A New Exodus? Americans are Exiting Liberal Churches

[Bono]

www.crosswalk.com/news/weblogs/mohler/?adate=6/12/2006#1402031

A New Exodus? Americans are Exiting Liberal Churches
by Al Mohler

"We have figured out your problem. You're the only one here who believes in God." That statement, addressed to a young seminarian, introduces Dave Shiflett's new book, Exodus: Why Americans are Fleeing Liberal Churches for Conservative Christianity. The book is an important contribution, and Shiflett offers compelling evidence that liberal Christianity is fast imploding upon itself.

Shiflett, an established reporter and author, has written for The Washington Post, The Weekly Standard, National Review, The Wall Street Journal, and Investors' Business Daily, among other major media. He is also author of Christianity on Trial and is a member of the White House Writers Group.

Shiflett's instincts as a reporter led him to see a big story behind the membership decline in liberal denominations. At the same time, Shiflett detected the bigger picture--the decline of liberal churches as compared to growth among the conservatives. Like any good reporter, he knew he was onto a big story.

"Americans are vacating progressive pews and flocking to churches that offer more traditional versions of Christianity," Shiflett asserts. This author is not subtle, and he gets right to the point: "Most people go to church to get something they cannot get elsewhere. This consuming public--people who already believe, or who are attempting to believe, who want their children to believe--go to church to learn about the mysterious Truth on which the Christian religion is built. They want the Good News, not the minister's political views or intellectual coaching. The latter creates sprawling vacancies in the pews. Indeed, those empty pews can be considered the earthly reward for abandoning heaven, traditionally understood."

Taken alone, the statistics tell much of the story. Shiflett takes his reader through some of the most salient statistical trends and wonders aloud why liberal churches and denominations seem steadfastly determined to follow a path that will lead to their own destruction. Shiflett also has a unique eye for comparative statistics, indicating, for example, that "there may now be twice as many lesbians in the United States as Episcopalians."

Citing a study published in 2000 by the Glenmary Research Center, Shiflett reports that the Presbyterian Church USA declined by 11.6 percent over the previous decade, while the United Methodist Church lost "only" 6.7 percent and the Episcopal Church lost 5.3 percent. The United Church of Christ was abandoned by 14.8 percent of its members, while the American Baptist Churches USA were reduced by 5.7 percent.

On the other side of the theological divide, most conservative denominations are growing. The conservative Presbyterian Church in America [PCA] grew 42.4 percent in the same decade that the more liberal Presbyterian denomination lost 11.6 percent of its members. Other conservative denominations experiencing significant growth included the Christian Missionary Alliance (21.8 percent), the Evangelical Free Church (57.2 percent), the Assemblies of God (18.5 percent), and the Southern Baptist Convention (five percent).

As quoted in Exodus, Glenmary director Ken Sanchagrin told the New York Times that he was "astounded to see that by and large the growing churches are those that we ordinarily call conservative. And when I looked at those that were declining, most were moderate or liberal churches. And the more liberal the denomination, by most people's definition, the more they were losing."

Any informed observer of American religious life would know that these trends are not new--not by a long shot. The more liberal Protestant denominations have been losing members by the thousands since the 1960s, with the Episcopal Church USA having lost fully one half of its members over the period.

In a sense, the travail of the Episcopal Church USA is the leading focus of Shiflett's book. Indeed, Shiflett states his intention to begin "with the train wreck known as the Episcopal Church USA." As he tells it, "One Tuesday in latter-day Christendom, the sun rose in the east, the sky became a pleasant blue, and the Episcopal Church USA elected a gay man as bishop for a small New Hampshire diocese." How could this happen? The ordination of a non-celibate homosexual man as a bishop of the Episcopal Church flew directly in the face of the clear teachings of Scripture and the official doctrinal positions of the church. No matter--the Episcopal Church USA was determined to normalize homosexuality, even as they have normalized divorce and remarriage. As Shiflett explains, "It is commonly understood that the election of the Reverend Gene Robinson, an openly gay priest, to be bishop of the diocese of New Hampshire was undertaken in clear opposition to traditional church teaching and Scripture. What is often left unsaid is that this is hardly the first time tradition has been trounced. The Reverend Gene Robinson's sexual life was an issue and was accommodated, just as the Episcopal Church earlier found a way to embrace bishops who believe that Jesus is no more divine, at least in a supernatural sense, than Bette Midler."

