Number 1 reason why PC(USA) churches are dying a slow, painful, sad, drawn-out, death and other happy thoughts

Yesterday I posted a status update on Facebook, "Bruce is pretty sure he knows why some churches are slowly dying in body and spirit."  I got more inquiry from that update than ever before.  Interesting.

So, wrote a post about it, want to hear it, here it go.

First, I am TOTALLY not jumping on the liberal or conservative version of the "The Presbyterian Church (USA) is hemorrhaging because we don't love/know/follow Jesus enough" train.  The reason for our denominational health is so far beyond a liberal/conservative issue for me.  Despite what we would like to say about one another, I don't believe that congregational health or sickness prefers one theological perspective over another.  It is much larger than that.

But before I pose my arrogant diagnosis of an entire denomination, let me get in my preemptive defenses and disclaimers:

1. I whine about a denomination that has formed me  and that I have CHOSEN to be part of.
2. I am engaged both personally and professionally in trying to be the change I seek.
3. I do know that people connect with God in different ways, but sometimes, it is just bad stewardship of physical, financial and spiritual resources.
4. I realize that there is not just ONE thing that is causing our churches to die a slow slow painful, wandering, subtle, sinister death . . . . but then that would be a really long boring blog post.
5. Sorry if I am basically rehashing things that I have posted before, but you know how we pastor types really only have about 3-6 things to say. 

But first a word of hope.   I am actually pretty optimistic about the future of the Presbyterian Church (USA) and am more committed than ever to working towards the transformation of our denomination through the transformation of our congregations.  I really believe that, while we are certainly at a crossroads, mainline denominations have HUGE potential to impact the world in new and effective ways in the future.

There is hope.  But . . . and isn't there always a big ol' but(t).

Our churches are dying in body and spirit because we have no institutional capacity to handle the complexities of being church in the shifting worldview from modern to postmodern.

Yes, this is nothing new to many of you.  And yes, much of the world has been in postmodernity for a while now, but the church is still catching up and I believe we have a responsibility to walk with each other through our varied experiences of this shift.  This plays out in so many ways as I will lay out below that sometimes it just seems like an insurmountable obstacle.  Call it wide-eyed naiveté, hope in the power of God or an acknowledgment of the numerical shifts in professional clergy and church demographics,  I believe there is a movement building and some hope building for that transformation to happen sooner rather than later.

Here are some sub-issues and problems in no particular order.

OBSTACLE // We promise relief from life's craziness rather than offer ways to experience peace in the midst of chaos:
Modernity says that we can overcome the chaos of life, Postmodernity says that choas is life.

I don't know how many times I hear, "Once _______ is over, it will be calm" or "If we could just _______ then everything will be better."  This idea that the chaos of life is to be conquered is such an American way of thinking.  Just pull up the boot straps and push through, damn the consequences, and everything will be better.  While perseverance is commendable at times, believing that the chaos of life in today's time of globalization and technology is EVER going to go away or be conquered it downright irresponsible.

Christ can offer us the peace that we need.  Don't avoid the storm, be calm in the midst of it.  Yes, technology and the rapid movement of life can create its own flavor of crazy, but we have always experienced those times of peace of mind, spirit and body even though the rest of the world is still just as crazy.  THAT is at the heart of the gospel for me, the peace and wholeness that we are offering in Christ.

////

OBSTACLE // We worship the past rather than allow the past to ground our future:
Modernity says that there is one way, the old way, Postmodernity says that new ways must flow FROM the old ways.

Don't get me started.  For those who want to toss everything out because it is "traditional" as well as those who think God can only meet someone in one way - your way - you are both killing the church!  The sooner we realize that folks will connect with God in a variety of ways, the sooner we can embrace the wonderful complexities of the Body of Christ.  Just because one person may not connect with God in the same way another does, does NOT make them any less faithful to God.  If we can't appreciate the diverse ways that people meet God we will never REALLY respect the journeys that we each take and we essentially hold ourselves back from truly see Christ in the other.  We need to truly embrace the varied ways in which God meets people.  God can handle it. 

////

OBSTACLE // We value the DOing of the institution over BEing in relationship:
Modernity says that community is in the methodology and ways we DO church; Postmodernity says that community is about BEing church.

We Presbyterians are gooooooood at this one.  Our Book of Order is "clear" and we can use polity to create community.  We can structure our way into being the body of Christ. Buzzzz.  Thank you for playing.  Now don't get me wrong.  I love our polity, the spirit in which it was and is written, the guidance it gives, the bounds it helps to set, etc. but it will NOT create community.  The ways we DO church should only be lifted up in as much as the DOing helps to sustain the BEing. 

