Why young Christians bail: it's NOT because of Sunday School

[hoipolloi]

An evangelical polling firm, the Barna Group, just released the results of a poll on why young Christians leave their churches: http://www.barna.org/teens-next-gen-art ... ave-church

Reason #1 – Churches seem overprotective.

Reason #2 – Teens’ and twentysomethings’ experience of Christianity is shallow.

Reason #3 – Churches come across as antagonistic to science.

Reason #4 – Young Christians’ church experiences related to sexuality are often simplistic, judgmental.

Reason #5 – They wrestle with the exclusive nature of Christianity.

Reason #6 – The church feels unfriendly to those who doubt.

The five-year study that produced the data is discussed at length in a book by the lead researcher for the poll & related studies (http://www.amazon.com/You-Lost-Me-David ... 150&sr=8-1).

[h/t to none other than Scotty Brown who, of course, is oblivious to the implications of these results: "To me, it seems that most of the reasons Barna gives is because these youth have rejected critical elements of Christianity and its message. In short, they left because they hated God and His people." (ncfic.org/blog).]

[dawniecakes]

I really loved the book, unChristian, which goes over several of these points in depth, backed up my Barna's research.

[debrand]

It's always amazed me that some people, like Ray Comfort, hang salvation on whether a person believes in evolution or creationsim. They go to such extremes to prove the literal Genesis account is true that they make themselves look foolish. There is no reason that religion can't coexist with science-unless an individual refuses to see his faith's early stories as metaphors for a higher truth.

[FuManchu]

Scott Brown is a hilarious caricature sometimes. Well, most of the time. All the time, really. I notice that the upcoming seminar he's hosting with Doug Phillips includes a lecture on "Preparing two-year-olds for marriage". Classy stuff.

[Guest Anonymous]

Scott Brown is a hilarious caricature sometimes. Well, most of the time. All the time, really. I notice that the upcoming seminar he's hosting with Doug Phillips includes a lecture on "Preparing two-year-olds for marriage". Classy stuff.

What in the hell? That's extraordinarily creepy even for Doug. Gross.

[bananacat]

From my own experience, there was a lot of #3. I knew that I wanted to be a scientist, and I felt like I had to hid it while I was at church. The official Methodist stance is pro-science, but some Evangelicals had infiltrated my church and it was Methodist in name only. I remember seeing commercials for the Methodist church saying they're so open and welcoming of everyone, and it was such a big lie because I could never be myself there. I had to hide my career goal like it was some kind of dirty little secret. The place where I should have felt the most accepted was instead the place where I faced the most judgment. Honestly, the teens that I went to high school with were less judgy than my church.

[mirele]

It's interesting how some of these reasons are hedged so that they don't offend the Barna Group's customers (more about that below), but others are not:

Reason #1 – Churches seem overprotective.

Why not "Churches are overprotective"? The Barna people depend on the people they're criticizing to actually buy their surveys, so they're going to soften anything that might be critical of their readers.

Reason #2 – Teens’ and twentysomethings’ experience of Christianity is shallow.

Compare this use of "is" to the use of "seems" in the first reason. Obviously, their readers, being good Christians, don't have a shallow Christianity, but teens and twentysomethings do. If I was in my teens and twenties, was a former church member and was now doing something else (like sleeping in on Sunday morning), I'd be annoyed.

Reason #3 – Churches come across as antagonistic to science.

Again, the verb "come across" is used instead of "are," because the truth to the purchasers of the Barna Group's reports is poison. They don't want to be told that carrying on about how believing literal Genesis is running off the youth.

Reason #4 – Young Christians’ church experiences related to sexuality are often simplistic, judgmental.

Again, note the verb, it's the hard "is," rather than "seems" or "comes across." But the churches do use sexuality as a hammer on their youth.

Reason #5 – They wrestle with the exclusive nature of Christianity.

Of course, there can't be a discussion about why the exclusive nature of Christianity is extremely problematic in an increasingly pluralistic and wired world. The churches that the Barna Group sells to pretty much believe that if you don't believe in Jesus, you will roast for eternity. (Some of the more "liberal" types might believe that God is merciful and will destroy us wicked heathen after a certain point.) However, the youth are being confronted by this question frequently as they encounter people of different religions and of no religion on a daily basis--and the response of their churches is to just pay, pray and obey.

Reason #6 – The church feels unfriendly to those who doubt.

Again with the soft verb "feels" rather than the concrete verb "is". The fact is that the church IS unfriendly to doubters. There is no place for doubters in most congregations. There's no place to express your doubts. The churches would likely hang on to more doubters (as well as people who don't buy the literal interpretations being doled out in these churches) if they weren't so, well, insistent on literal adherence to things that really aren't central doctrines (like creationism, homosexuality, the role of women or the churches tacitly endorsing right-wing political candidates and causes).