What makes Shiflett's book unique is the personal narratives he has collected and analyzed. Exodus is not a book of mere statistics and research. To the contrary, Shiflett crossed America, interviewing both conservatives and liberals in order to understand what is happening within American Christianity. Shiflett's interviews reveal fascinating insights into the underlying realities and the personal dimensions of theological conflict. Exodus is written in a very direct style, with Shiflett providing readers anecdotes and analysis of his personal interaction with those he interviewed.

One of Shiflett's interviewees was the Reverend Bruce Gray, Rector of St. John's Episcopal Church in Richmond, Virginia. In an interesting comment, Shiflett recalls that this was the very church where Patrick Henry gave his famous speech in 1775--the speech in which Henry cried: "Give me liberty, or give me death!" As Shiflett notes, "The Episcopal Church, by freeing itself from many of its traditional beliefs, sometimes appears to be well on its way to achieving both." Revered Gray supports the election of Gene Robinson as Bishop of New Hampshire, and he told Shiflett that the biblical condemnations of homosexuality had been considered by thoughtful people who had decided that the texts do not mean what they appear to mean. He cited his own bishop, who had issued an episcopal letter arguing, "Many people believe any homosexual activity is purely prohibited by Scripture . . . . But other Christians who take Scripture seriously believe that the Biblical writers were not addressing the realities of people with a permanent homosexual orientation living in faithful, monogamous relationships, and that the relevant scriptural support for those relationships is similar to the expectations of faithfulness Scripture places on marriage." That is patent nonsense, of course, but this is what passes for theological argument among those pushing the homosexual agenda.

In order to understand why so many Episcopalians are leaving, Shiflett visited Hugo Blankenship, Jr., son of the Reverend Hugo Blankenship, who had served as the church's Bishop of Cuba. Blankenship is a traditionalist, who explained that his father must be "spinning in his grave" in light of developments in his beloved Episcopal Church. As Shiflett sees it, the church that Bishop Hugo Blankenship had served and loved is gone. In its place is a church that preaches a message Shiflett summarizes as this: "God is love, God's love is inclusive, God acts in justice to see that everyone is included, we therefore ought to be co-actors and co-creators with God to make the world over in the way he wishes."

Shiflett also surveys the growing list of "celebrity heretics" whose accepted presence in liberal denominations serves as proof positive of the fact that these groups will tolerate virtually anything in terms of belief. Shiflett discusses the infamous (and now retired) Episcopal Bishop of Newark, New Jersey, John Shelby Spong. "When placed in a wider context, Spong is simply another character from what might be called America's religious freak show." Yet, the most important insight to draw from Spong's heresies is the fact that he has been accepted without censure by his church. As Shiflett explains, Spong's views, "while harshly criticized in some quarters as being far beyond the pale, are present not only throughout the mainline but throughout Protestantism, even in churches that are assumed to maintain traditional theological rigor."

[Bono]

In Shiflett's turn of a phrase, these liberal theologians believe in a "Wee deity," a vapid and ineffectual god who is not much of a threat and is largely up for individual interpretation.

On the other side of the divide, Shiflett spent time with conservative Roman Catholics, the Orthodox, Southern Baptists, and the larger evangelical community. In considering Southern Baptists, Shiflett largely drew upon interviews he conducted with me and with Richard Land, President of the Ethics and Religious Liberty Commission of the Southern Baptist Convention. Shiflett understands recent Southern Baptist history, and he takes his readers through the denomination's "conservative resurgence" that defied the conventional wisdom that denominations can never be pulled back in a more conservative direction.

