to your church. Bigger may or may not be better.
- We ought not forget the Savior’s warning that the road to destruction is wide and has many travelers, while the way of righteousness is narrow and few find it. We ought not cater to public opinion, because public opinion will usually not reflect the will and way of God.
Some Thoughts
1) It is wrong to assume that people leaving the church is always the church’s fault.
Rachel Held Evans venerates the millennial generation as if it is a model of all virtue – at least compared to previous generations. She claims her generatio has “highly sensitive BS meters, and we’re not easily impressed with consumerism or performances.” They are more concerned with social justice than their elders, more compassionate toward sinners (ie, less judgmental), more authentic and more substance-driven.
But is it possible that the millennials are not the paragons of nobility after all? Maybe their disdain for the church has something to do with their spiritual condition as much as it does the church’s. Could it be that they have compromised, abandoned truth and been shaped more by the world around them than the Word of God? Maybe some of their self-congratulatory greatness is a manifestation of a willingness to be guided by culture more than Christ. Is that possible?
I do not want to argue that my generation or any other generation is better than or more godly than the “millennials.” My generation was shaped by a sinful culture as well, as was the generation before mine, and as will be those that follow the millennials. My point is that they are not inherently more virtuous either. They are sinners, just like the rest of us.
The church is flawed today, just as it always has been. Traditional churches are flawed. Contemporary churches are flawed. Emergent churches are (seriously) flawed. Liturgical churches are flawed. And the millennial churches that Ms Evans longs for will be flawed as well. Sinners gather in churches and those churches are flawed.
But, perhaps at least one reason that people are leaving the church is the sinfulness of their desires and preferences; their resistance to biblical truth. Maybe, sinful human beings find genuine, biblical Christianity to be offensive and are driven away by it. Ought we to ignore the Bible’s teachings on sexuality simply because this generation finds them old-fashioned and out of date? Do we ignore the claims of Christ to be the only Savior because millennials or anyone else finds that offensive?
Maybe, sometimes people leave the church because it is preaching the truth and they “can’t handle the truth.” The church ought certainly to see how it can change its externals to attract and keep the next generation. But it ought always mold itself to Christ and not to the vicissitude of cultural preference.
2) It is wrong to ignore statistical decline.
On the other hand, it is foolish to be casual and unconcerned about statistical decline or the lack of numerical growth in a denomination or congregation. It is nice to fall back on the old saw, “we are only called to be faithful,” but that can be a form of passing the buck. “Hey, we are doing our job. It is up to God to save souls.” Our lack of numbers is really God’s fault. We can only be faithful, but if God is unwilling to save people, there’s nothing we can do about it.
The problem is that the NT shows that God is pretty enthusiastic about saving souls. Perhaps, a church that is faithful might not see growth and conversions for a time, but a church that is not seeing conversions and baptisms for year after year ought to admit that they have a problem and not pretend that they are being faithful while awaiting the activity of God. Chances are really good that if your church or our denomination are reaching no one on a consistent basis, the fault lies more with us than it does with God.
3) So, numbers are a better negative indicator than they are positive indicator.
We ought to resist the temptation to use our numbers as markers of God’s blessing. We can gather numbers using human, manipulative, flesh-driven techniques, and those numbers will be anything but a sign of God’s approval. We can gather numbers by compromising truth and scratching people where they itch. On the other hand, negative numbers should at least provoke us to prayer and self-analysis.
- A church that is plateaued or declining year after year should be deeply concerned about that and examine itself in the light of Scripture. It ought not ignore that decline or excuse it with the “we can only be faithful” line.
- The SBC should be deeply concerned about its 60 year statistical slide. Perhaps, it is all because we have been faithful as the society has drifted into wickedness. Perhaps. But maybe there is a little more to it. Maybe we have grown evangelistically disinterested and spiritually apathetic. Perhaps there are some real spiritual, structural, or strategic problems we need to address. I’m not sure. But we ought not to just ignore the problems.
