Half of the Australian population - 7.5 million adults - identified with a Christian denomination in the 1996 Census, but are not frequently involved in a church.
As shown in the graph opposite, the proportions of people identifying with various denominations but not involved in churches varies considerably from one denomination. Among people who identify themselves as Anglicans, Presbyterians, Uniting or Lutheran it is between 40 and 60 percent of all who identify.
On the other hand, the percentage is much smaller among some other denomination:one third of Catholics, a quarter of all Baptists, and less than that among Orthodox and Pentecostals.
The situation is similar in most other parts of Europe where the proportion of the population attending church can be considerably lower than in Australia.
This was the observation at a conference I attended in London in December last year. The conference on ‘nominality’ was organised by the Christian Research Association of the United Kingdom under the auspices of the Lausanne movement. About seventy researchers and church leaders from every part of the world attended, representing most of the major denominations including Roman Catholics, but not including the Orthodox.
Nominality was discussed at the conference from a theological perspective as being Christian in name only without putting it into practice. As the conference progressed, we realised that there was something of ‘nominality’ in all of us. The quest to put faith into practise is always incomplete. No-one can claim to do so perfectly.
The conference heard reports from all over the world. One leader from Costa Rica explained how many are leaving the Catholic church for the Protestant churches. Many stay only a short period of time.While some return to Catholic churches, others leave altogether.
Researchers from Africa and the United States reported that in the areas they worked, many people frequently attended the churches. But research seemed to indicate that many people did so without great interest in thinking through what faith meant to life.
Some people are nominal because their faith is not important to them. Some intend to be involved, but do not get round to it. But that is not the whole story by any means.
The centre-piece of the conference was a series of interviews with five people who described themselves as nominal Christians. They were interviewed by a BBC interviewer in front of the conference audience who described them as ‘lions being thrown to the Christians’. These were people in senior positions in companies and media, thoughtful and articulate people. They described how they valued some aspects of Christian faith but were put off by some aspects of church life. Several spoke of the problem they had with the certainty they felt was expected of them about Christian beliefs. Even more were they ‘scandalised’ by the exclusive ways that many Christians acted. They felt there was often little room for doubt or tolerance within the churches. These people had thought about faith, but had made conscious decisions not to be involved.
The Australian Scene
My own research on the Australia scene, which I presented at the conference, suggested that there are also many other reasons. Many people do not feel comfortable in the churches.
• Many young people find it speaks a language and in forms with which they are not familiar. However, age does not appear to be a major factor in nominality. 43% of people aged 20 to 29 who identify with a denomination never go - compared with 42% of those aged 60 to 69. Part of the trend among young people is that many no longer claim to identify with a denomination.
• Education level appears to be a factor. Among those with university degrees, only 32% are nominal. But among those who have no post-secondary education or have a trade certificate, 47% or 48% are nominal. There are many people in society for whom reading is not easy. Yet, participation in many church services assume one can read. Many services and sermons are also very abstract and conceptual, and do not relate to the relational and concrete ways many people act and think.
• Marital status is another factor. Those who are married or widowed are most frequent in their attendance at church. Perhaps they find church affirming of their way of life and of family values in general. However, levels of participation are considerably lower among those who are divorced (24%), never married (22%), separated (14%), in second marriages (18%), or in de facto relationships (6%). Perhaps some of these people feel excluded as the church ‘assumes’ happy family life.
There is no way we can cater for all sorts of people in the one context or style of worship or even style of church government. The theological principal of the incarnation, applied to contemporary society, may well indicate that there need to be a multiplicity of form to communicate with the multiplicity of people - even if there is only one message!
Three-quarters of the adult population of Australia say they remember a time when they went to church frequently. Most have drifted away.
However, the most powerful explanation comes from a question about why religion is important to people. The options put to people have arisen out of the work the Christian Research Association has been doing for many years, and the identification of patterns of faith in its major survey of church attenders in 1987.
Religion as Values
Those who say that what is most important about religion is worship, attend church most. In fact 70% say they go monthly or more often. The majority (56%) of those who say what is important is sharing faith - with other Christians or with people outside the church also attend. But those who say it is about values have much lower levels of involvement. Some say that religion is about keeping the Ten Commandments. Of those, 23% attend monthly or more. Of those who say it is about being caring and considerate of others, 16% attend monthly or more.
