Who Are the De-Churched? (Part 2)

Screen Shot 2014-04-09 at 4.22.17 PM

I ended Part 1 of this post with a question-what is the church to do about the growing ranks of the de-churched? I believe the answer depends on which de-churched group one is talking about. In Part 1 I identified two sides of the de-churched population-those who have left the church because they had received a false gospel, and those who have left because they’ve encountered the true gospel.

Let’s start with the false gospel side. As Matt Chandler explained, these de-churched are fed, knowingly or unknowingly, a false gospel of morality. They believe that if they just follow God’s rules he will bless their lives. When things fail to work out as promised, they bail on the church. Christian Smith, a sociologist of religion, has called this belief MTD-moralistic therapeutic deism. I prefer a more sinister and downright damnable name: Moralistic Divination-the belief that one can control and manipulate God’s

actions through moral behaviors.

While there are many churches that promote this sort of false thinking, including those within the prosperity gospel crowd, I believe most do not. So why do so many Christians, particularly the young, carry these beliefs? In most cases the problem isn’t what the church is preaching, but in what it is assuming.

For example, the popular summarization of the gospel known as “The Four Spiritual Laws” begins with the statement, “God love you and has a wonderful plan for your life.” This idea, drawn from scripture and rooted in orthodoxy, may be faithfully preached in your church. But how is it received? How does a person formed and hardened for decades in the furnaces of consumerism hear this statement?

The biblical understanding of a “wonderful life” looks dramatically different than the consumer culture’s definition of a “wonderful life.” If this assumption is never identified, named, and deconstructed, a person may hear “God love you and has a wonderful plan for your life” very differently than we intend. This is the problem we must begin to address if we hope to slow the exodus of people from the church. It’s not that we are failing to preach the gospel, but that we are failing to deconstruct the consumer filter through which people twist and receive it. The result is a hybrid consumer gospel in which God exists to serve me and accomplish my desires in exchange for my obedience-voila, Moralistic Divination.

When this consumer gospel fails to deliver on its assumed promises, as it inevitably does, frustration, disappointment, and disillusionment quickly follow. And the pool of the de-churched gains another swimmer.

But what about the other side of the de-churched demographic-those who’ve left the church because they’ve found more meaningful relationships, mission, and transformation outside the parameters of the local church? They force us to examine a different issue-structure.

The recent book by Colin Marshall and Tony Payne, The Trellis and the Vine, illustrates the dilemma. In David Mathis’ review of the book he summarizes it’s core metaphor:

The vine of Christian ministry is people; the trellis is the various organizational structures that exist for the health of the vine. So vine work is “the work of watering and planting and helping people to grow in Christ”, while trellis work has to do with “rosters, property and building issues, committees, finances, budgets, overseeing the church office, planning and running events” (p. 9). The warning the authors offer repeatedly is that our tendency in Christian ministry is to let the trellis work take over the vine work (p. 9).

In other words, the structures and programs of the church exist to establish and equip the people. People do not exist to support and advance the structures and programs. Or as I put it in The Divine Commodity: “Every relational community, like a family, needs structure. But the goal of any structure should be strengthening, not replacing, human relationships which are the medium God uses to carryout his transforming work. The Holy Spirit inhabits human beings not institutions.”

When the church loses sight of this and begins seeing people as a means of bolstering the institution, it breeds cynicism. The faithful begin to feel like cogs in a machine, a means of production, human commodities. They don’t feel valued for who they are, but for what they can do, give, or contribute. And to be fair, this confusion between means and ends can happen in both large and small churches, in a megachurch or a house church.

The call then is too investigate anew our ecclesiology-both on the level of theory and practice. What do we really believe about the church? What is the proper role for structures and programs? What do we believe about God’s intention for his people and the role of spiritual leadership? And do our beliefs align with the structures we create and sustain?

My hunch is that where people feel like the priority, and where love rather than efficiency is the operating value, we will see far fewer people being de-churched. Unfortunately for the last few decades, our ecclesiology in North America has been heavily influenced by the values of secular corporations. And I can’t think of a profitable corporation that has achieved success by promoting love above efficiency.

Consider this excerpt from Dallas Willard in the spring issue of Leadership (What!? You’re not a subscriber! What are you waiting for?):

[Pastors] need to have a vision of success rooted in spiritual terms, determined by the vitality of a pastor’s own spiritual life and his capacity to pass that on to others. When pastors don’t have rich spiritual lives with Christ, they become victimized by other models of success-models conveyed to them by their training, by their experience in the church, or just by our culture. They begin to think their job is managing a set of ministry activities and success is about getting more people to engage those activities. Pastors, and those they lead, need to be set free from that belief.