More importantly, Shiflett understands that doctrinal beliefs are the crucial variable determining whether churches and denominations grow or decline. He deals with the statistical data honestly, even as he points to the larger context and the underlying factors at work.

Shiflett's opening story about the seminarian who was confronted by his peers underlines the importance of theological seminaries as agents for either the perpetuation or the destruction of the faith.

In this case, seminarian Andy Ferguson, who had questioned the anti-supernaturalistic claims of his seminary professors, was confronted by a fellow seminary student who said, "We've been talking about you. We know you're having a rough time, and we've finally figured out what your problem is . . . . You're the only one here who believes in God." Andy Ferguson decided that his fellow student was right. "They believed in things like the redemptive power of the universe, but I was the last one there who wanted to defend the biblical God--the God who makes claims on us, who said we should do some things and not do others, and who put each one of us here for a purpose."

In the end, Andy Ferguson left the liberal seminary, converted to Catholicism, and went into the business world. He told Dave Shiflett that liberal Protestantism is doomed. "Mainline Protestantism will reach a certain point where it will appeal only to Wiccans, vegetarians, sandal-wearers, and people who play the recorder. No one will feel at home there if they believe in God."

Exodus is a book that is simultaneously brave and honest. Refreshingly, he eschews mere sociological analysis and points to the more foundational issue--truth. No doubt, this book will be appreciated in some quarters and hated in others, but it is not likely to be ignored.

[afleitch]

Please just post a link to the site so we can read it ourselves rather than post the whole thing without personal comment.

[opebo]

This is hardly news.  The sane exit churches for atheism, while the insane find the hardcore churches more appealing.  Who is left in Episcopalianism?  I don't know, maybe Babbit.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

Wow.... I must be wierd, I was actually planning to go back to church and find a "progressive" church to attend.

I went to a very conservative Southern Baptist "mega-church" for five years.  The pastor of the church, Adrian Rogers, was the man responsible for the "take-over" of the denomination by more conservative elements.  It was actually a good experience, but I was honestly more inspired by the uses of technology and the sheer immensity of the buildings than I was by the sermons given at the lectern.  I was also impressed by the faith of the close friends who brought me there.

That being said, my faith began to dwindle.  I am, and have always been, a firm believer in logic and science.  When I get fed theories like "Creation Science" (as I did in school, not church), as much as I would like to believe them, I just could not believe that 99% of scientists were wrong.

Rather than strengthening my faith by attempting to prove Biblical references with pseudo-science, these theories crumbled my personal religious faith that was once very deep.  I eventually stopped going to church, and reclaimed my Sunday mornings for sleep

It has been almost seven years since I last went to church, and I do feel something in my life that is missing.  I find it hard to accept the Bible as an "infallible" document, as beautiful as it is.  But I do believe we are here for a reason, and that each one of us has a purpose.  I believe in the teachings of Jesus Christ.  Problem is there seems to be only two types of churches - elitist liberal churches that don't seem to have any faith, and extremist conservative churches that seem to have too much faith and too little logic.

The message of the latter kind of church is powerful.  Accept Jesus Christ into your heart and be saved from sin to live with your savior forever in eternity.  And that's a wonderful and beautiful concept, but it simply isn't all that Jesus talked about when he was here on Earth.

The words of Jesus were filled with love and compassion.  He continually talked about how we should love our neighbors and he preached a message against discrimination.  If the meek shall inherit the Earth, and if it is hard for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, then how can we see the majority of cars in the parking lots of these mega-churches being BMW's, Mercedes, or expensive SUV's.  What would Jesus think if he came back today and saw his churches, his bride, filled with wealthy worshipers while people starved for food and starved for love and compassion in our own streets.

If your church doesn't stand for something, if it has no meaning, then it will surely fail.  You have to give credit to conservative denominations for upholding clearly defined principles.

That being said, there is no reason why other churches can't attract people to the true teachings of Jesus.  I know a number of people who are currently attending Southern Baptist churches that want out but just haven't found a real alternative that inspires and fulfills them.

