The Guardian: Church
in crisis as only 2% of young adults identify as C of E
In terms of the survival of the Church as an active force in society
as a whole, this statistic could hardly be more alarming. I argued in my last
essay that panicking about declining numbers does the church no
good, and that point stands — but the signs are clear that the younger
generation are particularly disengaged from the church. If, as I
mentioned, we are to ‘continue to ensure that our parishes appeal to
newcomers and regular churchgoers alike, and that our pastoral care, our
communal worship, and the theology we have which underlies them both
accommodate the practical needs of modern parishioners’, the millennial
generation is one particularly important to appeal to.
The first challenge facing the Church in evangelizing to millennials
is their general disinterest in engaging with religious and
philosophical ideas. Perhaps it’s unsurprising that the first generation
for a century to be poorer than their parents are more interested in the
more practical aspects of making ends meet than in dealing with
questions of the nature and ultimate purpose of existence; but, as I
wrote in my last essay, this very quality — ‘just about managing’
materially — makes millennials one of the demographic groups who most
need the spiritual care of the Church, even though they seem not at all
to realize it.
Philosophers speak of the modern zeitgeist requiring a ‘presumption
of atheism’ when approaching philosophical questions. I am, to some
extent, more optimistic. Among millennials, I would speak rather of a
presumption of agnosticism — a default disinterest in the whole
question of God. The number of millennials who have considered the
question in detail and actively concluded that there is no God is
relatively small: we do not have to save people from the hands of the
New Atheists; we just have to convince them that the question is worth
taking seriously.
Once we have done that, we are bound to encounter all sorts of
problems in getting millennials round to the ideas central to
Christianity — problems that would have been unthinkable when
catechizing earlier generations who had a much stronger background of
Christianity in their lives. One which I think is bound to arise is when
discussing the theme of sin.
A church which does not bring its members to confront their sin is
not a church of Jesus Christ, but millennials seem abnormally
uncomfortable doing this. It is a generation that easily sees itself as
having been sinned against — undoubtedly, we have been and continue to
be sinned against — but is very uncomfortable seeing itself as sinful.
In popular understanding the idea of ‘sin’ is often understood as
implying an outdated and rigid moral system of biblical commandments,
and not as part of an evolving and dynamic understanding of ethics
intended to move one to improve one’s relationship with others, with the
world, with oneself, and with God.
I speak from personal experience and a growing sense of
self-knowledge that shirking blame becomes an ugly habit and a
personality flaw. Naïve blundering into this subject will result in
alienation, not conversion. Attempts to draw millennials back into the
church must approach the issue of sin with great sensitivity and care.
The Church of England has never been a church of the fire-and-brimstone
preaching style, but we must do more than merely avoiding such
things. There is no one-size-fits-all method, but it may help to start
talking about what sin itself actually is. Millennials
like Buddhism which has a very similar idea of wrongdoing to
Christianity, but does not and has never cloaked it in the popularly
poisonous word ‘sin’, nor made the mistake of presenting its definition
as coming directly from a hard-and-fast set of scriptural
commandments.
Then there is an issue of politics and demographic optics.
Millennials tend to lean left on most economic issues. Thanks to the
Church’s work with food banks and the Archbishop of Canterbury appearing
at the Trades Union Congress, the general public is starting to become
aware that the Church institutionally is now on the political left, at
least so far as economics are concerned.
But that is not the impression one gets ‘on the ground’ at a Church
of England parish: the Church of England is Guardian
readers preaching to Daily Mail readers; an aging
congregation brings with it a tendency for the political view of the
average congregation to reflect the political views of the older
generations.
In an increasingly politically-active society, with a highly
politically-interested generation of young people, there has been a
tendency to the political segregation of social groups — witness
families being torn apart over Brexit, for example. A politically
segregated church would be anathema to the very notion of the Church as
communion of all the faithful — so this is also an issue where parishes
and ministers must tread carefully, neither alienating older current
parishioners (by the number of them that seem to be sticking around, the
Church seems to be pretty good at that already) nor younger newcomers
who need to hear about the Kingdom of God’s egalitarian
economic policies.
But while the Church of England institutionally is already on the
cutting-edge of economic politics, it is a lumbering dinosaur on social
issues, particularly issues (such as LGBTQ rights) which are hot-button
topics for millennials: 20%
of us identify as LGBTQ. Statistically, that
means that just about every single person under the age of 35 either is
LGBTQ or has at least one LGBTQ friend. Even for those who are
themselves straight, are they supposed to go to a church they would be
embarassed to bring their queer friends to? The half-hearted acceptance
of lesbian, gay, and bisexual Christians by the Church of England’s
establishment is reason for me, personally, to still be cautious about
revealing my faith to my queer friends: though they may know abstractly
that there are many LGBTQ people in the Church, they don’t really
understand why, and as a queer person in the Church I feel constantly
obliged to apologize for the party line’s 19th century ideas about
sexuality.
And, again, the problem is also on the ground at the parish level:
before I began transitioning gender and was presenting as a man
partnered with another man, I was even more cautious about outing myself
in unfamiliar churches. (Though as of writing I’ve yet to attend any
church, even my own, while presenting as female, it’s a lot more
difficult to hide one’s transgender status when one doesn’t pass.) Much
is made by the right-wing journalistic peanut gallery of the millennial
obsession with ‘safe spaces’, but even for me, new churches feel like
very unsafe spaces for me to come as a transgender woman.
To appeal to millennials, the Church must become affirming. The
shibboleth for affirmingness is still same-sex marriage. I understand
all the political reasons why it has not yet come through in the Church
of England. I even understand the theological
objections to it, although I vehemently disagree with them. If schism in
the Anglican Communion is the price for saving the Church from ruin
outside of the Global South, that is a price I’m willing to pay.
LGBTQ rights are not the only issue on which the Church of England
needs to ‘get with the times’, but they are by far the most prominent to
my mind, for the reasons listed above.
Lastly, a word on liturgy and worship. With its ‘Follow the Star’
campaign in 2018 the Church of England has neatly seized on an already
popular phenomenon and trend (church attendance at Christmas was already
rising). The Bishop
of Manchester has wisely suggested a comparable seasonal focus
throughout the year: by turning up the emphasis on the liturgical
calendar which we already observe, and drawing more distinction between
the church seasons than we currently do, to guide people into the life
of the church as a whole. To some extent this may be wishful thinking
(the popular desire to attend Church at Christmas may well spring from
nostalgic memories of nativity plays and carol services during youth,
but not many will have memories of excellent Lenten, or even Candlemas
or Eastertide, services), but it’s certainly worth a go, and there is
plenty of scope for it: the great mystery of the Advent season as
distinct from Christmas, and the inwardly reflective nature and
self-bettering idea of Lent, are hardly acknowledged in the civil
observances of Christmas and Easter.
The other liturgically-based sign of growth in the church is an
increase in the popularity of Evensong, even among millennials: I have
had friends come with me to Evensong services who would never think of
going to Sunday morning communion. It’s hard to see what in particular
draws people to this service, but I think it would be excessively
cynical to say that it is merely the ‘free concert’ effect: there is
something in this style of worship that is continuing to appeal
as a religious experience, and which is even beginning to
appeal to people more now than in the past. I will deal with this
subject again in future posts, so I won’t attempt to analyse Evensong’s
attraction to the otherwise unchurched here, but instead merely conclude
by inviting churches which themselves experience an uptick in attendance
for their evening prayer services compared to others to reflect on what
it is about them which draws people in, and if there are any aspects of
this growth which they might be able to re-create at their other
services.