The Solution for Church Decline is Not More of the Same
In his book Why Religion Went Obsolete, Christian Smith argues that a significant cultural shift has made traditional American religion increasingly irrelevant and unattractive. He argues that “Religion has not merely declined; it has become culturally obsolete.”[1] The irrelevance of religion is different than just decline or secularization.
The cultural air we unknowingly imbibe essentially contains pollutants that subtly shape people to not care about or have time or attention for religion. We may not like it but we can’t change reality by ignoring it. But it’s not just the surrounding culture that is at fault for the decline of church in the West. The church itself is liable. One of Smith’s chapter titles, “Religious Self-Destructions,” is spot-on.
Many Christian leaders don’t realize the extent of the problem or would rather stick to the same old ways. But if we keep doing the same thing, we’ll get the same results, but with less success. If Christian leaders don’t change course, they’ll burn out and become discouraged. They might think the answer is to do more of everything and make everything better, but that’s not the answer. If the problem is misunderstood we will not be able to come up with the correct solution.
Imagine someone buying a brand-new electric car. But when it starts acting up, they open the hood and start looking for the carburetor. They look around for spark plugs and try to change the oil. They’re frustrated because they don’t know what to do and nothing looks familiar. But they just keep trying to do the same old thing.
What’s the problem? They’re treating an electric car like it’s a gas-powered one. Same idea on the outside—four wheels, steering wheel, gets you from point A to B—but a completely different system under the hood. To fix it, they need a new kind of knowledge, a new toolset, and probably a whole new way of thinking.
Sometimes we try to fix new challenges in the church using recycled methodology. We assume what worked before will work again, without realizing the extent of change that has taken place and the challenges ahead.
We aren’t in Christendom anymore. Christians are speaking a dying language. Church buildings and institutions are increasingly seen as out of touch.
American religion’s demise has not been due to its farfetched belief contents—as most atheists and some secularization theorists would have it—but because of its own fossilized cultural forms that it was unable to shake. Religion in the Millennial zeitgeist felt alien and disconnected from what mattered in life—in short, badly culturally mismatched. The vibes were off.[2]
Christian Smith suggests getting down to the core. What are Jesus’ followers trying to do and why? What are the essential core traditions, identities, and missions—without which we would not exist—versus cultural positions that may seem non-negotiable but are actually liabilities? We can’t be satisfied with just trying to keep the status quo intact. A whole new paradigm is needed.[3]
The solution for church decline is not more of the same, and I don’t believe the solution is mega church either. I think the solution is Christians getting back to the simple center of Christ and Christ-formed communities without all the unnecessary clutter and cultural-Christian baggage.
(I plan to layout more of my thoughts in a few posts to follow)
Notes
[1] Christian Smith, Why Religion Went Obsolete, 2. “The decline of traditional American religion is a massive social change, the kind that doesn’t happen often, and it can be difficult to wrap one’s head around how such a massive change can occur.” (Smith, Why Religion Went Obsolete, 60) “In 2000, the median number of attendees at a worship service was 137 people. By 2020, that number was reduced to 65—a 52% loss in size in 20 years.” (Ibid., 32-33).
[2] Ibid., 338.
[3] Ibid., 372.
*Photo by Paul Volkmer
Jesus Hates Hypocrisy
Why should I care about Christianity when Christians are such hypocrites? Christians are behind things like the crusades.[1] Pastors and priests abuse people.[2] Pastors and churches only want my money. Jesus was loving. Christians are judgmental and hateful.
If you have been hurt in the church and I’m sorry for that. I hate it. It shouldn’t have been that way. The church is sometimes a messed-up place. Sometimes people say that’s because a church is like a hospital. I get that. Jesus did come to heal and help the sick after all. And not those who think they have it all together. But a hospital is meant to end in health and wholeness. Not death and destruction.
For the hurts that were inflicted on you, I’m sorry. It was not supposed to be that way. Jesus came that people may have life—right now—and have it abundantly. He didn’t come so people would be squelched. That is, however, Satan’s goal. Satan desires to kill, steal, and destroy. And sadly, he has often been quite effective, even within the church.
The thing that makes me the saddest, I think, is that is the furthest thing from Jesus’ desire. Jesus died for the church. He loves the church. The last thing He wants is for the church to be unloving. It is an affront to everything He stands for and is. Anyone who hates an unloving church has something important in common with Jesus Himself.