At the same time, if a church community believes that it's ministry is worth outliving the people who are there at a particular moment and time, some kind of structure and DOing church must take place in order to create sustainability.  In the end though, every time we face a choice, we should be about BEing church.

////

OBSTACLE // We only know acceptance or rejection and can't handle appreciation:
Modernity says that there is one and only one "Big Story" or metanarrative and truth; Postmodernity says there is not ONE metanarrative or truth; Christian Postmodernity says that under the metanarrative of Christ, there are many many truths about knowing Christ.

The old polemic that there is only ONE truth out there is poison to the health of our church at local and denominational levels.  Moderns can't seem to get their heads around the fact that there may indeed be room for multiple interpretations of the truth.  Can we not center ourselves around a belief in Christ and then allow the rest of the "issues" to be part of our corporate discernment?  I am not saying that if you disagree about homosexuality, abortion, or even the lordship of Christ ("a way" or "the way") one has to worship in the same church community, but can we not still hold each other as valuable members of a community at a denominational level?  Can we not model for the world living together with even the greatest of disagreement without resorting to spiritual and emotional violence?  If not the church, then who?

Moving beyond these issues is NOT a pipe dream.  In fact, many more of my strong relationships are built more along postmodern/modern affinities lines that in traditional liberal/conservative camps.  I would bet that there are many of you who are able to be in Christian community despite old paradigms that our church would prefer we continued. 

I tell ya, the tides are a turning.  The big question for many of us who are committed to the health of our denomination and are seeing opportunities to step up is, "Will we help to push the current or simply let it rush over us?"

What do you say, let the revolution begin!

Comments

[Keri Sheckler]

Even as a born and bred Southern Baptist I can say "Amen!" to your view/thoughts/comments. Thank goodness our hope is in the Lord and not in man. Keep going about His business there in the Bay Area and keeping it real.

[breyeschow]

Keri - Yeah, I forgot to also mention that seems pretty clear that this the movement is happening withing and across traditional denominational affiliations. LBHS 1987 in the house!

[Heather W. Reichgott]

I think you hit the nail on the head with the "relief from chaos/chaos is life" part.

Personally, I think that many in the church are hoping for a state of affairs in which we are wealthy, untroubled, in control all the time, and devoid of any conflict.

This is silly.
That is neither the way the early church functioned, nor the way Jesus functioned, nor the way the Bible EVER asks us to be.

For more on the same topic, I think you might enjoy this webcomic:

(if the image tag doesn't work go to asbojesus.wordpress.com and look for october 29, comic #205)

[Adam Copeland]

Thanks for the post, Bruce. I'm totally feeling similar issues in the Church of Scotland, except their death is much more immanent. Not that dying is all bad, for out of death a new life might emerge--something about Jesus there rings a bell.

Anyways, that wasn't what I wanted to write. Simply put: I too have hope in the future of the PC(USA) because of our seminaries, or to be more specific, because of my experience thus far at Columbia. There post-modernity is felt, lived-into, and embraced. There young students who have only known post-modernity learn the theological grounding for the future. There young profs take these issues head-on. If you want hope in the church, check out a seminary.

http://adamcopeland.wordpress.com/

[breyeschow]

Heather - "Silly" is right and really when it gets right down to it, I wonder how well the two worldviews can interact OR is God indeed big enough for us all?

Adam - That is good to hear. But where will they all go? On one hand we want to prepare leaders for tomorrow, but who who will be the ones to lead communities out of today? And yes, dying is not bad, I would just like to be intentionally part of the the process towards death if that is indeed where we are headed. Take care!

[Tyler]

I think you've hit a key issues on the shirt from modernity to postmodernity for the church. I think a lot of churches assume that because they existing within a changing social time that they are remaining relevant. It is the churches who instead of just talking about it, but doing tangible things that will be making a difference still years from now. It is the churches who simply talk about such things that will wonder what they missed. thanks Bruce.

[Christian Boyd]

Here are my excited late-night, too many Starbuck coffees, response:

The other day I was talking with a new church development consultant (which is apparently what NCD pastors do in the PCUSA) and we got talking about ancient future, emerging church, and the missional church movement. In that conversation he made the assertion that we are even past the postmodern, noting that it killed over somewhere in the nineties (timeline: 30 year war to world wars, modern; 1945ish to 1980's, early nineties, post-modern).

