Monday was a big news day re the status of the church in North America – here’s what went down:
1) The ARIS survey results title American Religious Identification Survey 2008was widely reported. The full report is available here.
2) The Barna Group released results of a recent survey titled Changes in Worldview Among Christians over the Past 13 Years – it was not widely reported. A printable version of the findings is here – the key nugget: “less than one-half of one percent of adults in the Mosaic generation – i.e., those aged 18 to 23 – have a biblical worldview, compared to about one out of every nine older adults.”
3) But to top it all off the Christian Science Monitorpublished a very provocative article titled The Coming Evangelical Collapse(print edition to be available later in the week). If you are already uncomfortable from reading other posts on this blog you may want to skip this one (as if the title wasn’t warning enough). But for those who want to read the author’s thoughts in greater detail check out the unabridged version – a three part series posted the end of January 2009 here, here and here (or a printable version of all 3 available here).
“The church that educates for a new society will live out in its structures what it proclaims. The very structures themselves educate. When our acts mirror our words, they give to our words a transforming power.”
George Barna posted today the results of his latest research regarding the state of Christianity in America. He titled his findings “Christianity Is No Longer Americans’ Default Faith” – summarizing his findings that ”half of all adults now contend that Christianity is just one of many options that Americans choose from and that a huge majority of adults pick and choose what they believe rather than adopt a church or denomination’s slate of beliefs.” Here are some of the insights Barna draws from the research:
“The Christian faith is less of a life perspective that challenges the supremacy of individualism as it is a faith being defined through individualism.
… Americans are embracing an unpredictable and contradictory body of beliefs… Millions also contend that they will experience eternal salvation because they confessed their sins and accepted Christ as their savior, but also believe that a person can do enough good works to earn eternal salvation.
In the past, when most people determined their theological and moral points of view, the alternatives from which they chose were exclusively of Christian options… Today, Americans are more likely to pit a variety of non-Christian options against various Christian-based views. This has resulted in an abundance of unique worldviews based on personal combinations of theology drawn from a smattering of world religions…
Faith, of whatever variety, is increasingly viral rather than pedagogical. With people spending less time reading the Bible, and becoming less engaged in activities that deepen their biblical literacy, faith views are more often adopted on the basis of dialogue, self-reflection, and observation than teaching.”
Barna’s survey results are no surprise but serve to underline our present reality that we need to be living in this culture as missionaries – not pharisees.
Christendom has been waining in the west for several decades but the church has been slow to see it – and even slower to process the implications. One exception to that is Malcolm Muggeridge who gave a series of popular lectures on the subject at the University of Waterloo (Ontario) in 1978 (published in 1980 in a book titled The End of Christendom). Muggeridge’s perspective was that Christendom is not compatible with Christianity and, as such, the end of Christendom will allow for the church to triumph. He saw the twentieth century as a parallel to what St. Augustine encountered when faced with the collapse of Rome: the inevitable transience of historical civilizations in contrast to which the eternity that comes to light through Christianity shines out all the more clearly, as he envisions anew Augustine’s distinction between the ephemeral City of Man and the everlasting City of God.
I’m so over the word “change” – I mean give it a rest – the Obama campaign has flat worn the word out. Before tucking the word away, however, let me offer a couple observations: 1) Systemic cultural change was well in progress before Obama’s campaign - he simply picked a good wave to surf on; and 2) The level of change the Obama campaign talked about pales in comparison to what is actually going on in American cuture and the church (specifically the church in North America).
No one describes the current transformation of the church more comprehensively than Phyllis Tickle. Her new book, The Great Emergence: How Christianity is Changing and Why, provides a view from 50,000 feet of what we are experiencing in this time of liminality. Her assessment is bold but based upon an historical analysis and whether her conclusions are correct will only be known years from now. But if she is right we are priviledged to be living (participating?) in a very transformative period for the church.
So what is the book about – what is the “rummage sale” thing? Check out this short video introduction:
One of the statements made by Andy Stanley at the Catalyst Conference this fall keeps ringing in my head: “If you are over 45 years old, you aren’t going to have any good ideas. It’s your job to recognize the good ideas.” I take a statement like this as a challenge not another nail in the coffin for those of us in this age group. The challenge is to not submit to the comfort of just “doing church” but to press forward – learn new things and engage in new ways.
Well, Andy Stanley’s statement rang again today when I read a series of questions that John H. Armstrong used in a graudate class in apologetics he taught last month at Wheaton College. I think these are the type of questions that can really help us move toward engagement – they provide a good map about what we need to be learning and applying. John Armstrong credits these questions to Newbigin’s book Proper Confidence: Faith, Doubt and Certainty in Christian Discipleship:
1. What are the questions that the postmodern person asks that were not asked 25 years ago?
2. What specific influence does Hinduism have upon the “new-age” movement in the West?
3. How can we speak about apologetics in a way that makes it accessible to ordinary people?
4. How do we approach the issue of evil with unbelievers?
5. Does conservative and fundamentalist Christianity actually pose a major problem for serious apologetics in today’s world and if so how do we deal with this problem?
