Christian Migration
27 Jul 2006
Research from the book: “The spiritual revolution”, Paul Heelas and Linda Woodhead, £16.99
When sociological surveys are made of people religious affiliation it is usually delineated on the basis of denomination. This research in Kendal, was undertaken with a very different typology. From a population of 26,000 people they found 7% of people were involved in organised church religion, and they delineated the types of churches as follows:
1. Religion as Difference: (devotional)
- God separate from us
- God mediated through his church, and scriptures
- Authority is external to us
- Worshipping the transcendent God
- Morality: is about the differences between us and God
- Stresses reality of sin and need for redemption
- Community: sees itself set apart, as the redeemed, tending towards separation.
2. Religion of Humanity: (social)
- God approaches humanity, through incarnation, human reason and feeling.
- Suspicious of authority, measuring it against human experience, and reason.
- It looks around, with ethical concerns, into the poor, politics etc.
- It tends to talk about the goodness of the world, even though it acknowledges sin.
- It wants to embrace people in inclusivity
- Goodness of work etc.
3. Spirituality of Life: (personal)
- God is sought within, and all persons, and within nature
- Notions of a higher self and better self
- Authority is not in texts, but within your personal experience, and it’s authenticity
- Looking for spirituality that is at heart of all religions
- Need to be liberated from your lower self, self liberation, shaped by culture with DIY groups
In terms of who was in which kind of church, they found that:
Religion of Difference: 18%
Religion of Humanity: 55%
Religion of Experiential Difference (this is a combination of 1&3): 21%
Religion of Experiential Humanity ( a combination of 1&2): 6%
Whilst the overall picture was of decline, the one section of churches that were growing significantly where those of ‘Experiential Difference’, which are the predominantly conservative charismatic churches. They were/are combining moral spirituality with an experiential spirituality.
Outside of organised religion they could trace 1.6% of people involved in alternative spiritualities.
Now I had some questions for the research that they could only answer anecdotally, they were questions they (surprisingly) hadn’t explored:
1. The growing churches: were they mostly from a migration of christians from other churches? The researches got the impression that yes, this was the case.
2. Alternative Spiritualities: were these mostly grown from ex church or current church people? Yes was the answer, most were run by women over 45, who seemed to have some church background.
Conlusion
So whilst the research and book want to conclude that Britain is less secular and there is a growth of non organised spirituality, I see something very different.
1. Most christians are migrating to churches that sustain them as a minority such as charismatic evangelical.
2. Many are migrating outside the church, with the alternative spiritualities.
3. Most people, 90% have no interest in organised or un-organised spirituality.
Apparently the researchers took the time to go door to door, and found that working and middle class people admitted to never talking about spiritual issues, that they would never ask their partner/spouse about such things.
This research convinced me more than ever that the future of the church is not in constructing alternative spiritualities outside organised church (these are valid and will mostly help migrating christians), but that we must address the issue of a population that the new market state has produce a new religion for, a religion that provides a way of life, and a metaphysic of being, theocapitalism.
How do we convert people from theocapitalism to christianity?
5 comments
Trackback
Comment by Paul
5.52 pm on 28 Jul 2006
Great question… I think I said before that I am not so bleak on the future – but then I mix with interesting middle class folks all the time who are not happy with the junk they are accumulating in the name of their religion – there is something missing – the hard thing is doing no more than suggesting a different way whilst still being caught between both worlds – I think stuff fatigue is a powerful indicator especially as experience fatigue is following close behind it…
people are getting burned out and bumned out so don’t want to try a new experience or just aren’t buying it that the next gadget really wil deliver the high – just as science failed to be the pancea for the modern period, stuff is doing exactly the same for the post modern…
so Q is how do I convince someone to try a different way of living when they don’t want to try something new like the “GOd/church thang”
maybe they just need some declutter time first??? Some space??? something to realise that nothing isn’t the answer either…
Comment by chris
10.27 am on 30 Jul 2006
Interesting research, but as you hinted within your critique, researchers often find what they are looking for! I am from a social science background, and have often struggled with Christian research. The old line about lies, damned lies and statistics springs to mind.