What should we do about the de-churched? Clearly I’ve not answered that question entirely, but I hope these reflections provide some ideas to kick start your own thinking. For those leaving because they’ve held a false gospel of Moralistic Divination, we need to put on our prophetic camel hair coats and start deconstructing their consumer assumptions. For those leaving in search of a more authentic life with Christ, we need to turn those prophetic pronouncements upon ourselves and examine our own assumptions about the way we lead and minister. Taking either approach seriously may result in fewer de-churched Christians…or your head on a platter.

  • http://leavethebuildingblog.com/ Ken Eastburn

    Fantastic, Skye. I love what you said about the structures and organization supporting the people, not the other way around. Spot on.

    Now, if you’ll excuse me, I need to share this on Twitter.

  • MamasBoy

    There is tremendous diversity of opinion and little unity among the various denominations. If someone can find a nearby church to affirm their opinions on Scripture/life, why go to a church they disagree with. Each man working out his own salvation too often becomes each man finding people who will afirm his presuppositions, beliefs and actions, instead of calling him to accountability and to bend the knee of his heart to the truth. But what is truth anyway? Is there anybody who has the audacity to be able to perfectly discern the Holy Spirit? Why entrust my soul another person whom I disagree with, when I’m the one who will answer for my actions, not my pastor? Nobody is greater than any other person, so why do we act like anybody else can tell us what God’s truth is, instead of figuring it out for ourselves?

  • http://www.littlegirldancing.com/ Marilynn K. Howe

    Mr. Jethani! Thank you for taking the time and energy to pour your heart and mind out in this blog. I am in the process of grappling with many of the same issues on my personal site http://www.littlegirldancing.com. It is refreshing to know that there are others doing the same. I am very new to this (applying critical thinking skills in regards to church). I appreciate the fact that you are not bashing the way “church is done” but you seem to truly have the best interest at heart for this Bride of Christ. I too have a passion to be a voice for the remembering of who we are. I will be looking forward to reading more!

  • Greg Wack

    Wow! Skye, this is a great two part post! The Russell quote in part one nailed my pain right now. Together they affirm transformation is desperately needed. Thanks for solid food for thought and action! Oh, yes, I will be subscribing to Leadership Journal very soon!

  • Andrea Denner

    As long as there is a dearth of true discipleship in the church, there will continue to be an embracing of strange doctrine (in this case, moralistic deism).
    Until new believers are shown from the scripture that love is not always romance, joy is not necessarily ecstatic happiness, and that patience can only exist if there is a reason for it to be exercised, etc. etc., they will make up their own theologies that fit their view of life- coming from whatever influence and culture that they embrace.
    When the church takes seriously the commands to make disciples, then I believe we will see less de-churched and unchurched.

  • ty

    bottom line: people are being taught doctrine and not jesus, rules and not freedom, exclusiveness and not community.

  • Ivy

    My husband and I were already disillusioned by the institutional congregation we attended in the northwest suburbs of Chicago before we moved to a very rural area. But even out here, we’ve run into the same problems: The wine is watered down to make it palatable for everyone, and the members of the congregation become nothing more than food to keep the institutional machine alive. To cite an overworked analogy, it’s like “The Matrix” – people are feeding the machine.

    We can no longer, in good conscience, support the Institutional “Church” or its congregations. How is it following Jesus to support an organization over supporting our brothers and sisters in Christ?

    We ARE the Church. We have friends who are also followers of Jesus, we meet with them, share fellowship, but “go to church” is a phrase that is no longer part of our vocabulary.

  • Ivy

    I had another thought on this.

    Just because I reject the institutionalized congregations, I’m not outside the Church.

    I AM the Church.

    Therefore, I’m de-institutionalized, NOT de-churched.

  • Jeri Falling

    Spiritual can be enhanced by always making sure that you have compassion to everyone. ‘

    <a href="Look at our new internet page as well

  • Jimmy Brender

    In a spiritual reality, nothing can be lost and therefore, nothing can be taken, but while we perceive this physical reality, the idea of losing when you give or gaining when you take, are inbred into the worlds thinking.`

    Very latest article coming from our very own blog site