6. Do Marxism and radical Islam have anything in common and if so how do we address these problems?
7. How do we respond to the “So What?” responses of many postmodern hearers?
8. Does our commitment to seeking justice and mercy in society act as a form of apologetics and if so how can we do this better?
9. How do we change every sphere of society?
10. In what ways is the Christian faith “public truth” as Newbigin cogently argues?
11. Is the community of Christ our greatest apologetic and if so what does unity and John 17 have to do with this in actual practice?
Being “missional” is a recognition that our mission as followers of Jesus is to advance His Kingdom in the world. As North Americans we have historically viewed that mission as primarily being outside our culture – we are now waking up to the reality it is also very much within our culture. So, does that mean we stop doing “foreign missions?” I don’t think it means that at all – in fact I think it would be very selfish to do so. I do think, however, that there are critical things we need to learn about other cultures (just like there are things we need to learn about our culture) if we are going to be effective and good stewards of what God has given us and the life we are called to live.
I had not heard of Dr. Paul Collier until I recently stumbled upon him on Ted. Dr. Collier is a professor of economics and Director of the Centre for the Study of African Economics at the University of Oxford. He is a leading authority on African economics with a focus on the causes and consequences of civil war, the effects of aid, and the problems of democracy in poor countries.
What he has to say is not only very interesting but has has direct implications on how we can best help the poor and the consequences if we don’t. The gap between the developed and the developing world and the bottom billion widens ever year. Failure to act effectively will have disastrous effects on our next generation.
A few additional notable items:
In January United Nations Secretary-General Ban Kimoon declared 2008 to be “the year of the bottom billion” citing the work of Paul Collier.
Marvin Olasky interviewed Paul Collier last year in World Magazine linked here
“One of the most important books on world poverty in a very long time.”–Richard John Neuhaus, founder of First Things Magazine
Karios is a Greek word that means “when all things come together” and the identifier for a network of neighborhood churches in the Los Angeles area. Their web page is worth a visit to get a flavor for what this new church is all about. They are part of Great Commission Ministries, an affiliation of missional churches – many of which serve university campuses (including a new church plant at FSU). Yes, this is cutting edge but not without solid backing (with guys like Rick Warren, Howard Hendricks, John Maxwell and Luder Whitlock on their Council of Reference).
In particular I thought their vision statement was well written and provides an excellent example of what a church in our post-Christendom culture should be about:
As a community we are
gathering a variety of wounded people together
crying out to our Creator
“breathe new life into us.”
so we can see broken communities…
becoming communities of faith
bringing the reality of God’s reign
neighborhood by neighborhood
In August 2007 Michael spoke at the Presbyterian Global Fellowship (PGF) conference along with John Ortberg (the 2008 conference speakers included Rick Warren and Alan Hirsch). Who is PGF? – you can check out their web page but I think what they say at the beginning of their “Covenant 2008” describes what they are about quite well:
“The mainline church is in crisis. We have turned
our eyes inward and have lost the central focus of
the New Testament church: its apostolic calling to
bear witness to Jesus Christ to the ends of the earth.
We live in a time when our own culture is a mission
field, and we acknowledge that maintaining old
institutions and systems leads neither to renewal
nor to faithfulness in God’s mission.
The mandate of the Gospel and the needs of
the world are urgent.
We confess that the living and reigning
Lord Jesus Christ alone is the hope of the world.
We believe that the Father sent the Son into the
world out of love (John 3:16) and that the church is
not an end in itself but a gift given to the world in
order that all may believe (John 17:21).
We believe Christ is calling us to recommit
ourselves to the authority of Holy Scripture and to
the faithful summaries of biblical teaching found in
the historic Reformed confessions.
We believe Christ is calling us, as covenantal
people, to be transformed by his indwelling
Holy Spirit and to be empowered by the Spirit
for faithful witness.
We believe Christ is calling us to move beyond
confidence in our own capacity and culture to a
new interdependence with others in the global
Body of Christ.
We believe Christ is calling for significant
transformation of our congregations, both in who
we are and what we do, as we engage in God’s
missional purpose for the church.
