Demographics and the Self-Destruction Principle

As my last post indicates, I have been reading up on demographics lately. One of the things that I find interesting is that non-religious population blocs are self-destructive. They don’t have babies at the same rate as religious people (of any faith) do and therefore deplete their ranks over time.

The practical implications for this are many. Goldman’s writes, in his book “How Civilizations Die: (And Why Islam is Dying, Too), that religious “nones” will top out in the USA at less than 20% and the slightly decline. This is because the total fertility rate driving their movement is abysmal (conversion probably won’t be substantial enough to raise the numbers much). Eric Kaufman sums up the point: “Liberalism’s demographic contradiction – individualism leading to the choice not to reproduce – may well be the agent that destroys it” (as quoted by Goldman). I call this the “Self-Destruction Principle” and its what we see happening places like Western Europe and Japan.

Conversely, the total fertility rates among religious people is much higher. In the regard the US is forging a much different path than our European counterparts. For example, the stereotype of large Catholic families is true: they lead the pack with a higher TFR than Protestants. This has led some researchers to conclude that Catholics will ultimately win the battle over which of the two will make up the largest percentage of the US population. Catholics have been aided by hispanic immigration to the US. Most of the projections include this factor. However, I think this is changing and it will mean that Protestants, particularly conservative Evangelical Protestants, will enjoy a surge.

A couple of factors indicate that this may be the case. First, hispanic immigration to the US has substantially slowed. Both the economic downturn in the US and the rising economic situation in Mexico have contributed to this reversal. Second, so many hispanics have converted to Evangelical brands of Christianity that we can no assume that all of these immigrants are Catholic. So, among the hispanic immigration flow we have a shifts.

Additionally, widespread religious persecution globally is forcing many people to immigrate to the US. A recent article in the Orange County Register (a good location if one wants to understand Asian immigration) notes:

Christians, who make up some 42 percent of Asian-Americans, face surveillance and repression, particularly, in China, where religion is tightly regulated, and dissent from the party line can land adherents in jail. Over half of Asian immigrants, Pew notes, cite freedom of religion as a key advantage of living in America. New faith-based migration could also be seen soon among Christians fleeing increasingly Islamic regimes in Egypt, Syria and other Middle Eastern countries. (link to the article)

These are not “chreasters” (Christians who come to church on Christmas and Easter). They are fervent believers who want to spread their faith. I imagine that we will see an uptick in outreach programs, both here and abroad.

The secular mind is unable to comprehend an American future that is more religious than the current America. It could be that the Obama era is the high-water mark over the next century for secular liberalism. This will be due in part to demographic shifts that are slowly, but inexorably, filling the US populace with more religious people.

After that, all best are off as global population decline will alter humanity as never before, staring sometime around 2075.

Have Lots of Babies

That’s right: have ‘em when you are young and have them often. That’s my conclusion after reading this book.

I am not kidding.

I recently read Jonathan Last’s, “What to Expect When No One’s Expecting” and really enjoyed it. There are lots of counter-intuitive findings that make a book like this really fun.

For example, sheer demographics will stop and ultimately diminish the rise of secular, non-religious people in the US. That certainly flies in the face of the dominant theory of secularization that is gospel in the American university system. Another one: Islam is headed toward big problems due to a falling “TFR” – Total Fertility Rate.

Modernity produced people that don’t like…. well, er.. people. At least new people. Did you know that the population of the planet – the whole planet – is expected to stop growing in the next 100 years? That no society has maintained positive economic growth amid plunging population growth? Did you ever ponder the effects on China of the “one-child” policy they have adopted? This book will make you think about issues like this.

It also challenges the completely bankrupt ideas behind population bomb theories (which are among the most laughable of all pseudo science of the past century) and suggest that a bright future is linked to having more babies.

Highly recommended.

Another Reason for House Church

….you can meet when you want to, not when tradition dictates:

According to a new study published in the Review of Religious Research, an examination of declining attendance at 16 congregations revealed that many pastors place the most blame on children’s sports activities, since both practices and competitions are increasingly “scheduled on Sunday mornings at the very time when many churches traditionally have provided religious education.”

With kids who are in sports, I think this is actually slightly “off.” I suspect it’s really not so much the Sunday AM time slot. When our kids are in sports, we are busier. Busier means less time for programs at church. House church helps with this, too! Fellowship infused into daily life makes more sense than programs that require one to “go” to church to participate. Just invite a few of your house church friends to attend your kid’s game. Meet other parents… You get the idea.