Jesus Hates Hypocrisy
Jesus was the most real and most loving and honest person there ever was. He doesn’t like lies. He doesn’t like people acting one way but really being another. This is what Jesus says in Matthew 23:27-28:
Woe to you, teachers of the law and Pharisees, you hypocrites! You are like whitewashed tombs, which look beautiful on the outside but on the inside are full of the bones of the dead and everything unclean. In the same way, on the outside you appear to people as righteous but on the inside you are full of hypocrisy and wickedness.
Jesus was harshest on the hypocrites. So, if you hate hypocrisy, you’re in good company. Christians, it is true, should not be hypocrites. When they are, they should work to remove the log in their own eye before they try and remove the speck in someone else’s eye (Matt. 7:3-5).
Christians are Hypocrites (at least sometimes)
The reality is, Christians are sometimes hypocrites. Jesus in Mark 2:17 says, “Those who are well have no need of a physician, but those who are sick. I came not to call the righteous, but sinners.” Christians are sick and in need of the Savior. They aren’t perfect, but they should be growing in Christlikeness.
Again, a church is like a hospital. It’s for sick people. It’s true that we can’t and shouldn’t fix ourselves up before we go to Jesus. But if people are going to a hospital and they’re not getting better, then I don’t want to go to that hospital. So, it’s true that sometimes Christians are hypocritical, but Christians have no excuse for being that way. Christians are supposed to be like Jesus.
Christians Fail and are sometimes Fake
Christians fail and are sometimes fake but that doesn’t disprove or invalidate Jesus. A world-renowned surgeon could perform heart or brain surgery on someone but if the patient keeps only eating donuts and doesn’t stop repeatedly hitting their head against the wall, the patient is still going to be unhealthy. To blame the surgeon for the patient’s problems would not be fair or make sense. In the same way, the presence of problems with Christians does not at all prove that Jesus is problematic.
So, if you’ve been hurt by a church or a Christian, please don’t let that keep you from Jesus. Christians and churches fail and don’t love people as they should. Sometimes they are two-faced. But that doesn’t mean that Jesus has messed up. Jesus loves you. And He hates it when people are hurt by the church.
Christians believe there is a Standard for Right and Wrong Conduct
The fact that we know hypocrisy is wrong points to the fact that there’s a standard for what is right and wrong. And we all fail. We don’t even meet our own criteria of what we should and should not do.
Suppose you were part of a science experiment where a device was inserted into your arm. The device would record any moral judgment you made over six months. Moral judgments like, “It’s wrong to lie” or “Helping your needy friend is a good thing to do” or “It’s wrong to throw trash out your car window and pollute the environment.”
After six months the scientists would print out a list of your moral judgments—your standard of right and wrong. The device would remain implanted but this time the device would note when you did and did not follow your own rules. At the end of the six months, the scientists print out a list of the times your moral judgments and moral actions weren’t in line with one another.
What would the scientists find on your list? Any discrepancies between your moral judgments and actions? I think so. I know my list would reveal some places where I failed to meet my own standard of right and wrong.[3]
Christians shouldn’t be hypocritical and when they are, they are going against the one they say they follow. Christians should be the last thing standing in people’s way from loving Jesus. But when they do, Jesus hates it. Christians should seek to love and live like Jesus did if He is their Lord and Savior.
“The problem with a hateful Christian is not their Christianity but their departure from it.” Christians are to love because Jesus first loved (1 Jn. 4:19). “This is real love—not that we loved God, but that He loved us and sent His Son as a sacrifice to take away our sins” (1 Jn. 4:10, NLT). Since God loved us so much, we ought to love others (1 Jn. 4:11).
So friend, as much as my heart is sadden for you and your hurts, I believe the heartache Jesus has felt is much more. He is Himself love and He gave Himself for the church that it would be a people and place of love and compassion.
My desire for you, is that you would have life. And have it abundantly. My desire is that you would flourish. And my cards are on the table, because I’m telling you openly, I believe Messiah Jesus matters. Matters desperately and eternally. I can’t make you think He matters too, and I can’t make you live for Him. But I hope I can help you consider Him and some important questions. Know, no matter what you think, or where you land regarding all these questions, that I will continue to love you and root for you.
