The Underlying Cause of Church Decline

 It is an alarming reality: the Church is dying! At least, that’s what some people say. But that fact is not true. The Church is not dying and will not die. What is true is the institutional church in America is dying. This expression of the Church is in decline — in numbers (membership, attendance) and in influence — and has been since the middle of the last century. The 1950’s were the heyday of the institutional church in the U.S. Since that time, the statistical records of every denomination and of most congregations reflect decline.

In every congregation I served in Methodist life, with one exception, two issues dominated the thinking of the leadership: (1) how to reverse the decline — that is, how to grow — and (2) how to stay afloat financially in the midst of the decline. Those same two issues dominated the thinking of the bishops, cabinet, and leadership of the Conference in which I was a member for nearly thirty years. A pastor’s effectiveness in the Conference was judged by one criterion: did the church grow numerically under his/her leadership.

The inescapable reality of decline leads to an obvious question: why? Why is the church dying? The assumption is if we can answer the question “why?”, then we can address the causes and reverse the decline.

Causes coupled with suggested remedies abound: a lack of hospitality — not knowing how to welcome the nonmember; a lack of passionate, uplifting worship that connects us with God; a lack of life-transforming discipleship; a lack of community-engaging, transformative mission; a lack of generosity as a way of life. (These five causes are identified in Robert Schnase’s Five Practices of Fruitful Congregations. The book has been used throughout The United Methodist Church in an effort to address the growing decline.)

Each of these five causes is a factor contributing to the decline that congregations are experiencing. In my mind, however, there is another factor — one that sabotages any effort to address any of these other five. This sabotaging factor has to do with purpose.

Most congregations do not function out of a clear, compelling sense of purpose that shapes their identity. Without a clearly stated, compelling sense of purpose, the unstated purpose that governs the congregation is the comfort and enjoyment of the members, i.e., tradition. This unstated purpose produces an unwillingness to change.

“We’ve never done it that way before” is the mantra of a dying church.

This unwillingness to change overrides our concern about the decline. We are concerned about the decline, afraid that we are dying. What we are currently doing has not reversed the decline. In fact, what we are currently doing — and have always done — contributes to the decline. Continuing to do what we are currently doing can only produce what it is now producing, which is decline. Clearly, if we want a different outcome, we have to do something different. We have to change.

Given the choice between changing and declining, most congregations unconsciously choose to continue the decline — while bemoaning it every step of the way.

These congregations are good at avoiding this underlying reality. They deceive themselves. They talk about wanting to grow while resisting the very things that are needed for growth to occur. They believe the solution is the right pastor — particularly a younger pastor who would attract younger people. This focus on “the right pastor” allows them to avoid looking at themselves, identifying what they are contributing to the decline, and making the necessary changes.  

The unwillingness to change is a (the?) underlying factor in the decline of the institutional church today.