There are some who identify with a denomination, but say religion is not important to them at all. Of those people, only 2% attend monthly or more. The large majority (87%) never go at all.
So the frequency of involvement is partly a result of what is important in religion to people Those for whom it is primarily about values, about being a kind and considerate person, feel it is not important to attend church frequently. This is, in fact, the response given by the majority (53%) of Australians.
• 18% of those who identify say religion is not important,
• 15% say worship is most important
• 8% say that keeping the Ten Commandments is most important
• 6% say sharing faith with others is most important.
Responses
How do might churches respond to low levels of involvement among many groups of people in contemporary society?
They might begin by taking seriously the fact that many groups in the society feel uncomfortable in churches. The churches need a much greater variety of ways of connecting with people. Church life has been built around regular - usually weekly - attendance at services. But people want to engage in spirituality in the many dimensions of life, in the many little life-worlds of which they are a part. They will look for a dimension to spirituality in healing in times of health, in restoration in times of holidays, in working out how they should live in their working lives in terms of business ethics, in times of leisure.
Distinct options in social activities, in study groups, and perhaps even in worship, are needed for the less educated, which do not assume that people are comfortable reading. It may be that separate options for the young, for second generation immigrants, and for divorced and separated people would be helpful.
Churches need to to use the multiplicity of networks in which people are involved as the locus in which they seek to bring an emphasis on spirituality. This may mean, in many instances, departing from the traditional patterns of church community life based on the weekly meeting within the local neighbourhood. They do so recognising that traditional religious resources exist within a plethora of alternatives.
Churches have sought to create communities which come together regularly for prayer, worship and other activities rather than offer a resource which may be used one week but not another. But if people are going to look at traditional religions, they must be presented where people look for them. We may also have to ‘break our packages apart’, allowing people to try a part without committing themselves to the whole package. (The particular package offered in many places was put together largely in the 19th century.)
While churches may not want to dilute ideals of full commitment or frequent involvement in Christian community, they should recognise that full commitment may lie down the end of a long road. They must not let the ideals go. They must work on them and develop them - and provide paths towards them without assuming that people have to adopt the ‘goal’ before they begin on the journey.
From the very beginning of Christianity, there have been different levels of intensity and commitment with which people have engaged the Christian faith: from the wandering charismatic prophets of the first century to the people who practised more domestic patterns of faith. In the Middle Ages, monasticism stood for ideals of commitment to which the laity could not aspire.
Nevertheless, through all the ways in which the church engages people, I suggest that it should seek not only to meet needs but to build communities through which faith may be explored. For example, if counselling is offered, then people may also be invited to participate in a support group in which faith is explored and in which people give to each other as well as receive.
If churches run seminars on parenting, they might also develop networks and encourage people to give each other longer term support. They might build into that structure the option of meals together, where bread and wine may be shared and spirituality recognised. Indeed, in the future the ‘church’ may be found in a variety of networks gathered around particular themes and interests rather than in a local community meeting weekly.
The message of the ‘nominal Christians’ who were interviewed at the conference was an important one. Within the plurality of contemporary life-styles and ways of thinking, people need room for doubt and for tolerance, room for people to come to a variety of conclusions on many matters. Truth is not always easy to determine. While some people are attracted by a sense of certainty and authority, by clear messages about right and wrong, that same authoritarianism carries connotations of judgementalism and false superiority to others.
The very issue of nominality can be expressed in judgemental terms, if it is stated that being a Christian depends on a particular frequency of church attendance. On the other hand, the issue may draw attention to the need for diversity within the churches in order that they may engage more people in the quest for maturity of faith and life.
Philip Hughes
The Australian Community Survey, conducted by researchers from Edith Cowan University and NCLS Research was made possible by a Collaborative Grant from the Australian Research Council, and the support of ANGLICARE (NSW) and the Board of Mission of the Uniting Church (NSW). The research has been jointly supervised by Prof Alan Black and Dr Peter Kaldor. The research team included John Bellamy, Keith Castle and
Philip Hughes.
|
