1. Hindus, Buddhists, Muslims and Oriental Christians all grew rapidly between 1991 and 1996. Each of these groups experienced growth of greater than 30 per cent during those five years. The fastest growth of all was among the Hindus who experienced a growth of 54 per cent. The source of growth can easily be determined. These groups all grew because of immigration from countries in which these religions dominate. Immigration from India and other areas of Asia and immigration from some sections of the Middle East, such as Syria, Turkey, Iraq and Egypt was substantial during those five years. Some other groups grew from immigration but in ways which either balanced local losses, such as among the Catholics, or in which caused just a small increase, such as among the Seventh-day Adventists.

2. The other religious groups which grew were the Latter-day Saints (18%), Pentecostals (16%), and the Jehovah's Witnesses (12%). With these groups must be placed the 'No Religion' group which grew at a very significant rate: 35 per cent. Immigration contributed little to growth in these groups. Some growth occurred because of the age profile. As groups with a relatively young profile, they had children during those five years who contributed to the numbers identifying with the group. It is likely that growth from children born into the groups could account for around 8 per cent of the growth in these groups. The remaining growth is the result of people actually changing their identification. They grew because of conversion, or, in the case of the 'no religion' growth, because of apostasy (Bentley and Hughes, 1998, p.10; Bouma and Hughes, 1998).

Why did these groups grow, while others, such as the Anglicans, Presbyterians and Uniting Church, experience substantial decline in numbers as well as in proportion to the population?

There are a variety of reasons which can be given. The first is that each of the groups which grew put a great deal of time, effort, and financial resources into growing - apart from the no religion group. The Latter-day Saints and the Jehovah's Witnesses put a huge effort into door-knocking. Both denominations expect their members to spend substantial amounts of time in direct evangelistic activity, among both friends and strangers. The Pentecostal denominations are also aggressively evangelistic. Many of them run a wide variety of activities geared specifically to the conversion of people. They encourage their members to talk to other people about their faith, to bring them to these special activities for outsiders and to seek to have an influence on the lives of others.

Switching Denominations

Data from the National Church Life Survey indicates that the Pentecostals are much more successful in their evangelism than would appear from their numbers in the Census. The problem is that, while they gained many people, they also lost many. The National Church Life Survey estimates that between 1991 and 1996, 15 per cent of Pentecostals moved out of Pentecostal churches to attend a church of another denomination, and 17 per cent of Pentecostals drifted out of church life altogether. In other words, they lost almost one third of their attenders in five years (Kaldor, 1999, p.55).

Some other denominations have seen a large portion of their members switching to another denomination. For example, the National Church Life Survey estimates that the Baptists lost 19 per cent of their members to other denominations, and the Churches of Christ lost 21 per cent, while the Uniting Church lost only 10 per cent and the Anglicans lost 8 per cent to other groups. However, the Pentecostals topped the list in terms of the proportion drifting out of church life altogether. 11 per cent of Uniting Church people, 9 per cent of Anglicans and 7 per cent of Baptists drifted out, compared with 17 per cent of Pentecostals.

Anecdotal evidence suggests that some have also drifted out of the Latter-day Saints and Jehovah’s Witnesses. The Latter-day Saints keep their own figures on membership and claim to have 100,000 members in Australia who have been welcomed into the church. The fact that the Census only counted 45,000 means that many have attended but slipped away again.

What Attracts People?

The losses only exaggerate the issue in that they indicate that many more than the Census would have us believe, do join these conservative churches, if only for a short time. Why do such churches grow? What attracts people to them?

While part of the growth can be explained in terms of the aggressive evangelistic activity of these groups, it cannot explain the whole story. For decades, the Pentecostals, Latter-day Saints and Jehovah’s Witnesses have been aggressively evangelising, holding meetings and rallies and knocking on doors. Yet, until recently, most of those groups remained very small and insignificant in the Australian scene. Jehovah’s Witnesses were first counted in the Census in 1971 when they had 35,000 people identifying with them. The Pentecostals were first counted in 1961 when they had just 16,600 people. The Latter-day Saints were counted in the first half of the century, but never grew above 3500 people. They re-appeared in the Census records in 1981 with 32,000 people.

The problem is deepened by the fact that most of these groups have grown despite, it seems, what people say they would like in a church. The Australian Community Survey asked people what would attract them to church. One of the most frequently cited responses was that the service should be short. More than half of those who do not currently attend church said that a short worship service of less than one hour was important to them in thinking about the possibility of attending. Furthermore, the majority of people said they wanted a church which had an openness to different views on religion and a broad emphasis on spirituality. (NCLS Research will be publishing a book later this year which will provide detailed analysis on this information.)

The majority of Australians are discouraged from attending by groups which are narrow in their perspectives, and which place heavy demands on their members in terms of time, money and effort. Yet, this is exactly what the Jehovah’s Witnesses, the Latter-day Saints and the Pentecostal churches do. All three groups make heavy demands of time, money and commitment. None of these groups could be said to be open to different views on religion and a broad emphasis on spirituality! Indeed, these three churches would be among the most exclusive in their views that they had ‘the truth’ of all religious groups in the Australian spectrum.

Theory

One of the theories to explain why conservative churches grow is that expounded by Dean Kelley. Kelley has argued that the business of religion is to provide meaning. Religion helps people to make sense of the world, particularly at those points in life when meaning is most threatened, in times of crisis, the death of someone close to us, or the approach of our own death. He argues that meanings take hold when they make demands on us. A strong religious movement expects firm adherence, even the sacrifice of status, possessions and safety for the sake of the movement. The absolutism and strictness of a religious group which demands conformity will encourage vigour in the group. Many of those people who join such groups feel that they are different from others. They are told that they are ‘saved’, that they are included in God’s kingdom while others are left outside. They see the difference between their lives and those of others who do not belong, and it confirms their status. Kelley points to the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Latter-day Saints as key examples to prove his point. He also argues that the Wesleyan revival in the late 18th and 19th centuries led to the rapid growth of the Methodist churches for exactly these reasons.

