Decline & Renewal, 24: Chris Flanders Guest Column

Editor's note: Here’s the fifth in our series of guest columns on church renewal. A few more articles are yet to come.

The author of this column is Chris Flanders, associate professor of missions at Abilene Christian University. Chris is a native Minnesotan who spent eleven years as a missionary in Thailand. He has a PhD in Missions from Fuller Theological Seminary.

Great Hope for Renewal

So, we are in decline. That much seems certain. Many churches are experiencing numerical loss. A leader from one (former!) large church I know mentioned that his church wasn’t simply declining—it was “hemorrhaging,” going from over 1,000 active members to fewer than 200 within a decade. This is a story that I hear more and more these days. Many in this series have eloquently and wisely pointed out specific ways this is has occurringed.

Research indicates that the younger generation is increasingly “post-Christian.” (Click here for Barna article). Also, there is the rise of the “nones” (unaffiliated, “spiritual” but not religious; click here for Huff. Post article). Many of those who leave our churches opt for this post-Christian, unaffiliated life—i.e., being spiritual without being religious. Others are leaving “legacy churches,” opting for alternative types of community (intentional communities, neo-monastic communities, simple churches/house churches). The net effect is weighing heavily on attendance in many traditional congregations.

In the particular world in which I work (ACU’s College of Biblical Studies and the Halbert Institute for Missions), we feel this decline too. Numbers of ministry and missions majors are down (undergraduate Bible majors in Fall 20003 were 278; in Fall of 2011 they were 139. Recent entering classes on both the undergraduate and graduate levels suggest this trend continues). Many seminaries in the US and Canada today are experiencing enrollment problems. Some are merging with other seminaries. Many are shutting down.

There is a significant shift even among those who major in Bible, ministry, or missions. Many note that they will not look at traditional church staff ministry. Rather, they often distrust the “institutional church,” opting instead for non-traditional ministry, outside of the traditional model of congregational, full-time, church-supported ministry. Many missions students I speak with have an ardent desire not to seek church support, but rather piece together support from friends and family or work in a vocational manner.

I certainly agree with my friend, Jeff Childers, who eloquently noted that “big” is not a virtue. As a missions professor friend of mine is fond of saying, just because there are a certain number of warm bodies in a certain place at a certain time of the week is no indication that the Kingdom of God is present.  Said another way, attenders ≠ disciples. And, since Jesus commanded us to make the latter, and not the former, we do not need to worship “bigness” or use large-ness as a marker of success. Having said that, what is happening all around us seems quite significant, and warrants our attention.

WHY

Why is this all happening? Simply put, we do not know. Many have tried to figure it out. Trends are notoriously difficult to understand, except perhaps in retrospect. Since we are currently experiencing these things, the source(s) is not clear. However, in my opinion, the following seem likely candidates as part of the answer as to “why?”

*For years now, many of our churches have held a brand of religion that is strongly consumerist, which for many has run out of energy, finding it impossible to compete effectively with the numerous other, more compelling consumer choices. Especially for many young people, this type of “outward form of religion” that denies power is particularly unpalatable. Many choose simply to walk away rather than practice what they view as “inauthentic” religion.

* This is the postmodernization (or, the ultimate logic of modernity playing out) in religious terms—the radical unhinging of religion from institutional arrangements and the positioning of the individual as the ultimate religious judge and guide. Robert Bellah termed this “Sheilaism” (named after an advocate of this type of religion), a form of religious self-absorption that ultimately leads to disassociation with traditional, organized religious communities.

* The playing out of a sect-church progression (a normal, sociological progression for all religious groups), which results in a lessening of tension with the surrounding society. Less tension à less distinction à less reason to affiliate. We are in many ways more at home in the world.

DO NOT PANIC

We should be concerned when we are losing our people, not only to other groups (perhaps not an overall loss for the Kingdom of God, but certainly raising crucial questions about our lack of ability to nurture and disciple our own people) but also in some cases, losing them to no affiliation at all. We obviously should be very concerned when many of our active youth, upon leaving our homes, become one of the “nones.”

We should not worry, however, that somehow in all this we have failed uniquely. This has happened before. Decline (and renewal!) is part and parcel of our story. That is, church history can at one level be viewed as an ebb and flow of growth à decline à renewal. Though it may be quite unpleasant for those of us who will endure the challenging years ahead of us, at least we can know that such loss is in no way unprecedented. We have been here before.

Missiologist Andrew Walls is well known for bringing this to our attention. He notes that in each era of Christian history, the former “heartland” which had been a center of faith, ultimately decayed and faded in vitality and significance. At the same time, by missionary effort, Christianity moved past the (former) periphery and established a new center.