HT: CT Gleanings Blog.

More Blah on Western Missionary Roles

There was some excellent feedback on my post regarding the role of Western mission agencies – thanks for commenting.

As I have been thinking about the way my organization is training and prepping people right now I have had a nagging thought about the need to readjust. How we talk about the role of the cross-cultural gringo needs to shift. We need to emphasize more than we ever have preparation for partnership with indigenous or culturally-near partners.

I see the growing need to prep people in the following areas (in no particular order):

1. Changing role of the outsider and insider
2. Identifying affinity groups and strategizing with affinity group leaders
3. Evaluating culturally-near neighbors for possible partnership
4. The role of research in UPG ministry
5. Training and coaching as a primary contribution of outsiders
6. Indigenously derived access methods – how to encourage them while keeping them from overtaking the work
7. Keeping out of the driver’s seat
8. Did I already note, “Keeping out of the driver’s seat?”
9. Structures that inhibit growth and structures that encourage it
10. Funding, money, and the role of the outsider: not a didactic “this is how to handle money” but a “these are issues to think about” approach
11. Assessment of orality within the UPG and developing an appropriate response
12. Ideas for working with the traditional church within a UPG
13. Coaching – what is it and how is it done, how it differs from training and teaching

Folks with some tools in these areas will be better equipped to equip.

Feel free to add your topics…

Cool Video on Church Community

(sorry that it runs over into the blogroll…)

The Collision of Two Rights Make this Wrong

The Foundry has reported on one of the briefs in the upcoming Supreme Court battle on same sex marriage. If the court affirms gay marriage religious liberties will be curtailed.

Religious liberty doesn’t stop at the church doors. The Becket Fund for Religious Liberty, the nonpartisan public-interest law firm dedicated to protecting the free expression of all religions, filed an amicus brief with the Supreme Court making the case that legal recognition of same-sex relationships as marriages creates hazards for religious liberty, particularly when courts impose a redefinition of marriage.

This is a pretty significant court case. Christians (and Muslims, Mormons, Jews, or any other religious body) will experience limits on the use of federal funds, limited access to federal jobs,contracts, be subject to lawsuits, and many other bureaucratic pressures.

Tennent’s Review of Bell’s Book

I will be the first to say that I am not reading Rob Bell’s latest book. I concluded long ago that Bell has deconstructed theology to the point that it is no longer relevant.

If you are interested (and I know many are after last weeks’ Bell musing on homosexuality), check out Tennent’s review.

(HT to http://matthewdgreen.com)

Blah Blah Blah on Western Missionaries

I have been out of the country for a few weeks (seeing some AMAZING things) and have been getting “pinged” about a recent article by Justin Long on mission structures. At the same time, I was sent a report about mega-church involvement in missions and how organizations need to react to accommodate them. Finally, while abroad I traveled with an author who, at one point, said, “The big question is ‘what is the role of the Western missionary?’”

How many times will I have this conversation with people?

If I might be so bold, let me make 10 observations about Western missionaries:

1. As long as there are unreached people groups there will be a role for Western missionaries.
2. The role for any missionary, whether Western or not, is constantly in flux. This is both true globally and locally. The issue of change in the global missionary effort has little to do with the origin of the missionary.
3. Agencies are temporal manifestations of how people are organizing to accomplish mission. Let’s not spiritualize them.
4. The rise of the non-Western missionary force does nothing but create greater opportunities for Western missionaries. They are now able to be involved in a much broader range of roles and fields.
5. Nationals can do the job cheaper, financially, in many cases. However, ‘Mercenary Missions’ (in which we pay other people to do what are obligated by scripture to do) is a great tool but no replacement for US churches sending out our best and brightest. These should be complementary strategies.
6. Many nationals are ineffective in cross-cultural missions. This is particularly true in places where they become pastors and not missionaries (India is rife with this issue).
7. Like any culture, American culture can make a unique contribution in the Great Commission. We are good at vision casting, logistics, resource management and training. We are not so good at sacrifice, disciple making, flexibility and following.
8. Financial resources in the West should be freed to do missionary work. Western churches and missionaries should be assisting in this, not constantly fretting over the misappropriation of funds.
9. We often overlook “culturally near” missionary strategies. Often, neighboring cultures that are already reached can be mobilized to extend the Gospel into cultures with no current witness.
10. American churches are often ill equipped to understand and strategize appropriately in cross-cultural, unreached situations. They need Western missionaries’ expertise to increase their effectiveness.