Having said that, I have not read this book, or checked out the methodology, and it might be spot on.
A friend told me recently of a website publishing an extensive, longtitudanal study from which the conclusion was that people needed absolute, bible based certainties, and churches needed to be providing this.
Research is great, but it is contextual, and shot through with researcher bias, and usually finds a market (in book form) because there is an interest group who can use it to make their point.
I have found myself outside church, and yet, never more felt part of the Kingdom, so i suppose I am one of the folk that Jason hints at- a migrating Christian. in fact, I like that title! Perhaps it carries a flavour of pilgrimmage…
Another point that occurs to me is that Church is catholic, but Church is also LOCAL, and it is in the local, indiginous expression of Church that our focus is on these days. The big, imported models of building up our institutions have been found to be problematic.
I have a friend who runs a large church in Lancashire where I grew up as a Christian. It is a wonderful , full of light and love and music and great people. It is very much part of the conservative charasmatic tradition. My friend however, is exhausted. He works incredible hours, and never feels that he has done enough. And when he looks at what is taking time, it is often about servicing an institution- keeping the wheels turning. This is no bad thing- as I said, it is wonderful.
However, the church is located in a rough, run down part of old industrial Lancashire. All about a cobbled streets and mill terraces, full of people who have nothing to do with Church. Like the 93% mentioned above- Church is irrelevant to them. My friend feels the pain of this, and tries to engage in outreach, but how much more can he fit into his week?
Many of us have felt this. many of us have sought something else, and perhaps even known some success. However, in contrast to Jason, I feel strongly that many are following the flow of spirit into new things. New ways of structuring ourselves to be accessible and available to those around us. To be in communion with other denominations, and in dialogue with other faiths. Of caourse it is possible to do this WITHIN established churches, but as my friend knows well, so much gets in the way. Church has usually learnt things the hard way after all…
As for these new communities of faith- some are temporary, some will grow, and set their own feet in concrete and glass. And the Spirit will move on…..
Comment by mervyn
6.05 pm on 30 Jul 2006
Iam reminded of an old quote by walter percy about places being used up and losing the life they once had and even now new churches are seemingly getting used up and worn out perhaps its time to stop playing Church with a Capital C and investing in church with a small c where people matter it seems that for so long we have used the formula believe belong behave whereas Jesus view was belong believe behave but then again perhaps I am wrong who knows what I do know is that some of our things arent working and we are maybe relying on personalities and the next big thing instead of simplicity?
Comment by chris
5.22 pm on 4 Aug 2006
I have been thinking about the belong believe behave bit (in what ever order!)that Mervyn talks about. I was not happy with any of the orders of the words. Possibly because none of them fitted me.
I have been a part of leadership within Churches for a long time, and am now part of a new church project, but I suppose I feel that a linear way of bringing people into the community of faith does not work, for me, or for those I am ‘churching’ with.
I still experience challenges to my faith (The believing bit), and in the past have been dishonest about this. I sometimes feel I ‘belong’, wheras at other times, i just feel that I OUGHT to belong.
I try to ‘behave’, but this too can easily become dishonest- how many of us would really wantothers to find out what we are REALLY like?!
I do like Mervyn’s comment about church with a small c, as this is where it seems to me that we can belong to one another, and encourage each other, through the weaknesses of our behaviour and our flickering faith.
Comment by Helen
10.49 pm on 4 Aug 2006
chris wrote:
I do like Mervyn’s comment about church with a small c, as this is where it seems to me that we can belong to one another, and encourage each other, through the weaknesses of our behaviour and our flickering faith.
Nicely put, chris.
I hear you about ‘not fitting’ and ‘not belonging’ and having doubts.
I finally ‘came clean’ in one of my local newspapers, in response to an invitation from the editor to write about why I didn’t go to church anymore.
The article didn’t make everyone happy.
Nevertheless, it was nice to be honest…finally…
Comments are now closed.