I've alluded to "customers," so let me be clearer. It's not merely that the Barna Group is selling books on Amazon.com and elsewhere, they make their money selling the actual guts (or crosstabs) of these surveys to various organizations. I could see a very large publisher, say, a Thomas Nelson or Zondervan, buying the crosstabs and analyzing them to determine where they ought to focus their publishing, so that they can sell books to worried pastors and youth leaders. Same with large church groups or denominations like the Southern Baptist Convention. These results show up in how outreaches to young people, particularly college students, are targeted. Consequently, Barna Group can't actually use concrete verbs like "is" with any proposition that implicates the churches, otherwise their customers will get offended. But it's perfectly OK to cast teens and twentysomethings in a bad light. Hence, the interesting verb choices seen above.

Of course, Scott Brown is missing all of this, but then again, Scott's a very shallow thinker.

[margiebargie]

I really think (hope) that evangelical christianity is going to implode in the next decade or so. It really does need to go away or change drastically. As it is now, it's incompatible with science, reason, and common decency.

[BravaAmica]

I really think (hope) that evangelical christianity is going to implode in the next decade or so. It really does need to go away or change drastically. As it is now, it's incompatible with science, reason, and common decency.

From this post to God's ear.

[batwing]

I keep thinking this post has something to do with a young Christian Bale :oops:

Carry on.

[Kitty]

All six of those were completely true for me... when I was 14. And they're still true now 5 years later.

[hoipolloi]

Good exegesis, Mirele.

Barna's equivocal language makes me think that things really are this bad (or good, depending on your viewpoint). They're just trying to sugar coat it for their customers. After all, we can't have it said that churches have any responsibility in the exodus of their younger members.

[Austin]

I think those six reasons are true for many people, not just young Christians. Like me.

[silvia]

Has the Barna firm ever considered that maybe young people are leaving church because they can see that what many churches teach is just flat-out wrong? The implication in this survey data is that if churches just soft-pedal their messages, act more accepting, etc., they will be able to get more young people to stay. But I think most young people are smart enough to see through any misguided attempts to make extremist views more palatable. In the long run, young people will leave churches in droves until the churches make a concerted effort to realign their doctrines with reality and change their messages to reflect compassion for all people. A concerted PR effort to make repugnant doctrines look good just won't do the trick.

[EmmieJ]

I agree with the poster who said that these six factors are the reasons why a lot of people leave their Church, not just young people.

Especially if a person has an open mind and comes in contact with a variety of people, it's almost impossible to believe that your Hindu/Muslim/Jewish/agnostic/whatever friend is going straight to hell, when you see what a wonderful and kind person he/she is, and that you are certainly no better (and maybe not even as good as) that person.

To me, the stricter church views on sexuality are so outdated, that I wonder how they still have any parishioners under the age of 50 at all.

[silvia]

Especially if a person has an open mind and comes in contact with a variety of people, it's almost impossible to believe that your Hindu/Muslim/Jewish/agnostic/whatever friend is going straight to hell, when you see what a wonderful and kind person he/she is, and that you are certainly no better (and maybe not even as good as) that person.

A-fricking-men.

[Austin]

A-fricking-men.

I think there is tremendous truth in that, EmmieJ. When Christians keep themselves separated from "the world", it is much easier to condemn the masses who disagree with their faith. It's a lot harder to condemn someone you know and care about, to whatever extent, which then causes questioning of the justice of their exclusionary faith.

[titus2_4u]

I haven't seen the book, but there should be discussion of young women leaving the church because of the patriarchy: we're told that it's a bigger deal for us to stay pure than the boys, then treated with kid gloves.

"No, youth pastor, I don't want to discuss abstinence or body image. How about the theological question I posed? No, I'm not "going too far" with my boyfriend. No, I don't have an eating disorder. How about the theological question I posed? What am I looking for in a husband? I see this isn't going anywhere . . ."

[liltwinstar]

Have they considered the fact that some people (like me) leave church because we simply don't believe in it any more??? You can't force people to stay in church or in a belief system. No amount of "fun" youth activities (on the one hand) and dour preaching to families (on the other) is going to keep someone in a pew, week after week, if that person simply doesn't believe the tenants of the religion. At that point, the only reason a non-believer would stay is because of family/social pressure or simple habit.

Also, do churches/pastors really want a congregation full of people who had to be persuaded to be there by fear, by intimidation, by "fun", whatever??? I wouldn't think so.

Some things like wider acceptance of gay individuals/families, for instance, or a full acceptance of women are nice things and I applaud churches who follow those paths. But that doesn't change the fact that I don't believe in the Christian concept of God/Jesus.

[Hane]

Have they considered the fact that some people (like me) leave church because we simply don't believe in it any more???

Amen. For years, I used to think that people were attending church less and less because they couldn't be bothered to get their lazy @$$es to services on Sunday, and because "going to church on Sunday" wasn't as "socially mandatory" as it was when I was a kid back in the '50s and '60s. Then I reached my '50s, and realized that I just couldn't expend any more energy trying/pretending to believe in things like the virgin birth and the resurrection anymore.