We believe it is time to gather anew around
God’s mission to the world…”
What Michael Frost has to say in the following discussion is very important explanation of missional and how our ecclesiology needs to be realigned:
Alan Hirsch posted the following on August 5:
When we use the word “church” it is very hard to get some kind of building out of our minds. But this is not the way that phenomenal expressions of Christian movements experience it. This is due partly to the fact that the early church didn’t have such buildings and the Chinese had all their church buildings taken away from them. But it is also because buildings are not what is meant in any of the theological images of church in the Scriptures. Since Constantine it seems that we have simply got it all mixed up. On comparison, the Chinese church is much closer to what the New Testament intends, as well as more consistent with the New Testament experience, of church. It is we who are inconsistent in this regard-it’s that simple. So what do networks look like?
Peter Ward has written an excellent book exploring the theological, ecclesiological, as well as sociological dimensions of networks. Following Zygmunt Bauman’s brilliant analysis of culture in terms of liquid and solid modernity, he uses the term liquid church to describe the essence of what a truly networked church would look like; a church responsive to that increasing fluid dimension of our culture which Bauman called “liquid modernity.” He contrasts liquid church with what he calls “solid church.” To simplify this, solid church is roughly equivalent to what I have here described as institutional church. Because of the continuing existence of solid modernity he does not counsel the total abandonment of solid church, but he does suggest that it is one of decreasing effectiveness. Solid church is related to solid modernity. And solid church has generally mutated from its original basis into becoming communities of heritage (that embody the inherited tradition), communities of refuge (a safe place from the world), and communities of nostalgia (live in past successes). He suggests that almost all manifestations of solid church fall into one or more of these categories.
He says that “the mutation of solid church into heritage, refuge, and nostalgic communities has seriously decreased its ability to engage in genuine mission in liquid modernity.” This is so because the church finds itself increasingly stranded from its surrounding culture. He remarks that this has seriously damaged the gospel genetic code of the church because the church cannot truly be and become itself in such a condition. Solid church has mutated the gospel code because it has by and large ignored cultural change and found itself changed in ways that are less than planned or perfect. In catering to the religious needs of some (largely the insiders) it has as a consequence failed to respond to the wider spiritual hunger of not-yet-Christians. What is more, “the mutant genetic code within these kinds of churches means that they are a poor starting point for a new kind of church that connects with the flow of spiritual hunger evident in our societies.” This highlights the need to engage liquid modernity with a liquid form of church. Liquid church is essential because it takes the present culture seriously and seeks to express the fullness of the Christian gospel within that culture. The defining element of this is church as a living, adaptive, network highly responsive to the deep spiritual needs and hunger expressed in surrounding society.
If you wiki “Web 2.0″ you will read under the Definition section: “Web 2.0 has numerous definitions. Basically, the term encapsulates the idea of the proliferation of interconnectivity and social interactions on the Web.” It changes communication from “one-to-many” to ”many-to-many.” Wikipedia itself is one of the clearest examples of a Web 2.0 creation and the power of collaboration. Other examples include facebook, ebay, craigslist and flickr.
When I think about the potential this platform offers to connect us collaboratively I picture a dam opening up – releasing vast amounts of previously untapped resources. Tapping those resources can be pretty risky and failure is more likely than success. But, if you keep imagining and trying different ideas something may grap hold and then mountains will move.
So here’s where I see the connection to the church. When was the last time we asked “them,” the congregation, to collaborate with “us,” the leaders? In the past this was practically difficult and thought by some to not even be appropriate (having determined that God only speaks to leaders). So why not move in this direction now? Well, the same old reasons apply – we are risk adverse, don’t like change or losing control and there will certainly be ideas that fail. What remains lost by not moving in a collaborative direction, however, is that the congregation will continue to sit and wait for the leaders to figure it out – and the leaders will be figuring it out without the resources available from the congregation. More on all of this in a new post I’ve been working on and will complete in the near future.
Let me revert to the Web 2.0 discussion by introducing, if you have not already heard of him, Clay Shirky. Recently Clay has been getting much attention with the release of his new book Here Comes Everybodyand his many speaking appearances, including Colbert, and being featured on Tedand RAS. The following video is his presentation at the Web 2.0 Expo in April 2008. The title of this talk is “Gin, Television and Social Surplus”in which he explains how the Web 2.0 platform is releasing what he calls the “cognitive surplus” and the impact that has had and will have on our society. There are a few other excellent Clay Shirky presentations online - I’d particularly recommend the presentation about his new book which you can watch here.
1) The ARIS survey results title American Religious Identification Survey 2008 was widely reported. The full report is available here.
3) But to top it all off the Christian Science Monitor published a very provocative article titled The Coming Evangelical Collapse (print edition to be available later in the week). If you are already uncomfortable from reading other posts on this blog you may want to skip this one (as if the title wasn’t warning enough). But for those who want to read the author’s thoughts in greater detail check out the unabridged version – a three part series posted the end of January 2009 here, here and here (or a printable version of all 3 available here).
Recent Comments