Faith is a key ingredient in a church.  You'd think that fact would be obvious, but the churches in this article just don't seem to get it.
A church is not a social club or a college campus.  A church is a place for people to come and be inspired.  I fail to believe that it is impossible to inspire people to do good and love one another.  That's not a concept derived from some fancy book or professor's lecture, it is simply what the words of Jesus Christ demand of us.  Return to the words and the real light of Christ will shine through.

[Bono]

Wow.... I must be wierd, I was actually planning to go back to church and find a "progressive" church to attend.

I went to a very conservative Southern Baptist "mega-church" for five years.  The pastor of the church, Adrian Rogers, was the man responsible for the "take-over" of the denomination by more conservative elements.  It was actually a good experience, but I was honestly more inspired by the uses of technology and the sheer immensity of the buildings than I was by the sermons given at the lectern.  I was also impressed by the faith of the close friends who brought me there.

That being said, my faith began to dwindle.  I am, and have always been, a firm believer in logic and science.  When I get fed theories like "Creation Science" (as I did in school, not church), as much as I would like to believe them, I just could not believe that 99% of scientists were wrong.

Rather than strengthening my faith by attempting to prove Biblical references with pseudo-science, these theories crumbled my personal religious faith that was once very deep.  I eventually stopped going to church, and reclaimed my Sunday mornings for sleep

It has been almost seven years since I last went to church, and I do feel something in my life that is missing.  I find it hard to accept the Bible as an "infallible" document, as beautiful as it is.  But I do believe we are here for a reason, and that each one of us has a purpose.  I believe in the teachings of Jesus Christ.  Problem is there seems to be only two types of churches - elitist liberal churches that don't seem to have any faith, and extremist conservative churches that seem to have too much faith and too little logic.

The message of the latter kind of church is powerful.  Accept Jesus Christ into your heart and be saved from sin to live with your savior forever in eternity.  And that's a wonderful and beautiful concept, but it simply isn't all that Jesus talked about when he was here on Earth.

The words of Jesus were filled with love and compassion.  He continually talked about how we should love our neighbors and he preached a message against discrimination.  If the meek shall inherit the Earth, and if it is hard for a rich man to enter the Kingdom of Heaven, then how can we see the majority of cars in the parking lots of these mega-churches being BMW's, Mercedes, or expensive SUV's.  What would Jesus think if he came back today and saw his churches, his bride, filled with wealthy worshipers while people starved for food and starved for love and compassion in our own streets.

If your church doesn't stand for something, if it has no meaning, then it will surely fail.  You have to give credit to conservative denominations for upholding clearly defined principles.

That being said, there is no reason why other churches can't attract people to the true teachings of Jesus.  I know a number of people who are currently attending Southern Baptist churches that want out but just haven't found a real alternative that inspires and fulfills them.

Faith is a key ingredient in a church.  You'd think that fact would be obvious, but the churches in this article just don't seem to get it.
A church is not a social club or a college campus.  A church is a place for people to come and be inspired.  I fail to believe that it is impossible to inspire people to do good and love one another.  That's not a concept derived from some fancy book or professor's lecture, it is simply what the words of Jesus Christ demand of us.  Return to the words and the real light of Christ will shine through.

Well, I think part of the problem here is that you see conservative Christianity as monolithic, which it is not. For instance, Reformed Christians, like me, are very critic of the mega-church, post modern worship style that seeks to dumb down religion to make it appeal to unregenerate men. Superficial preaching is included here.
Another is that you put faith and reason as antithetical to each other, when they aren't. God says "Come now, and let us reason together" Isaiah 1:18. Unaided reason, however, is deficient in understanding spiritual truths, but reason aided by scripture is a valuable gift.
However, I think the problem you have here is that you simply don't have saving faith. What you are looking for in church is not a place to worship God and share in the blessings of the kingdom, but a social club where you can discuss social gospelism. I'm really sorry if I'm wrong in my diagnosis, but that seems to be the impression I'm getting from your post. If that is the case, I think you'd feel right at home in a liberal church, because that is what they have become.

