Tuesday, July 17, 2012

Church decline, especially among liberal Christianity..NYT columnist

In Ross Douthat's piece on the decline of Liberal Christianity, he stresses the motivation and the evidence to adapt to social trends, as a non-starter for church growth, citing the decline in church attendance across the U.S. particularly in the Episcopal church.
However, what he does not mention is how out of sync any body is today with a culture that depends on both instant gratification and instant morale boosting, especially if that body is struggling to find both time and interested particiants to dig deeply into the issues affecting the world. It would seem that churches, especially those with a simply, black and white list of three or four primary 'do's' and 'don't's' such as opposing abortion, and injecting church dogma into the public discourse (witness the Santorum campaign for president) and holding others as "evil" should they not conform (John Kerry being refused the eucharist in his, the Roman Catholic church, because he supported a woman's right to choose) are attracting converts. One especially non-dogmatic congregation has some 40,000 people in the theatre seats in Texas each Sunday, promising "God wants you to be rich, to have a big house, to have a big car and a big salary and investments". Dubbed the "prosperity gospel" by critics, it merges American salesmanship to some kind of faith conglomeration that appears to the outsider more like religious theatre.
But the husband-and-wife leader partnership seems to be reaping the rewards of the riches they promise, as the voice of some God somewhere.
Douthat also, unfortunately, links church growth to the question of its survival, in the typical, corporate method of measuring success. Triumphal churches, with big choirs, and big congregations, and large budgets, with up to half a dozen active clergy are wonderful marketing tools for those in the upper echelons of corporate America, because those attending can brag that they go to a very "well-respected" church, with all the other 'magnates' in the city, as if their size were a stamp of approval of their strength. Their spiritual discipline, neighbourliness, commitment to social justice, study and prayer may, however, be relatively thin, without anyone paying attention. I once asked a retired Motorola executive, friend of the bishop, where he wanted to be in his spiritual life in three years, and because he did not know what I was talking about, he changed the subject. He and his kind would like to populate the pews of large, urban revivalist, evangelical and biblical literalist churches with contemporary music and hymns, and completely ignore the more private, sometimes less public exciting discipline of seeking and finding God.
Small mission churches, however, offer their members much more opportunity to be known and to know and support their neighbours, without the fanfare that attends the triumphal churches, lacking much of the theatrical lustre of those large cathedrals.
If God is a "relationship" and most clergy are not either adept or perhaps even interested in deepening the relationships between and among their congregations and themselves, in a world starved for someone to pay attention, without always solving their problems or removing their pain, there will necessarily be significant drops in attendance. Churches of all dogmatic stripes have to regain sight of their focus on both God and the God-within in order to help to generate spiritual lives and the communities of safety that those lives genuinely require and mutually support.
And, stop paying attention to the "Almighty Dollar" as the route to organizational survival. If the important matters are being attended to, the dollars will look after themselves, but that message is almost impossible to deliver and to have received in the U.S.A. today.
By Ross Douthat, New York Times, July 14, 2012
In 1998, John Shelby Spong, then the reliably controversial Episcopal bishop of Newark, published a book entitled “Why Christianity Must Change or Die.” Spong was a uniquely radical figure — during his career, he dismissed almost every element of traditional Christian faith as so much superstition — but most recent leaders of the Episcopal Church have shared his premise. Thus their church has spent the last several decades changing and then changing some more, from a sedate pillar of the WASP establishment into one of the most self-consciously progressive Christian bodies in the United States.

As a result, today the Episcopal Church looks roughly how Roman Catholicism would look if Pope Benedict XVI suddenly adopted every reform ever urged on the Vatican by liberal pundits and theologians. It still has priests and bishops, altars and stained-glass windows. But it is flexible to the point of indifference on dogma, friendly to sexual liberation in almost every form, willing to blend Christianity with other faiths, and eager to downplay theology entirely in favor of secular political causes.
Yet instead of attracting a younger, more open-minded demographic with these changes, the Episcopal Church’s dying has proceeded apace. Last week, while the church’s House of Bishops was approving a rite to bless same-sex unions, Episcopalian church attendance figures for 2000-10 circulated in the religion blogosphere. They showed something between a decline and a collapse: In the last decade, average Sunday attendance dropped 23 percent, and not a single Episcopal diocese in the country saw churchgoing increase.
This decline is the latest chapter in a story dating to the 1960s. The trends unleashed in that era — not only the sexual revolution, but also consumerism and materialism, multiculturalism and relativism — threw all of American Christianity into crisis, and ushered in decades of debate over how to keep the nation’s churches relevant and vital.
Traditional believers, both Protestant and Catholic, have not necessarily thrived in this environment. The most successful Christian bodies have often been politically conservative but theologically shallow, preaching a gospel of health and wealth rather than the full New Testament message.
But if conservative Christianity has often been compromised, liberal Christianity has simply collapsed. Practically every denomination — Methodist, Lutheran, Presbyterian — that has tried to adapt itself to contemporary liberal values has seen an Episcopal-style plunge in church attendance. Within the Catholic Church, too, the most progressive-minded religious orders have often failed to generate the vocations necessary to sustain themselves.
Both religious and secular liberals have been loath to recognize this crisis. Leaders of liberal churches have alternated between a Monty Python-esque “it’s just a flesh wound!” bravado and a weird self-righteousness about their looming extinction. (In a 2006 interview, the Episcopal Church’s presiding bishop explained that her communion’s members valued “the stewardship of the earth” too highly to reproduce themselves.)
Liberal commentators, meanwhile, consistently hail these forms of Christianity as a model for the future without reckoning with their decline. Few of the outraged critiques of the Vatican’s investigation of progressive nuns mentioned the fact that Rome had intervened because otherwise the orders in question were likely to disappear in a generation. Fewer still noted the consequences of this eclipse: Because progressive Catholicism has failed to inspire a new generation of sisters, Catholic hospitals across the country are passing into the hands of more bottom-line-focused administrators, with inevitable consequences for how they serve the poor.
But if liberals need to come to terms with these failures, religious conservatives should not be smug about them. The defining idea of liberal Christianity — that faith should spur social reform as well as personal conversion — has been an immensely positive force in our national life. No one should wish for its extinction, or for a world where Christianity becomes the exclusive property of the political right.
What should be wished for, instead, is that liberal Christianity recovers a religious reason for its own existence. As the liberal Protestant scholar Gary Dorrien has pointed out, the Christianity that animated causes such as the Social Gospel and the civil rights movement was much more dogmatic than present-day liberal faith. Its leaders had a “deep grounding in Bible study, family devotions, personal prayer and worship.” They argued for progressive reform in the context of “a personal transcendent God ... the divinity of Christ, the need of personal redemption and the importance of Christian missions.”
Today, by contrast, the leaders of the Episcopal Church and similar bodies often don’t seem to be offering anything you can’t already get from a purely secular liberalism. Which suggests that per haps they should pause, amid their frantic renovations, and consider not just what they would change about historic Christianity, but what they would defend and offer uncompromisingly to the world.
Absent such a reconsideration, their fate is nearly certain: they will change, and change, and die.

No comments:

Post a Comment