The American sociologists, Stark and Bainbridge, have argued similarly under the banner of the ‘Rational Choice Theory’ (Stark, 1987). They argue that people make choices about their religious involvements in which they weigh up the costs and the benefits. The benefit offered by such groups as the Jehovah’s Witnesses and the Latter-day Saints is a great confidence in salvation. While the costs may be high, those who make the payment have a very strong sense that they have achieved the benefit: they have been included in God’s Kingdom, while others are left outside.

What point is there in going to a religious group which says that it really does not matter whether you attend or whether you do not? If God loves those who attend church and those who do not, then why bother attending? If there are no demands, and no distinctions in the benefits between those who meet demands and those who fail to meet them, then why meet the demands? Both Kelley and Stark and Bainbridge argue that religious groups which are inclusive in their thinking, which make few demands on people, become weaker. Ultimately they fail to offer a strong and certain sense of meaning. Kelley says:

On the one hand, ultimate meaning is essential to human life, and it is effective to the degree that it demands and secures a central commitment in human lives. Yet on the other hand, to attain that central significance, it often rides roughshod over other interests and values, sometimes even disregarding human well-being (Kelley, 1986, p.164).

The theories of Kelley, Stark and Bainbridge may have limited applicability, however. They are talking about situations in which there are competing meaning systems within one cultural setting. Their picture of religion is a consumer-oriented one. Their theories have to be modified somewhat to apply to the many parts of the world in which religion is part of national or regional identity. In places such as Greece and Thailand, religion is a very important part of the national identity. Approximately 95 per cent of the population in these countries identify with one particular religious group (Greek Orthodoxy and Buddhism), and one which does not make high demands. In such countries, other religious groups have found it hard to grow. To give up the national religion is like giving up national identity. There is little room for other meaning systems. On the other hand, as predicted by Kelley, Stark and Bainbridge, as the demands on those who identify are low, so the level of involvement in the weekly religious practices is low.

But the patterns are different. In such places as Greece and Thailand, almost everyone is involved in the major festivals. Few people attend weekly events in church or temple. The national religion in these places does continue to give people a strong sense of meaning and identity, and one which is often highly resistant to change.

The Size of the Fringe

Something of the above pattern is true in Australia. In terms of actual numbers of any given Sunday, the numbers attending Baptist, Pentecostal, Latter-day Saints and Jehovah’s Witness churches (perhaps close to 400,000) are likely to be greater than attending Anglican, Orthodox and Uniting churches (350,000).

On the other hand, of all Australians who attend occasionally, 42 per cent attend Anglican, Orthodox and Uniting churches, while only 3 per cent attend churches of the Baptist, Pentecostal, Latter-day Saints and Jehovah’s Witness groups. This means that within a year, over 1.8 million people attend an Anglican, Orthodox or Uniting Church, while less than 600,000 attend a Baptist, Pentecostal, Latter-day Saints or Jehovah's Witness church.

The less demanding Anglican, Orthodox and Uniting churches may have declining weekly attendances. Yet, they continue to provide some meaning to a much greater number of people. than the more conservative and faster growing groups. The mainstream groups have a large fringe group who do not attend services on a regular basis, but who attend occasionally, perhaps for major festivals, and for whom the church remains an important source of meaning and value.

The conservative churches may grow faster than the more liberal churches. But they will either remain small, with large numbers switching out of them into the more liberal churches or out of the church altogether, or they themselves will become more liberal in their outlook. There is a tendency that as denominations grow, so they become weaker in the demands that they are able to make on people. This has been well documented in a variety of denominations in the United States (see Pointers, volume 8, no.1, pp.8-10.).

Many people came to Australia with a strong ethnic heritage, of which religion was a major part. It remains strong for many recent immigrants, which contributes to the strong growth and sense of identity among Muslims, Hindus and Buddhists. For many others, the sense of distinct ethnicity, and the links between ethnic culture and religion have weakened. Many people are making choices about what religious resources they use and where they find their own sense of meaning. Some choose the conservative groups. Kelley argues that these are likely to be primarily people on the edges of society who have not found a place elsewhere, the poorer people or those who are disadvantaged in some way. Many others decide not to identify with any particular group, even though many of these people occasionally attend a church or other religious activity. Others find their sense of meaning in the more liberal denominations. They may not go frequently or become highly involved. But these denominations continue to provide people with a sense of meaning and a basis for values.

There is room in Australia for a variety of churches. The religious profile is changing, and some of the most conservative religious groups are growing most rapidly. However, what is most likely to grow in the longer term is diversity.

Philip Hughes

References

Bentley, Peter and Philip Hughes. 1998. Australian Life and the Christian Faith: Facts and Figures. Melbourne: Christian Research Association.

Bouma, Gary and Philip Hughes. 1998. 'Religion and Age in Australia' in People and Place, vol. 6, no.1, pp.18-25.

Kaldor, Peter, John Bellamy, Ruth Powell, Keith Castle and Bronwyn Hughes. 1999. Build My Church. Sydney: NCLS Research.

Kelley, Dean M. 1986. Why Conservative Churches are Growing. Macon, Georgia: Mercer University Press.

Stark, Rodney and William Bainbridge. 1987. A Theory of Religion. New Brunswick: Rutgers University