Your thoughts? Feel free to disagree!

The Worker Bee

Here is a little motivational poem I wrote for the seminar, “Overcoming Death by Email”

The Worker Bee,
J. Ted Esler

Oh, to be a worker bee and only think of me,

To go to office, school, or field, or to the factory.

And do a task (and do it well) but not for other’s sake,

No, just the things that must be done, but these without mistake.

To work the hours, to earn the pay, to do the things they ask,

To keep one’s job, yet free oneself from doing extra tasks.

And then one can retire, leave all of this for good,

Look back while reminiscing, doing things one never could.

A lifetime spent just getting by, rewarding? I don’t know.

A lifetime spent in servitude, no purpose there to show.

There’s nothing wrong with working hard and putting in your time,

But time is really all we have, so use it to its prime.

Multiplying House Churches

Multiplication. It’s a scary word for house churches.

When we first started our house church it was three families that, within just a few weeks, became four that became the nucleus of our house church network. We then grew slowly but surely until we hit the point where it was becoming more and more difficult to meet in homes. We had grown too big!

We had plenty of reasons why we didn’t want to multiply. The deeper friendships that are built in a house church are a natural bulwark against multiplication. A number of us had yearned for a church experience with these sorts of relationships and now that we had found it, how could we give it up? Added to that is the question of “how” to multiply. Nobody wanted to discuss it for fear of alienating anybody else. Who would go with whom? We had not started with a culture of multiplication and now we had to figure things out as we went forward.

For me, multiplication is must. There are house churches that never multiply nor do they value multiplication. My fear for these groups is that they become ingrown, spiritually incestuous, and unable to relate to the outside world. At some point they become inhospitable to outsiders, who cannot share in the “inside jokes” and culture of the group. They also, over time, lose the diversity that they had at the beginning of their history together. Another danger is that they will grow until they settle for a non-house church model in order to accommodate the larger numbers.

One key to healthy multiplication is to set an expectation from the beginning that, at some point in the future, this group will multiply. From the first meeting, acknowledge together that God desires for the Kingdom to grow and that incorporating that growth will result in multiplication.

In my experience, it has been helpful to avoid having rules for multiplication. When people ask me about multiplying, they often want me to say, “This is how to do it.” Each house church is different, each person is unique, and the gifting and needs represented in the group will always be in flux. So, rather than have a set way of multiplying, encourage dialogue. Let people know early and often that it’s okay to talk about and consider multiplication.

I get a lot of questions on the timing of when to multiply. It’s not a bad idea to “set a date” about multiplication; not a firm date, but some expectation of timeframe. In our house church network, there seems to be a window of about 12 to 18 months in between multiplication cycles. I have heard others suggest that the best time to multiply is when the group grows so large that you cannot all sit around the same table and enjoy a meal together. This is a good rule of thumb and will keep your house church to a reasonably small size.

Multiplication can happen in different ways. The first way, and the one which I have seen most often, is hiving. When a group “hives,” it become two house churches with roughly equal members. In a hiving process, it’s important for everybody to have input on which group he or she will be a part of. People like to know that their voice is being heard and they want input into the decision. Considerations may be gifting, age, location, or a host of other factors.

A second method (and one which “church planting movement” advocates seem to prefer) is what I call the sending method. One person or family decides to start a new group with the blessing of the rest. This approach is well suited for those who have apostolic, or entrepreneurial, gifting. An advantage of this method is that the new group can easily be started among a set of people who already know each other. For example, somebody might want to start a house church with their neighbors. They could possibly invite you to help them get it started. Missiologists state that the fastest way to start new churches is along existing social groupings.

The last option, and most radical, is squaring. This happens when all the existing members of a house church decide to start a new house church. If, over time, each one is successful, one might end up with the mathematical square of the original number of people. This is, in essence, what has happened with the four couples who had initially made up our first house church. Each family is now a part of a new house church and we are joined together in a network.

Having a functioning house church network relieves some of the stress of multiplication. A network can provide relationship continuity, a sense of togetherness and visions for your city or town, and a safety net should a new group have difficulty.

So… go forth and multiply!