[afleitch]

Bono, if Don wishes to rekindle his faith in a church he feels comfortable in then so be it. Your style of worship may benefit you, but it doesn't suit everyone else (and neither does mine) That's why there are so many different churches in the first place!

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

Well, I think part of the problem here is that you see conservative Christianity as monolithic, which it is not. For instance, Reformed Christians, like me, are very critic of the mega-church, post modern worship style that seeks to dumb down religion to make it appeal to unregenerate men. Superficial preaching is included here.

I don't think Jesus would refer to any man as "unregenerate".  Last time I checked, he teached to all people and could be understood by all people.

[Bono]

Well, I think part of the problem here is that you see conservative Christianity as monolithic, which it is not. For instance, Reformed Christians, like me, are very critic of the mega-church, post modern worship style that seeks to dumb down religion to make it appeal to unregenerate men. Superficial preaching is included here.

I don't think Jesus would refer to any man as "unregenerate".  Last time I checked, he teached to all people and could be understood by all people.

Then you didn't check very well:
Matthew 13:14-16"In their case the prophecy of Isaiah is being fulfilled, which says, 'YOU WILL KEEP ON HEARING, BUT WILL NOT UNDERSTAND; YOU WILL KEEP ON SEEING, BUT WILL NOT PERCEIVE; FOR THE HEART OF THIS PEOPLE HAS BECOME DULL, WITH THEIR EARS THEY SCARCELY HEAR,AND THEY HAVE CLOSED THEIR EYES, OTHERWISE THEY WOULD SEE WITH THEIR EYES, HEAR WITH THEIR EARS, AND UNDERSTAND WITH THEIR HEART AND RETURN, AND I WOULD HEAL THEM.' "But blessed are your eyes, because they see; and your ears, because they hear.

[Bono]

Bono, if Don wishes to rekindle his faith in a church he feels comfortable in then so be it. Your style of worship may benefit you, but it doesn't suit everyone else (and neither does mine) That's why there are so many different churches in the first place!

Andrew, I'm concerned about whether Don actually has any faith to rekindle! And if he has, do you think a "church" that denies the divinity of Jesus and is outside orthodoxy is the best place to rekindle it? As for style of worship, I agree that variations are allowed, but that there are boundaries. That's not the issue at hand, though.

[MaC]

This is hardly news.  The sane exit churches for atheism, while the insane find the hardcore churches more appealing.  Who is left in Episcopalianism?  I don't know, maybe Babbit.

If athiests want to get noticed, maybe start (not a religious house or anything since that would defeat the point) but a club or meeting group.  You could call it Religious Annonymous, have punch and cookies there, and talk about why massah's spoonfed mystic jargon is harmful to society.

[ilikeverin]

Bono, if Don wishes to rekindle his faith in a church he feels comfortable in then so be it. Your style of worship may benefit you, but it doesn't suit everyone else (and neither does mine) That's why there are so many different churches in the first place!

Andrew, I'm concerned about whether Don actually has any faith to rekindle! And if he has, do you think a "church" that denies the divinity of Jesus and is outside orthodoxy is the best place to rekindle it? As for style of worship, I agree that variations are allowed, but that there are boundaries. That's not the issue at hand, though.

What a lovely way to help people find God, by telling them they're faithless losers.

[Alcon]

Guys, quit it.  Bono is so much more pious than you, that to deny him the opportunity to provide his opinion about your faith would be an affront to God himself.  After all, it's not rude and unsolicited when he's trying to save you from hellfire!

[ilikeverin]

Guys, quit it.  Bono is so much more pious than you, that to deny him the opportunity to provide his opinion about your faith would be an affront to God himself.  After all, it's not rude and unsolicited when he's trying to save you from hellfire!

Nah, Bono doesn't think anyone can be saved from hellfire, because God condemns people to it in the first place before they're even born

[jokerman]

Bono, learn some sense and don't debate religion on the atlas forum.  I gave it up long ago.  Might as well argue over what colors of clothing look well together with someone who's been blind all their life.

