The Decline of Evangelicalism and the Rise of the "Nones"

At Caleb Maskell's suggestion, I am indeed reading Robert Putnam's and David Campbell's American Grace: How Religion Divides and Unites Us.  I'm only 140 pages into a 550 page book, but it's been a great read. 

It describes the last 60 or so years of American religion as a series of reactions.  In the 50s, mainline church attendance among people in their 20s boomed as GIs returned from the war and wanted to enter respectable American life.  In the 60s, the new cohort of 20-somethings rebelled against this and church attendance plummeted (never to return for the mainline churches).  In the 80s, there was a backlash against libertine 60s sexuality that spurred the rise of evangelicalism and the religious right.  (By the way, these folks are sociologists--Putnam at Harvard--so they document this with a battery of survey data.) 

But evangelicalism has been in decline since 1994, and it seems that Putnam and Campbell would regard that as a permanent decline.  The new movement, the reaction to evangelicalism, they call the "nones."  These are folks who, on religion surveys, report they have "none."  Among people coming of age in the 40s, 50s and 60s, this number was about 5%.  In the 70s and 80s, it went up to about 15%.  In this decade, it's hit 30%.  It's--according to them--the new wave. 

The nones are not atheists or agnostics, statistically-speaking.  They may in fact be quite spiritual.  But they're not churchgoers.  They came of age where their picture of church was dominated by its association with conservative politics, and this seems to have created a visceral negative response.  Addtionally, the most-statistically-noteworthy characteristic of the nones is their support of gay rights, also something that sharply distinguishes them from evangelicals.

If this is the new religious landscape, what do you make of it?  In conservative Christian circles, it seems to me the response to this has been to redouble efforts along evangelical lines--to fight to "take back culture" (the very factor that created the backlash against evangelicalism and reversed its rise) as particularly symbolized in the fight against gay marriage (the central issue embraced by the nones, on the other side), even as evangelicals encourage "evangelism" among the nones (despite having alienated them in the above two ways). 

How do you respond to this changing landscape?

Comments

[steven hamilton]

i think there is something compelling in how Richard Rohr speaks of this phenomenon [and in part humbly embraces responsibility at the Churches doorstep, at least on the part of the "de-churched" (those who left church), by being either/or and not both/and...i have even heard him say that the Church, especially the evangelical wing is, is in the midst of unconciously grieving over this decline, hence the anger, frustration and burn-out among church leaders.]

Hs response, which is so compelling, is toward "contemplative leadership", which engages the Witness/Holy Spirit in seeking to "see with spiritual eyes" i.e. engage the perspective of the Holy Spirit, which is lovingly unthreatened, non-condescendingly compassionate, engagingly humble, listening with a depth of strength that is not label-orienting and pigeon-holing, then speaks in discerned specifics rather than shallow generalizations (which seems the opposite outlook from a "Cultural Warrior") and thus creates an environment of trust and love in which deeper issues can then be engaged...OK, I'll stop my Rohr-fanboy ramblings at this point and say that our own ramblings toward mysticism, centered-set, stage-4, seem oh-so-similar...

i suppose all-to-say, this is exactly why this gathering of people and the conversations we have are so appealing and frustrating to me, and still engagingly teach me so much

[Jeff]

Yeah, I'm pretty much going to punt to mysticism too. Actual connection with the living God who offers real hope and healing. Not that there isn't a lot more to say beyond that, but I'm pretty convinced its the right starting point.

[Brent]

Man, I really still just hate calling 'actual connection with the living God' mysticism. Do you guys use that term? Don't you get a lot of negative push back from seculars that mysticism makes Christianity useless and inward? It really just strikes me as the wrong way to frame things.

To me, the 'shift' is not just a shift away from evangelicalism, but a shift toward things that our culture rightly finds very important, but which evangelicalism has largely failed to address, namely social justice, human rights, poverty, environmental care, etc. These things are the 'new faith' of the nones. To me, the obvious way forward is to focus on the connections between this new faith and the faith of Jesus and 'punt' to those Christians who have done a great job living out those connections.

I know, I will hear 'that is mysticism,' to which I reply, 'ok, what isn't mysticism?' Obviously, I'm not sold on this whole mysticism thing, and I think what I'm not sold on is that it isn't just a way to avoid defining terms and engaging in certain conversations.

[Jeff]

Mysticism is more important than justice. I'm just going to leave that Yoda-style because I want to form a more coherent argument and write something later.

[Paul]

wow, thanks, Steve (and Dave)! This helped me see through a new set of lenses the pain [perhaps... 'anger, frustration, and burn-out'] my sister and her husband may be experiencing in recent years that I've not been able to fully understand. They pastor an awesome pentecostal church in DC that's gone through a lot of change during recent years.