Notes
[1] The crusades were not condoned by Christ. Just because something happens “in the name of Christ” does not mean that it is endorsed by Christ. “One killing in the name of Christ is a blasphemy” (John Dickson, Bullies and Saints [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2021], 253).
[2] Jesus speaks directly to the evil of mistreating kids. He says, “If anyone causes one of these little ones—those who believe in me—to stumble, it would be better for them to have a large millstone hung around their neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea” (Matt. 18:6).
[3] Eric T. Yang and Stephen T. Davis have a similar illustration on page 110 of their book, An Introduction to Christian Philosophical Theology (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2020).
[4] John Dickson, Bullies and Saints (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 2021), 284.
*Photo by James Bak
Deconstruction
Deconstruction is in vogue
I recently looked at #exchristian posts on Instagram. There are a lot of them. It’s pretty popular to recount what is wrong with the Church. Why? And how far should it go?
What’s deconstruction?
Deconstruction is more than just saying what’s wrong with church. A lot of times it’s saying what’s wrong with the Christian faith. It’s saying Christianity is essentially stupid. That’s often what deconstructionists say. But, they don’t so often set out to prove their claims.
Memes in no way prove that a worldview has no meaning or validity. And proving that there are problems with a church, the Church, or particular people in the Church is not the same as proving that Christianity gives an inaccurate picture of the world.
Deconstruction has happened before
Deconstruction is not new. The hashtags are new but deconstruction has actually been happening since the beginning of Christianity.
For example, the apostle Paul and other early Christians argued for the truthfulness of Christianity while others sought to disprove it (see Luke 1:3; Acts 1:3; 9:22; 17:3; 18:4-5, 28; 19:8; 24:25; 26:22-26; 28:23).
People have sought to deconstruct all sorts of aspects of Christianity. Early Christians were accused of cannibalism because of confusion over the Lord’s Supper. They were accused of atheism because they didn’t believe in the pantheon of Greek gods. And they were accused of political disloyalty because they wouldn’t give ultimate allegiance to the empire or offer sacrifices to the emperor.
There are things that should deconstruct
Many memes convey important messages, important critiques that should be taken to heart. There are many sad and despicable things that happen in the church. My family and I have experienced some of those things.
Spiritual abuse, sexual abuse, making idols of pastors, legalism, pridefulness, inhospitality, just to mention a few, are unacceptable and should be condemned as such. Many movements have important things that should be gleaned from them. There are things that can be learned from #exchristians. There are also things that should be confessed and cried over.
Jesus Himself “deconstructed” things
Jesus criticized the religious leaders. He was a rebel with a cause. He reached out and welcomed the Samaritan woman even when that was socially unacceptable (Jn 4). Jesus tipped tables in the Temple. He composed a letter through the hands of John partially to critique and challenge the Church (Rev. 2-3).
Jesus wasn’t silent. He brought up stuff but also proposed solutions. The apostle Paul modeled the same approach.
I believe church leaders should take the same approach. They should take the opportunity to listen, learn, and lovingly address problems.
How does one know what should be deconstructed?
Friedrich Nietzsche, the famous and influential German philosopher, came from a very devout family. Yet, he ended up a very articulate deconstructionist. He very poetically and memorably said: God is dead and we killed him.[1]
Nietzsche didn’t stop there, though. He spelled out what that means for our lives. He reasoned, and I think rightly, that if God is dead, then there is no actual meaning or morality. It is might that makes right. The strong slay and the strong say what is right and what is wrong.
Nietzsche lit a fuse and dynamited God and with Him all basis for morality and actual meaning.[2] So, how much should be deconstructed and destroyed? How do we know? On what basis can we judge what is right and wrong?
If we’re going to prune for the sake of health and good fruit, how much do we cut back? If we cut back too far do we not lose all hope of fruit and flourishing?
There is a point to pruning but if we prune back the very existence of purpose that seems like a cut too far. It seems to me that’s not going to serve the purpose of the pruning.