This will certainly not be the last word on Southern Baptists, churches, and statistics. The ACP is in the SBC DNA. We are a numbers-analyzing bunch. I do not believe we should abandon the ACP or numerical monitoring. It can help us identify issues of concern. We ought to be very careful, though, about assuming that good numbers are a sign of God’s blessing or that bad numbers are a sign of fault in the church. Neither is fully supported by God’s Word.
We ought to be interested in numbers as identifiers of issues. But ought never idolize numbers as sure measures of either God’s blessing or our failure.
As is so often the case, the biblical truth lies between the human extremes.
Well written article. It covers many of the concerns we both talked about after seeing several of our friends applaud the article on Millenials by Ms. Evans and share it touting their support. Instead, we were both concerned because as you pointed out about the followers of Jesus it is merely a sign of watering down our beliefs in order for people to not feel so badly about their sins. Jesus never changed his message, thus his crowds declined. May we, the church of Jesus Christ, stand true to His Word, regardless of world views and acceptance.
The numbers aren’t the problem, but they do seem to betray a problem.
So step back and look at what we do know, that might be a problem. I’m guessing that the prayer meeting is the least-attended (and frankly the least important) meeting in most churches … I know that’s the case in ours, yet that’s the work that is assigned exclusively to God’s people.
Secondly, check around with the people that do attend. Check whatever results you can determine, of their discipleship of their members.
Ask how God’s blessing on a church would be revealed. I’m sure God would want us to know when we’re getting it right.
If any of those ideas are valid, I don’t find a lot of reason for optimism, most places I look.
“The numbers aren’t the problem, but they do seem to betray a problem.”
Precisely!
Prayer meeting?
The lack of true prayer meetings is definitely a problem.
How can I lead my church to have true prayer meetings? I’ve been longing for this for years now. I suppose at least part of the answer is that I myself need to become more passionate about prayer.
Fresh Wind, Fresh Fire, by Jim Cymbala, is a good read on this topic.
Great book.
FWFF Boring charismania examples
Culturally, we have lived in times when being part of the church was a benefit in most places–which church was more about geography than anything else.
We have entered a time when there is no cultural benefit derived from church involvement. It’s not a helpful step for your business or your political career or anything else. The result being that those who come end up being only those who see a spiritual benefit of being there.
I think the faithful core has existed in most generations, but I think the “millennial” generation is one of the first that has grown up with a substitute cultural/social structure in place of the church. So, while the Neolithic Age of Dave saw people attend church to draw near to God and people attend church to sell insurance, the newer generation’s salespeople are elsewhere.
It makes it look like, to the younger bunch, that they are “more faithful” but the reality is that the old fogeys who have been committed to church for their lives are as, if not more, faithful as any of the younger crowd that still comes. It’s just that all the people that wanted to sell insurance, advance their political cause, or look good at work used to come to church, too. Now they go elsewhere.
As has been said many times around here: it’s time to recognize that faithful, Bible-centered Christianity is a minority religious view in this country. And it’s time to pray like not only our building programs depended on prayer, but like our lives do.
Why I oughta….
Well, your faith is a rock 🙂
😉
8)
I often hear arguments like those that Ms. Evans espouses, and I think you hit the nail on the head when you said, “Maybe their disdain for the church has something to do with their spiritual condition as much as it does the church’s.”
Some clever guy put it another way: “If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.”
As (I suppose) a “millennial” myself, I see a great number of my peers turned off by the church by what appears to be attachment to sin in their own lives. I am not any more righteous than they are, and if I’m any less attached to sin, it is only by the grace of God. However, I think that is the difference–whether young or old, the real determining factor is the humility to “confess our sins,” and let Christ “cleanse us from all unrighteousness.” The church is, among other things, an extension of the work of Christ as physician…and nobody is visiting because they don’t think they’re sick.
My two cents.
Very well put, sir.
Alec,
Very, very true….good insight.
David
I’m getting in on this stream so I can follow some of the comments throughout the day. May comment later.