...and, Brett, I'm not in the Christian ministry biz, but I sense more push back from [stage 2-ish?] 'Christians' about the word mysticism, but not sure I use it in conversation with my secular friends.

[steven hamilton]

so brent...what exactly in my/Richard Rohr's description of "mysticism" is off-putting, knowing that the use of plain-language (and not particularly religious-esque) is actually a good old school mystic way, aspirations to Yoda-like and Yogi Berra-like sayings aside...

[Dave Schmelzer]

So...for what it's worth on my end: I meet no "nones" (and I meet a lot of nones and hang out with many of them in Seek) who come to us looking for social justice. They just want to know if they can experience a God who can help them. That said, if our community didn't embrace justice, that would most definitely be noticed. But they can do justice without us and without God. It's not the unique opportunity.

[Peter Eavis]

I am totally stumped. I like our culture more than evangelicalism, so I am glad this is happening. But I also want people to connect with Christ in ever-increasing numbers. I guess all we can do is create enough space in our churches for God to be able to shape them in a way that they would be attractive to anyone looking for faith. Vague, but hopefully not entirely unhelpful.

[Brent]

I didn't mean to make a statement about justice, rather a statement about the new morality of the nones, which isn't based on any deep understanding of justice, but on a sort of shallow spiritual humanism that includes notions of justice. See Sam Harris' new book (which might, btw, make a nice NTRT reading assignment).

I guess I am mostly asking for clarification on this whole mysticism thing, since, as I understand that term, I don't see it being all that helpful.

[Brent]

Paul, I get a lot of people call me 'Brett' from mishearing my name, but you are the first do it after misreading it :)))

[steven hamilton]

so, i'll jump in with the wiki definition of mysticism, which is really pretty good: "Mysticism (from the Greek μυστικός, mystikos, an initiate of a mystery religion)[1] is the pursuit of communion with, identity with, or conscious awareness of an ultimate reality, divinity, spiritual truth, or God through direct experience, intuition, instinct or insight. Mysticism usually centers on a practice or practices intended to nurture those experiences or awareness."

i think that goes to the heart of what dave, jeff and myself are pointing to, but equally engages your comments because it is an engagement with God and conscious awareness of an alternate reality that ends up being "more real"...also if i might quote the illutrious brent (you) in what i believe to be one of the best (and mystical-esque) descriptions of this alternate reality: "I have often found that talking to people about Jesus goes a lot better at first when I don't talk about Jesus (or God) at all, but about the 'alternate reality' (which Jesus called 'the Kingdom of God') that Jesus introduces us to. The reality of the world we see on the news and struggle with every day is not the true reality of the world. True reality flows out of self-giving love, and the way to let this reality bleed into and take over the false one is not through political upheaval, but through re-orienting our minds and our lives - by living according to the true reality, being the change we want to see. None of this is a trick, it all rings true with people - an alternative way of living not based on greed and self-interest? That is exciting!"

i'd be interested...how would you understand the term 'mysticism'?

[Vinceation]

Fascinating conversation above... thanks guys. Dave, your comment "[justice is] not the unique opportunity" rang startlingly true to me. I've read/heard you say things to that effect before but never quite that plainly.
I may be veering off from what Brent initially shared as to where he sees a shift is needed (so, Brent, if you don't see yourself in this, know that I'm not pegging you), but I would say most of the young church leaders I'm around believe strongly in the approach that pursuing or partnering in social justice efforts is THE way to respond to this change in culture and maintain a relevant voice, with the thought that it meets people where their passions already are. (And I don't want to cheapen that line of thought as a mere evangelistic strategy; the theology of these young church leaders is that justice is the most important Kingdom of God-oriented activity to engage in.) Certainly (as you've said, Dave) justice is not a negotiable if you're going for the things of God, but it strikes me that the thought that "that's our in with this culture!" is misguided. You're right, they can do justice with or without God or a church community. It seems like justice is less an "in" in an increasingly secular culture, and more a deal maker/breaker once a secularist is willing to give faith a chance.

[Vinceation]

Interestingly, a friend of mine who I would say is a "none" (not sure how spiritual she is but she's definitely a "none") actually brought up mysticism to me in conversation once. She told me she's really attracted to the lifestyle of mystics. I'm pretty positive she didn't mean it in a "connection with God" way, more in a "slowed down life that includes quiet and solitude" way.
At any rate, my experience is that mysticism is not weird to "nones", it's at the least a refreshing perspective on our fast-paced lives.