“When the Jerusalem church was scattered to the winds, Hellenistic Christianity arose as a result of the mission to the gentiles. And when Hellenistic society collapsed, the faith was seized by the barbarians of northern and western Europe. By the time Christianity was receding in Europe, the churches of Africa, Asia and Latin America were coming into their own. The movement of Christianity is one of serial, not progressive, expansion.” (Click here for Walls' article.)

Phyllis Tickle proposes, “About every five hundred years the empowered structures of institutionalized Christianity, whatever they may be at that time, become an intolerable carapace that must be shattered in order that renewal and new growth may occur.” Perhaps this is what is happening right now (P. Tickle, The Great Emergence: How Christianity Is Changing and Why. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Books, 2008, p. 16).

Our own movement, the American Stone-Campbell Restoration Movement, had its inception in such a moment. Gordon Wood notes that perhaps the most “godless” period in American history was not the 1960s, but rather the 1790s-1800s. It was within the post-revolutionary religious “low” (some estimate church adherence during this time to be someone between 7%-20% of the population) that the renewal movement we call the Second Great Awakening invigorated and renewed American religion. (See Chapter 9, “Republican Society,” in Gordon Wood’s Empire of Liberty published by Oxford University Press, 2011.)

WHAT TO DO?

We can’t just ask, “Well, what do they want?” and try to re-fit our congregational lives to match the expectations of religious consumers. Such would simply feed the rampant consumerist impulse that is likely a part of the current downward trend.

Wilbert Shenk, in a fantastic article (click here for Shenk's article), notes 5 basic options for renewal: 1) Reaffirm tradition (Do church more loudly); 2) Restructure the church (Do church better); 3) “Mainstream” the church (do church in a more consumer-friendly mode); 4) Restore the primitive model of church (do church more “biblically”); and 5) Missionary engagement.

I agree with Shenk who argues, “Authentic renewal will only come with a return to the theological roots of the church in Scripture along with missionary engagement of its culture.” Because the church was constituted for mission to the world, renewal will come with a missional re-focusing. For Churches of Christ to remain a viable and flourishing movement, we will need to “reinvent” our lives along the lines of missionality and witness.

Some are tired of this term “missional.” That is fine. I am not at all attached to it. But, I am attached to what the term aims at. I believe that the hope of renewal in our movement lies precisely here. To renew Churches of Christ will take nothing less than viewing ourselves as the instrument in God’s hand for participating in the Divine mission to the world. Put another way, renewal will come when we orient the life our communities not around the event of worship, or any particular theological agenda, but rather a life of witness that takes seriously the task of embodying in word and deed the good news about God’s work in Christ to bring healing to the world.

This means, as my friend Ryan Bolger, an “emerging church” expert at Fuller Seminary noted, taking all the tools that traditionally were reserved for “missionaries” (reading a culture, adapting the form and message so that it brings a challenging relevance to a particular context, learning a new language, viewing the body of Christ as sent into the world with the good news) and applying them in our own backyard.

This will also demand a generous “pluralism.” The Anglican Church, which is experiencing a wonderful renewal through its “Fresh Expressions” initiative, terms this a “mixed economy.” That is, we must welcome and encourage both missional renewal among established congregations and new missional expressions (e.g., church plants, “emerging” expressions, house/simple church expressions, etc.). Established churches should partner with such expressions and actively seek to learn from them. In the meantime, all churches should seek to renew their corporate lives around God’s mission.

The way forward I believe is the renewal of mission. This will not be an easy task. Many will choose not to journey along this way. Others will try, but will find it too difficult. (A former supporting church of mine tried this and ended up not able to reorient their corporate lives in such a way as to expend their lives and resources on behalf of their community. They have dwindled from over 1,000 in attendance to now just a few hundred.)

A CAUTION

William Abraham points out that the two most conspicuous side effects of attempts at church renewal are judgmentalism and schism. Because of this, as we move into God’s missional future together, we must have great patience and grace with one another as we struggle, fail, or even refuse to journey. We must endeavor to stay connected to bodies of believers, not jumping ship because things are hard, or slow, or small. We must be patient visionaries, who point to our (missionary) God who calls his (missional) people to live out Kingdom life before a watching world. This is mission.

So, we have great hope for renewal. That much seems certain.

------------------

Bio:
Chris Flanders is still waiting for the opportunity to be a full-time, professional Little League coach. Until that job materializes, he teaches missions in the Graduate School of Theology at ACU and directs the Halbert Institute for Missions at ACU. Chris is married to Cara who works at ACU as a supervisor in the MMFT program and a therapist in the Counseling Center. Their two children, Autumn (15) and Ethan (12) (both born while they were serving in Thailand) are a huge part of their lives. He has always conceived of himself as someone who participates fully in God’s mission in the world and helps others intentionally connect with that mission. He spent 11 years doing just that in Thailand (Bangkok and Chiang Mai) where he worked with established churches and also helped plant several new churches.