Brett McCracken encapsulated the arrogance inherent in Held’s post in a powerful article at “On Faith.”
He later adds this gem.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/on-faith/wp/2013/07/31/how-to-keep-millennials-in-the-church-lets-keep-church-un-cool/
Some thoughts… (dangerous ground for me)
RHE’s BS meter, while simultaneously offensive and arrogant and silly, is just dumb, too. My generation thought it had a corner on such abilities but it turns out there are huge numbers of gullible people in my generation, see “Word Faith”. I’m sure her generation is just as gullible. (See RHE)
(Great quote: Part of the problem is the hubris of every generation, which thinks it has discovered, once and for all, the right way of doing things. C.S. Lewis called it “chronological snobbery…”)
Second, numbers really aren’t important, people are.
D) Part of the SBC numbers problem is we are largely North American. What happened in Europe, The North East re the reduction of the church is happening nationwide. NOT, that we shouldn’t redouble our efforts, always examine our evangelism in message and methods, we should. Semper reformanda!
But groups in Africa, and Pacific rim are having a great day of evangelism. We need them to send missionaries here and to the muslim countries.
VI) Part of our members problem included counting stray dogs on Sunday Morning and baptizing infants. Well, OK, not INFANTS, but 4 and 5 year old’s who didn’t know Jesus from Captain Kangaroo.
And Finally, at last, in conclusion, Starting churches in high population areas to reach the unchurched will continue to be a fruitful enterprise when undertaken with prayer, passion, and purpose. (And, perhaps, regular preventive care.)
Thank you and goodnight
One other thing … if God approves of what the SBC is doing, it seems to me we’d be blessed. I can’t think of any way we’re collectively blessed, except that maybe the dollars ain’t too bad.
I don’t think He’d call that “abundance”.
Better defined statistics would benefit the SBC if we truly desire change as a denomination. Outsourcing to a respected private research company, preferably non-Christian, would be more accurate since they would have no interest in the solution. They would create the software program that can be adjusted. They would not be bias in their questions and know how to read the stats and know how to sort it by region or sector. We would supply a committee to provide the information needed till the program is completed. For instance: Who relocated and rejoined an SBC church and why? Why did they leave and why did they join? There is a ton of detail that can be accumulated and graphed. All of this would be held in a central database and can be made available online for pastors to review or download. This would simply become a prayer list for each local body of Christ. It would also provide information necessary that would assist leadership to make present or future plans. Think about knowing how many were baptized each week in your area. Imagine being able to view your stats, your city’s stats, your region’s stats, your state’s stats and the whole convention’s stats each week after church on Sunday. It would be live. Technology is that advanced today. This information could be displayed on screen before the evening service. Remember the board we use to hang on the wall with Sunday School attendance and tithes? Why are we not doing this with detailed technology? I know this isn’t the answer, but expanded, it could be part of the answer.
Bruce H:
Reading your post has a strange twist in it to me since I just saw a reprint of the Baptist Messenger from January 1969. Back then, they printed in the paper each week the attendance and number of baptisms for every [or at least most] church in Oklahoma. Of course, this was back in the old days prior to the internet so the information was a few days old before people would get their paper in the mail.
I don’t know why we don’t have equivalent information today. Whatever the reason is — it is not technology — since all this info was available back in the “dark ages”.
[The Baptist Messenger is the weekly journal of the Baptist General Convention of Oklahoma]
If anyone is interested in this I’ll dig up the URL where the PDF is located
Roger,
It has been 44 years since 1969. We have declined and are more informed since then. If we do not add more information to the stats we will never be able to form conclusions to what confirms principle in God’s word. Finding the principle and truth of God’s word is paramount to the church. Restaurants and business find the right principles and become successful. God works in his principles. We need to learn them and begin to trust His direction when it seems to go against our understanding of what we think of His principles. Sometimes the church needs a big change. I have watched “Restaurants Impossible” and see what extremes it takes to change. There are times we need to be extreme in our approach to make the necessary changes. If not, we succome to tradition. That is sad.