[paul]

Heh! sorry, wish I knew how I did that, perhaps misheard it in my own head ;-)

[Steven]

in light of recent sermons, i would be curious to know how you approach it, dave? "how do you deal with this?" sounds like, "how do we engage none's?" sounds like the formula given by dave in recent sermons is something like pray and then keep your eyes open. a strategy that i highly regard.

but is there more to know or "prep" with regards to this specific strain of spirituality? my sister is a "none". she prays but does not like any one religion. i can't blame her. organized religion is generally very boring and irrelevant. how do i engage her in a way that creates dialog as opposed to a pre-planned monologue?

[Doug]

I'm curious to know what her story is -- that is to say -- how did she get to her current take on spirituality? Is that something she likes to talk about?

[Brent]

OK, I guess. I suppose it is the term I don't like so much, with its modern associations (mystic, mystery, mysterious) that suggest a kind of experiential anti-intellectualism.

Along with that, I guess I am also wary that it could be a bit reactionary - as if the reaction to getting burned by the abstract political and theological reasonings of 1980s-90s evangelical leaders is to eschew exegesis and theology altogether. To me, that would be a huge mistake. The problem recovering evangelicals (like myself) had with the evangelical ethos of those times was not its use of reason, but that it was unreasonable. If you grew up in that culture, you knew that Jesus came to atone for our sins, the rapture was coming, gays were an abomination, and all Christians supported Israel and the Republicans. There was no space for discussion, no notion that Christianity was a pluralistic playing field. I think a lot of these 'nones' walked away simply because their voices couldn't be heard.

The way bring people in, I think, is not just to focus on experiences and 'benefits' as opposed to theological/political reasoning. That's not enough. Post-moderns are post-modern because they are also modern. We have to also carve out a space for exegesis and reasoning that creates a (pluralistic) foundation for enduring faith.

[Steven]

That's a good question. I'm not really sure. She asks me on occasion if I believe in fortune telling and what I think about it. I usually say she should get prayer instead and see what that yields since fortune telling has very little accountability.

I don't actually know what her experience has been like with spirituality. My guess is that most people don't really think about it. But then I'm not sure. It only became important to me because life became desperate. It'd be cool to talk about her history. But her past experiences with me sharing about faith have been pretty bad. I wasn't always the best listener.

I feel that I would be a much better listener now.

[Jeff]

Well, I just got the audiobook with two 5 hours trips ahead of me, I might actually get somewhere...

[steven hamilton]

yeah, mysticism gets a bad rap - historically, for being anti-intellectual. but having studied this and researched it, that is a caricature of mysticism by the Scholastics...and in fact, the re-emergence of mysticism in the late medieval period was a reaction against Scholasticism, which had flattened it all to the point of being "unreasonable", and mysticism re-engaged "experience" but did not jettison the intellect.

whatever we call it, i'm for broadening and deepening and linking praxis experience with theological thinking that is rigorous but supple...to me mysticism engages both/and...or at least that is my hope.

[Chip Decker]

Steven - Its encouraging to hear that you are growing as a listener. Learning to listen and ask questions has helped me relate better to people different from me (nones - and everyone really) and also helped me to learn a lot more than I would before. When I listen to someone I am forced to actually enter into their world, understand the nature of their beliefs, and to wrestle with them from that place forward toward Jesus and answers that make sense and understandings which actually help them. So three cheers for better listening and Jesus I invite you afresh into Steven's relationship with his sister. Do your thang Lord!

[Chip Decker]

Hi Brent. I know you got a lot of pushback from questioning the utility of the almighty M-word but I just want to say I love your comments here. (Not that the others didn't, I'm just a lot nicer than they are.) Oh, and I am reading Sam Harris "The End of Faith" right now and enjoying it a lot so far. (He is very hard on Islam though if you are sensitive to that sort of thing.) Peace!

[methodman]

Religion and ignorance have become best friends. It's not possible to have heart and brains and compassion and speak of educated mechanical, statistical, chemcial, computational, electronic, votage amp battery ideas and be a christian. No other group promotes such an awakening into the dark ages. I have never met of group of morons so hostile to reading, so hostile to science, so hostile to philosphy, so hostile to spirituality, so hostile to facts, so hostile to health-care. Actually I do understand their position. Modern medicine stops them from their ability to lay hands on people and that just takes the fun out of everything. These people and this religion are for the backward. Pat Boone on a moorcycle Ha H Ha seriously I am so prou to be an excommunicated baptst, Being a christian involves three important things. First I must vote republican but not tell anybody. 2n I have to pray to Gawd like a 2 year old and 3rd I have to be momentarily nice. That fufills my holiness. If I need anything else i really need to GET THE HELL AWAY FROM THAT MOVEMENT. I AM PROUD AND COMFORTABLE BEING EXCOMMUNICATED. My kids are only 7 and think this religion is for the hateful and illiterate.