[Alcon]

Bono, learn some sense and don't debate religion on the atlas forum.  I gave it up long ago.  Might as well argue over what colors of clothing look well together with someone who's been blind all their life.

That's kind of an elitist thing to say, and a little unfair to those of us who have genuinely put thought into their religious views (or lack thereof).

[afleitch]

Of course religion, theology and spiritaulity (and opposition to it) should be discussed on here. I think it should be given its own board. However it would be good if we could all excercise some restraint. It's important not to be absolutist about faith even it means everything to you, there is often opposition, and sometimes rightfully so. Neither should you be dismissive to the extent you become personally nasty.

[Bono]

Bono, if Don wishes to rekindle his faith in a church he feels comfortable in then so be it. Your style of worship may benefit you, but it doesn't suit everyone else (and neither does mine) That's why there are so many different churches in the first place!

Andrew, I'm concerned about whether Don actually has any faith to rekindle! And if he has, do you think a "church" that denies the divinity of Jesus and is outside orthodoxy is the best place to rekindle it? As for style of worship, I agree that variations are allowed, but that there are boundaries. That's not the issue at hand, though.

What a lovely way to help people find God, by telling them they're faithless losers.

Well, it seemed to me, from the post Don made, that he didn't actually have saving faith in Christ. I apologized preventively, but that's what I got from his words. I could be very wrong. That said, if he really has faith, he should be in a church with people who have faith, and not with people who think church is a social club.

[Bono]

Guys, quit it.  Bono is so much more pious than you, that to deny him the opportunity to provide his opinion about your faith would be an affront to God himself.  After all, it's not rude and unsolicited when he's trying to save you from hellfire!

Alcon, I'm no more or less pious than anyone. I'm just a miserable sinner who is saved by God's sovereign gift of grace, and want to spread the true Gospel as I was commanded to. I was under the impression that the purpose of this board was for us to provide opinions on personal views, but apparently that is not the case.

[bullmoose88]

Of course religion, theology and spiritaulity (and opposition to it) should be discussed on here. I think it should be given its own board. However it would be good if we could all excercise some restraint. It's important not to be absolutist about faith even it means everything to you, there is often opposition, and sometimes rightfully so. Neither should you be dismissive to the extent you become personally nasty.

I think a religion (sub)board would be a very good idea.

[Alcon]

Alcon, I'm no more or less pious than anyone. I'm just a miserable sinner who is saved by God's sovereign gift of grace, and want to spread the true Gospel as I was commanded to. I was under the impression that the purpose of this board was for us to provide opinions on personal views, but apparently that is not the case.

You can do as you like in that respect, but unless someone is asking you to evaluate their faith, I don't personally see that as your place.

[Gabu]

They want the Good News, not the minister's political views or intellectual coaching.

Wait, what?  Is this thing honestly attempting to assert that ministers at conservative churches don't bring up political issues at all?

[Bono]

Alcon, I'm no more or less pious than anyone. I'm just a miserable sinner who is saved by God's sovereign gift of grace, and want to spread the true Gospel as I was commanded to. I was under the impression that the purpose of this board was for us to provide opinions on personal views, but apparently that is not the case.

You can do as you like in that respect, but unless someone is asking you to evaluate their faith, I don't personally see that as your place.

I only do so out of concern for him.

[Alcon]

I only do so out of concern for him.

That does not make it less rude.  And how does questioning his faith show concern for him?  "I don't believe you actually have faith in Christ" is not constructive criticism for anyone who can't force themselves to believe in something they actually don't.

[jokerman]

I only do so out of concern for him.

That does not make it less rude.  And how does questioning his faith show concern for him?  "I don't believe you actually have faith in Christ" is not constructive criticism for anyone who can't force themselves to believe in something they actually don't.

Christ was pretty "rude" to some people as well, you know.  I don't see where people get this idea Christianity should be about telling people what they want to hear.