This resonated with some article I read within the last year that states there is a feud across denominations between classical, modern, post-modern ecclesial world-views, each with a different ax to grind or to protect a core value (with post-modern, the author said it is more a reaction to the modern rigidity). The author offered a counter position which was rooted in the Trinity, which agrees much with what you have posted as post-modern, but pushes us out even further, yet holding on to the ancient.

The author (whom I am going to have to search my article file for soon) shares that 99.5% of western-euroamerican ecclesiologies are Christocentric and stuck on particular forms endemic of the reformation, enlightenment, or 1950’s and post-modern 1960’s. The result of such being is we all are possibly overly Christocentric in formal and informal ecclesiologies and not Trinitarian in nature (or essence). [Neo-Orthodox vs Trinitarians on the next Death-Match]

It seems we hold in common (Classicists, Modernists, and Post-modernists) ecclesiologies that are more a “Unitarianism of the Redeemer.” As Daniel Migliore notes in Faith Seeking Understanding, our ecclesiologies are “unable to discern any necessary connection between its cozy and sentimental Jesusolatry and passionate concern for the coming of justice for all people and for the renewal of the ravaged earth.”

Intrinsic to this Trinitarian reaffirmation is also a renewal sense of what community is in relation to a dynamic and charismatic God and the world, roles and functions of community members, faith practices that are relevant to a hungry and suffering world, and a definition and practice of mission that is something greater than what it has been over the past 2000 years.

In this sense, “the Church is catholic due to Christ and not its members” (which is an eastern orthodox view) would be re-formed to reclaim that the Church is catholic and whole due to the Holy Trinity and not because of the particular works of any one of the Trinity nor any one or collective members of the Holy Community known as the Church. With this transformed mindset, the Church as ecclesia and koinonia would be able to see more clearly its call to participate not only in the framework of the Church but also in the world, and evangelism and mission would be a priori by nature.

So, I think the fantastic observations and assertions you have made are actually beyond the modern/post-modern ect. They are more within this liminal glob we find ourselves in that does not have a moniker yet. . . and that is okay.

[breyeschow]

Christian - WOWZA! Slow down on the coffee ;-) Naw just joshing. Yeah, since I really just talk out of my _____ whatever we call this stuff has the difficulty of having to also be lived out some how. All the theory in the world doesn't mean diddly if there are not some "fruits" produced. And then we go round and round about that. In any case, most of this for me is grist for the mill as I try to actually make some of it real.

[Matt Singley]

"We value doing the institution over being in relationship". Although I think you would be very hard pressed to find many people that would confess to doing this themselves I think it is a rampant problem in the PC(USA) church. It makes me think of that old Elvis song that says "A little less conversation a little more action please".

Thanks for taking the lead in this conversation, Bruce. Things are getting interesting.

[Monte]

Bruce,
Great conversation. I agree. Even more I think that our meta-narrative, or big story, is even more valid today when we share it in a pluralistic metanarrative world. I think it's heard more authentically when we share as individuals - and as church communities of faith in our corporate witness - that it's true for us through our experience, participation in it and the connection we have with each other, God and all of creation through the good news of liberation through the living God of the Bible.

I think we also probably tend to look to the wrong places to see the change happening and how to not go with the flow, but navigate the changing tide with vision, clarity, honesty and efficacy. Our system tends to look to BIG churches and to clergy with BIG names or BIG bibliographies of the books they've written. I think some avenues to the future are not just emerging, but even already emerged. Part of our obstacle is looking for new responses to our challenges in the same old places and in the same old boxes. Communities like Mission Bay, among others, might be already pointing to one of the myriad of choices to make in discipleship and corporate life as a community of faith.

[breyeschow]

Monte - I think you are sooooo right in that the hope for me lies in the reality that much of the resources and energy is ALREADY here! We just need to find ways to unleash the tide! It will require a refocusing of priorities, models, etc. but you are so right. EmegerING and emergED.

[dirk]

I'm going to give my humble opinion on the topic of dying churches. Growing up Disciples of Christ, I'm familiar with dying denominations, so Presbyterians and Methodists don't feel bad you're not alone! haha. First, since denominations are man made i don't think it's any surprise that churches come and go. Yet, God's word is eternal and forever...it will never die...and that's what matters. I think God is way less concerned about our denominational affiliation and much more concerned about where are hearts are at!

Basically, any church denomination who does not present their message in a culturally relevant way is going to die. And, while I have an appreciation for the traditions of hymns, robes, and pews, most people don't care about this stuff! Of course I just realized that I contradicted myself because Catholics have been rolling along for 100's of years! (not really sure if their churches are dying?)

