I had the chance this weekend to take in a conference by Reginald Bibby, a sociologist from the University of Lethbridge. The conference was put on by the Canadian Bible Society and attracted quite a diverse group of Christians from across denominational lines.
Bibby is the Canadian equivalent of George Barna, a researcher dedicated to analyzing and describing the religious climate here in Canada. According to Bibby, Canada may not be on the path to secularization that many sociologists (himself included) had previously predicted.
In the late 80s and early 90s it became popular to think of religion in Canada in terms of a slow death. Industrialization, it was argued, had negative effects on religion in most countries (the notable exception being the United States) and Canada would soon follow Western Europe in becoming a ‘post-religious’ society. This became known as the ’secularization story’ in sociological research and achieved pretty much universal acceptance within the discipline.
Bibby and others are starting to take another look at this theory. The numbers, it seems, are telling a different story. While participation in Canadian churches has seen a sharp decline, Canadians still overwhelmingly identify themselves with a particular denominational heritage (over 80% of us) and still hold to some basic beliefs about God’s existence and concern for humanity that demonstrate that the religious concerns have not gone away. Canadians also remain vitally interested in ‘religious questions’ whether that is talked about in the language of ’spirituality’ or more traditional lingo. Specifically Bibby mentioned the idea that Canadians are relatively open to church involvement if they perceived that a church could make a significant contribution to their lives.
This was a bit surprising for me. Publicly at least, it seems to be the default assumption that Canada is pretty much a post-Christian society and that it is only a matter of time until all that remain are a few ‘holy huddles’ who stubbornly refuse to submit to the logic of secularization. It was fascinating to hear how the questions haven’t gone away, there is just increasing skepticism that churches can provide meaningful answers.
Bibby’s conclusion was that churches need to do a better job of marketing themselves to meet the felt needs of Canadians. There is probably something to learn here; every church should be able to answer the question: Are we offering anything of value to the broader community? While I agree that churches need to do a better job of addressing the questions people are asking, I also have this nagging suspicion that some of the key questions that the gospel addresses are questions that we would rather not ask.
i heard Bibby’s spiel at a breakfast last year. i also read the book you posted on your site. I’m not sure how pleased Bibby would be to get tagged as a Barna clone but it serves the point of the post. I also think his response to the inaccuracy of the secularization myth is a little more nuanced than that churches need to market themsleves better. However…
Secularization is a really convienient idea for the evangelical church to continue to believe. It reinforces our protectionist perspective on faith and church identity. It is interesting to me that in a time when the DATA shows a climate of heightened spiritual appetite we continue to be reactionary and subtly exclusive.
I’d be concerned that if we gear ourselves around meeting the felt needs of Canadians we will orient ourselves more around a consumer culture. There is no doubt that faith in Christ as well as church community will meet some felt needs but I don’t think that is the whole picture. Sometimes being a Christian means suffering for a cause greater than ourselves. If we “sell” meeting needs how can we later call upon people to risk and persevere through trials?
I’d be concerned that if we gear ourselves around meeting the felt needs of Canadians we will orient ourselves more around a consumer culture. There is no doubt that faith in Christ as well as church community will meet some felt needs but I don’t think that is the whole picture. Sometimes being a Christian means suffering for a cause greater than ourselves. If we “sell” meeting needs how can we later call upon people to risk and persevere through trials?
I agree that secularization is somewhat of a myth. From my observations, the world is getting more religious, regardless of industrialization. A recent study rated the “religiousity” of different countries. It measured time, effort and material expenses toward religious activities. The most relgious country was India. India is in the midst of industrialization in hyper-speed. The second most religious country was the US. Certainly, Canada cannot be too far behind.
Does anyone else get a shiver down their spine when they read that “Bibby’s conclusion was that churches need to do a better job of marketing themselves to meet the felt needs of Canadians.” As if we as a church have a product to sell, like we want people to take ours because, Folgers is better than Nabobs (or neither one is as good as Kona) or Coke is better than Pepsi. Jesus isn’t a product for us to sell. God doesn’t need a new and better marketing strategy to sell Him to the masses, He needs Christians to walk in a relationship with HIM! And invite other people to experience Him. I like how Rob Bell describes faith like a trampoline. No one “markets” whose trampoline is better, you just invite them to come and jump. Maybe I’m taking this comment the wrong way (feel free to set me straight) but I think looking at a church like some sort of corporate structure that needs to be out there marketing our product, misses the mark. Instead we need to live a honest, real relationship with the Master, and then invite others to come and jump with us.
I’m probably misrepresenting Bibby a bit here. He would probably resent the whole ‘marketing’ metaphor but I’m not entirely sure he can avoid it.
His main point was that Canadians would be more interested in church if they felt that it was significant. I don’t think that’s necessarily bad. If the church is seen as insignificant then we are probably missing out on something important.
On the flip side the temptation will be strong to demonstrate our ’significance’ by appealing to the things that we think people are looking for. Again, not inherently wrong but there are some temptations here as well.
If i understand Bibby correctly it’s not meeting people’s percieved needs that is so important for churches to do. It is offering people something significant to belong to that they are by in large looking for. There is a distinction here: people are looking for a cuase big enough to aspire to and ‘hitch’ onto not just another service that will be provided for them. This is indeed good news. It really shifts the focus from marketing to mission (stupid words). At least that is what I came away with from his book. It is too bad if in that seminar he left the audience with the marketing angle. But then who am i to speak about the authors intention…
I think Dale is on to something here with his “protectionist perspective on faith”. I have been thinking a lot lately on this very topic and wondering . . . if I feel such a strong sense of community in my church (people bringing meals, praying for us, being interested in my son, crying and laughing together)why is that not attractive to the outside community? Jesus offers love, peace and life abundant, who wouldn’t be attracted to that? My only conclusion thus far is to rake ourselves (church members)over the coals on the communication and display of these ideals to the outside hurting world. Sadly, they have a different view of who we are. It’s like their is a misfire with the synapses - the world around us is looking for Jesus, we know him - so why aren’t the two connecting? Any ideas?
Bonnie
Interesting thoughts Bonnie. I wonder if it has as much to do with negative perceptions (often well deserved) than with our inability to ‘get the message out’. It can take a long time to change a perception.
[...] there have been many who have disputed the idea that secularization is inevitable (here in Canada, Reg Bibby is a notable voice) but I’m impressed with the book so far. I’m interested to hear how [...]