More thoughts on the Pew Report and the fluid membership trends (if people join at all.)- They think they're moving in less than a year (because our neighborhood is among the most transient of the transient)
- They see no spiritual advantage to joining (and they already pledge money, participate in mission, etc.)
- It's simply not what they do and/or what their generation does. They also don't join Rotary, Friends of the Library, or the Country Club.
Many of our neighbors have no religious affiliation, according to Pew. And those seeking spiritual community may never "join" our congregation or any congregation officially even if they worship with us occasionally. Imagine, then, the consequences of even one generation of this trend.
This means that . . .
those who never officially join will not be added to the rolls . . .
which means that . . .
they will not show up in denominational stats . . .
and they will not be holding office . . .
and they will not be voting in congregational meetings . . .
and the congregation will not be charged the per member apportionment fee (since they aren't members) . . .
and denominational hierarchies will continue to lose financial support . . .
and the denominational offices will continue to find their power diminished (due to financial issues and lack of influence) . . .
and denominations will continue to find themselves increasingly irrelevant.
Or maybe I'm completely wrong.
In spite of all this, there are several reasons to be excited about the future of God's church. Commited Christian discipleship is slowly replacing generations of civil religion.
We are trying something new with the current new gatherings of visitors/regulars. They are not called "New Member Classes" and the point is not to "get them to join." Jesus never got people to join an institution. He invited them to join a movement to change the culture and the world.
Our hope is that everyone who gathers with us in search of a deeper faith will make a new or renewed commitment to God. That is our basic goal.
If they choose to do this through our congregation, we will be very happy. If they decide to make a commitment through another congregation, that's fine as well. If they decide to explore what they believe a bit more, also fine. Our push is to encourage them to ratchet up their commitment to God and to follow Jesus in a new, more serious way.
The future church will have a different way to acknowledge those in the community of faith. I'm not sure what it will look like. But the Pew Report seems to support the notion that - even if we go with personal ID cards - they don't guarantee discipleship.
Apparently some churches find The Membership Card helpful in spite of what I think.
Posts
10 comments:
Can't say that I find the membership card a particularly comfortable thought...
I have never seen or heard of church membership badges before. This blows me away! I can't imagine having everyone scan their card as they walk into worship. How tacky!
We used to keep an additional category on our rolls just for these folk that are extended family. That way they were included in mailings, etc. But a separate issue from membership reporting.
Of course, we didn't pay per capita (head tax to denomination) on them, so I'm sure the hierarchy wouldn't approve, but it worked to acknowledge them and keep them connected even if they didn't want to join.
"We don't need no stinking badges!"
"Commited Christian discipleship is slowly replacing generations of civil religion."
This is Marcus Borg's interpretation too. I think that everyone should read The Restructuring of the American Religion in light of the data presented in the report. It clearly gives more supporting evidence that Wuthnow is right about the blurring of denominational organizational lines and the re-drawing of them around ideological lines.
I learned this first hand when it became clear to me that I had much more in common with several Jesuit priests than I did with most of the people in the Presbytery of which I was under care. If members of my Presbytery were more like those Jesuits, I might be a pastor today. The blogosphere seems to bear this out as well. This seems to be a medium that intentionally blurs these boundaries because associations are built first on ideas and the medium itself does not support traditional ways of circumscribing boundaries.
I think you're completely right about that this means for denominations, but I frankly don't expect denominations to respond to this by doing anything about it (rewriting policy, or whatever). In fact, despite hopeful thoughts from such esteemed personages as Brian McLaren, I suspect that this Pew study will, practically speaking, be met with a giant yawn from denominational hierarchies, who think it's more important to fight about ideological divides and the schisms that result from them, while rigidly maintaining the status quo on issues that are much more important than ideology to the emerging culture - "membership" rules being a great example. I can give you some others if you're interested. ;-)
But maybe *I'm* completely wrong - I hope so!
That membership card thing makes me nervous.
My congregation does something similar to what althea mentioned. We are in a college town (OK, a capital city, actually - but with a major university right down the street), and we have a transient population. People who worship with us regularly but don't "belong" (and what a horrible phrase that is) are invited to participate in everything we do, and can receive mailings, etc. if they choose. That's what I did the first couple of years I worshipped there. I felt like a part of something without having to make some grand commitment.
Now I don't know about fees to the denomination or anything. My experience working for a church has led me to not want to know about any of those things ever again.
While I'm applauding the death of American civil religion as loudly as possible, I do hope that some of the denominational structures will remain when the next big change starts to occur, because I do believe there is use for such things. Committed local discipleship is wonderful and a much more authentic gauge by which to measure the effectiveness of congregational ministry, but I'd hate to lose the collegial aspect that comes from being a member of a denomination. In addition, our seminaries and specialized ministries like my current call (campus ministry) won't survive without denominational support, though both seminaries and campus ministry need much more support within my own denomination (ELCA).
Don't get me wrong: I'm not suggesting that all the trappings of American denominationalism need to survive. We could do with a lot less baggage on a synodical and national level and much more local help within my own denomination, and frankly, as we live through the death throes of American Protestant christendom it's going to get ugly for synod staffing and national church staff. But the leaner, more effective ministries that emerge as a result will need a network from which they can be based, and I'd like to see a specifically Lutheran network continue to exist into the next century (as well as Presbyterian, Methodist, etc.).
We are certainly living in interesting times, though - I wonder if we are on the verge of the next great awakening?
Rev Scott -
I'd call it (actually Phyllis Tickle would call it) The Great Emergence. See:http://www.emergentvillage.com/weblog/phyllis-tickle-to-write-book-for-baker-booksemersion
Each year every Episcopal congregation submits its "Parochial Report" listing several categories (ranks) of members and others who attend. It's popularly known as the "Pinocchio Report" for obvious reasons. I've come to value the regularly attending worshipers and those who self affiliate with the Episcopal Church as "members" and not worry too much about official definitions. But I have also engaged in a great deal of adult education about what it means to be Anglican as one part of the body of Christ, and to resist the occasional move to make us into some kind of non-denominational generic Sunday gathering of good will and bad music.
I certainly hope that discipleship is replacing civil religion. That said . . .
I certainly acknowledge that "joining things" is not what our generation does. And I certainly sympathize with people who don't want to view the church as some sort of club with insiders and outsiders. But I also think that the rampant individualism and dis-connectedness and distaste of committment that we see among the younger generations is not the attitude that God calls us to.
It is, in many ways, the same argument that you get from people living together without getting married. "If my personal feeling of committment is there, what does it matter?" And yet, we say that it does--and as we pursue this messy business of discipleship in community and as community, the fact that we make the deliberate choice to commit to one another instead of keeping ourselves safe, somewhat aloof, and ready to bolt does matter.
Now what we call it, and how we handle our records may need some adjustment. How denominations charge their assesments, etc. may need some adjustment . .
Post a Comment