[slickcat79]

Some things like wider acceptance of gay individuals/families, for instance, or a full acceptance of women are nice things and I applaud churches who follow those paths. But that doesn't change the fact that I don't believe in the Christian concept of God/Jesus.

Agreed. I was raised in a presbyterian church. It was a good church. We had youth group, fun activities, summer camps, mission trips, etc. I don't ever remember believing that members of other religions were "going to hell" or doomed in any way. I think I remember being taught that members of other religions actually worshiped the same god that I did but just called him by different names. That obviously doesn't mesh with all belief systems, and is fairly condescending, but it was nicer than the hellbound theory that other churches might preach. It still didn't stick.

[keeperrox]

Have they considered the fact that some people (like me) leave church because we simply don't believe in it any more???

Or the people like me who never really believed the stories at all, but went because I had to.

[antifundie]

You know, in terms of actual Christianity/the Gospel/Jesus, WHO CARES if people go to church? Jesus didn't talk about CHURCH, he talked about other stuff. So, these people are wringing their hands because people leave a institution, not that people don't believe. That's crap--it's all about money and selling their "brand" of Christianity.

I think churches try to hard. I don't need a pastor to be hip, I don't need a rock band, I don't need free coffee before the service. What I need (in terms of religion) is a place where I can ask questions, where I could express doubt, and where I could learn more about Jesus. Not "Jesus doesn't want you to have sex" but "hey, have you thought about this verse/passage this way?"

And, if people don't want that/don't believe in Jesus, I don't really worry about it. Maybe this is bad, but (at least in the US) is there REALLY anybody who hasn't heard the "Gospel"?? Really? At this point, I think Christians should focus more on 1) helping their fellow man/woman and 2) being (generally) better people. Evangelism is just needless. Well, I have serious issues with any kind of proselytizing/missionary work anyways, and I saw that as somebody who does/would like to believe in Jesus.

[Mompom]

Scott Brown is a hilarious caricature sometimes. Well, most of the time. All the time, really. I notice that the upcoming seminar he's hosting with Doug Phillips includes a lecture on "Preparing two-year-olds for marriage". Classy stuff.

WHAT? Seriously, extremist fundie people, just take your kids to Disney World like the rest of America, and STFU. They make life so freaking complicated (while simultaneously making it extremely narrow).

[VintageJen1984]

It's interesting how some of these reasons are hedged so that they don't offend the Barna Group's customers (more about that below), but others are not:

Reason #2 – Teens’ and twentysomethings’ experience of Christianity is shallow.

Compare this use of "is" to the use of "seems" in the first reason. Obviously, their readers, being good Christians, don't have a shallow Christianity, but teens and twentysomethings do. If I was in my teens and twenties, was a former church member and was now doing something else (like sleeping in on Sunday morning), I'd be annoyed.

As a twentysomething who hasn't been comfortable in the church I'm a member of for a while that I haven't attended in about three months, (though I am not planning to leave Christianity, I do plan to leave the SBC) this is not how I interpreted this statement.

I want deep theological discussion. I want to discuss why Catholics and Lutherans and Southern Baptists and Presbyterians and Pentecostals all interpret the Bible in such different ways. I want to talk about church history and how the reformation might have addressed real problems with the Catholic church back in the day, but how even the Catholics don't do those things now. Or why the Pentecostals don't believe in the trinity but are considered Christian, but other groups that don't believe in the trinity aren't because they don't. And so on. And so forth. My favorite topic (ever since acing a college honors project on it) is usually Catholic vs. Orthodox split and Orthodoxy in general since so few people in my area even know what it really is.

And okay, we're an SBC church? Let's talk about WHY we're an SBC church. Why do we all congregate here, and not over at the Methodist church or the Bible church. There's a lot of anti-Catholic rhetoric, but 99% of it is based on things that look like Catholic doctrine--but aren't. The other 1% is based on real Catholic doctrine that has Bible verses backing it up, but the SBC interprets it differently, and obviously more right than the pope. Someone remind me again why "we can all read the Bible, so we can all interpret it, not just the pope" makes sense if you still get mad at people not interpreting the Bible the SBC way? Also, while we can all (mostly) read the Bible now, there were times in the past when most people could not read. Also, also, the pope is highly educated and able to read the Bible in its original languages. So can my pastor, who has a doctorate, which is awesome, but many pastors in the SBC don't and don't find it important. That's pretty sad. I personally would like to be able to do that, and I'm not even trying to lead other people to Jesus.

I find what I get in (my evangelical SBC church) very very shallow in comparison. This is what I thought the study was saying. We want to experience the deep theology but instead we get the most endless chorus of "Open The Eyes Of My Heart, Lord" ever. (If I never hear that song again it will be too soon.)