However, a culturally relevant message doesn't mean that you have to water down God's word. If a church isn't covering the basic message of the bible... topics such as: loving your neighbor, how you should spend money, legalism, immorality, reaching out to the poor, consequences of sin, (basically everything that Jesus taught) then the church becomes a sort of social place, community group, or feel good service. BTW, Joel Osteen has a feel good service...but he's a motivational speaker and hardly a teacher of God's word. I mean who wouldn't want to be wealthy and prosperous? Alright Alright don't get me started. Warning! Tangent about to start. You can't teach God's word effectively without his truths. If you teach his love, mercy, and grace, you must teach his wrath and judgement and vice versa. Any extremes, and you fail to deliver God's message to humans.

Another viewpoint...simplicity. Churches are very complicated these days(along with corporate america and our personal lives)! I think these complications lead to church or denominational extinction. Jesus said we should have faith like a child. I think that's a great idea. Faith like a child is simple. I like it. No, wait...I love it actually! Simplicity is something we need to embrace in our culture. I think if organizations had a simpler model then we would all be better off...kinda like... "In and Out Burgers" here in California. You don't get confused with their menu...it's simple and easy to read. That's the way church should be...simple and easy to read. I think that's how Jesus would do it. So yeah...that's what I'm here to say, and make this statement to this world... If Jesus was alive today he would eat at "In and Out Burgers" ;) but only after eating organic fruits, nuts, and vegetables all week long...mmmmmm.

[breyeschow]

Dirk - thanks man. Great insights. Love the breadth of reactions.

[Jake Bouma]

Dude, this is a fantastic post. I don't really have anything valuable to add to the discussion; I just wanted to commend you and affirm you.

[abby]

"the tradition dies whenever it thinks its function is to perpetuate itself by uncritical assumptions and citations..."-james keenan s.j.

[Carol]

Hi Bruce -

Very interesting stuff...I admit that given my lack of active participation over the past 9 years, I'm waaaaaay behind the curve on these thought processes. But it's good to think new thoughts!

Did you see this article in today's Chronicle? http://www.sfgate.com/columnists/morford/

Thought you might find it (and the associated comments) interesting!

[breyeschow]

Jake - Thanks!
Abby - Too true!
Carol - Great link, thanks. Hope you are well. Once the transitions are done for you all, we can get back to the important work of Presbyterian politics ;-) Hey we have a cello as part of the bans now! Do I hear Harp sometime in the future! Indie Classical Praise!

[Johnny T. Helms]

Bruce, this is my first visit to your site (I found it on Blogrush) and I am a little confused by your wording. I was PCUS for several years and briefly PCUSA and have kept up with some of the life of the denomination (I still have family in your denom.) Do you believe that Jesus Christ is the only way to the Father? That He is the Son of God, the Christ, Lord, raised from the dead? I know that there has been debate over these issues (some of them anyway) over the last few years and your wording is rather vague as far as Jesus being the only way to be justified. I hope you will respond either by email or on this site. Thank you.

[breyeschow]

Johnny, thanks for stopping by. While I am pretty involved in the PC(USA) I am not tied to the denominational culture as it stands mostly for our inability to reach people with much effectiveness.

My sense is that we may not agree on this one, but hopefully can agree to disagree. So here is where I am on the Jesus is THE way or A way discussion.

I do believe that Jesus is THE way that I have been reconciled to God and would find great joy if others acknowledged and accepted the same gift. But, is Jesus THE way for everyone? Again, my inclination is yes, but my understanding of God's ability to connect with those before after and during the presence of a human Christ is greater and leaves room for God to connect with God however he sees fit.

[Johnny T. Helms]

You were right; we will not agree on this. And this, my friend, is what is wrong with the PCUSA; this is why people have left in droves. You essentially believe nothing and you have nothing to preach. This is post-modernism and post-modernism offers absolutely (forgive the pun) nothing.

"A human Christ" is very curious. Has Jesus Christ come in the flesh? Was He raised from the dead, bodily and historically? Are Muslims saved by their "connection" with God? The Buddhists? the Hindu? And if so, why did Jesus Christ die?

Bruce, go with your "inclination." But you are right, we agree to disagree. Please respond to these last questions if you will. Thank you again.

[breyeschow]

Johnny, thanks for keeping in the dialog. Rather than continue it here, stay-tuned for a post in the next few days that will surely be more focused on issues of Christology. I would love to get more voices in the mix. Be well. Bruce

[God]

I have very little knowledge on Presbyterian Church but I got the actually stuff that the author want to convey its good to know that information on these Churches.