If one of the problems we’re critiquing is people’s failure to love it seems foolish and unproductive to cut off the possibility of the existence of actual love. And yet, that seems to be what many are doing. Richard Dawkins, the famous atheist said in his book, The God Delusion, that morality and love are simply a “blessed precious mistake;” a happenstance of evolution.[3]
Yet, as G.K. Chesterton said, if we rebel against everything we lose the grounds and ability to rebel against anything. So, is there a basis for actual truth? If so, what? And how does one know? If not, how does one know what should be deconstructed?
What are the reasons for deconstruction?
“Christian” Hypocrisy
Christians and so-called “Christians” often fail to live the Christian ethic. They fail to live a life of love. Often they even carry out evil actions. Sexual abuse seems to have even become prevalent. And so people reason, not so unreasonably, that Christianity is pointless if not also a plague on society.
Problems with people acting immorally, of course, don’t actually prove that Christianity is a shallow or wrong worldview though. This is especially the case if people are using Christian criteria to critique Christianity. Yuval Noah Harari has said,
“Americans got the idea of equality from Christianity, which argues that every person has a divinely created soul, and that all souls are equal before God. However, if we do not believe in the Christian myths about God, creation and souls, what does it mean that all people are “equal”?[4]
It doesn’t make sense to say Christianity is wrong and yet also use Christian morality as a measurement of what is morally wrong. If someone is to critique Christianity they must have an epistemological basis to do so. That is, they must have knowledge of what is right and wrong.
Is that knowledge just innate? If so, why? And how does it work?
Empty Dogmatism
Some people grew up attending a church that only offered empty platitudes and forced dogmatism. Their genuine questions were not able to be asked and certainly weren’t honestly answered. And so, when they confronted challenges or hostility with their beliefs they give it up. They don’t feel they have solid grounds for continuing to be committed to it.
Morality
Some “former Christians” deconstruct Christianity not because of reasoned augmentation but because of Christian morality. Some people don’t like what Christianity says about sexuality or other moral issues.[5] So, they criticize Christianity on moral grounds although they may have no warranted ground for their sense of morality.
Notes
[1] See his work Thus Spoke Zarathustra.
[2] Nietzsche grounded meaning in a doctrine he called “eternal recurrence.” He essentially proposed living in such a way that if your life was to eternally reoccur that you would be living in such a way that it would be less terrible. Nietzsche grounded purpose in this fictitious notion. Fictitious because Nietzsche did not actually believe in God or in the reoccurrence of our lives.
[3] Dawkins says, “Could it be that our Good Samaritan urges are misfirings”? By Dawkins account we have “programmed into our brains altruistic urges, alongside sexual urges, hunger urges, xenophobic urges and so on…. We can no more help ourselves feeling pity when we see a weeping unfortunate (who is unrelated and unable to reciprocate) than we can help ourselves feeling lust for a member of the opposite sex (who may be infertile or otherwise unable to reproduce). Both are misfirings, Darwinian mistakes: blessed, precious mistakes”). (Richard Dawkins, The God Delusion, 252-53).
But, if we are brutes, why shouldn’t we be brutal? Nietzsche, for instance, promotes the strong acting like “large birds of prey” and freely abusing the weak “lambs” because after all that’s what comes naturally and there is no God to impose morals. He said, “I expressly want to place on record that at the time when mankind felt no shame towards its cruelty, life on earth was more cheerful than it is today,… The heavens darkened over man in direct proportion to the increase in his feeling shame at being man” (See par. 7 of the Second Essay in On the Genealogy of Morality).
Jean-Paul Sartre said, “The existentialists… thinks it very distressing that God does not exist, because all possibility of finding values in a heaven of ideas disappears along with Him; there can no longer be an a priori Good, since there is not infinite and perfect consciousness to think it. Nowhere is it written that the Good exists, what we must be honest, that we must not lie; because the fact is we are on a plane where there are only men” (Jean-Paul Sartre, Existentialism and Human Emotions, 22).
If we don’t acknowledge God then the moral laws that flow from His character are gone as well, and we are left with blind skepticism and relativism; every person doing whatever is right in their own eyes. As we consider this we should never forget that, as Martin Luther King Jr. exhorted, “everything Adolf Hitler did in Germany was ‘legal.’”
[4] Harari, Sapiens: A Brief History of Humankind (New York: Harper, 2015), 109.
[5] As Romans 1 says, “people suppress the truth in unrighteousness.”
Photo by Aaron Burden

