Why Can’t We Blame the British Invasion?
How does one explain the seemingly inexorable decline of the Christian church in the United States? Is it simply a result of shifting morals and values? Is the message of the church suddenly irrelevant and aging out of favor? What are the factors that the church in decline should use as motivation for change?
In ‘Failure of Nerve’ Edwin Friedman offers some insight into the leadership vacuum that exists in 
US culture, the causes for it and the strength necessary to provide genuine leadership that is evidently lacking. In so doing he furnishes an opportunity for the church in the US to be more circumspect and consider its own leadership challenges and the contributing factors for the evident decline.
The Pew Research Center suggests that the most rapidly growing religious group in the United States is currently what it calls ‘The Nones’. ‘Nones’ are defined as unaffiliated individuals who identify as atheist, agnostic or simply nothing in particular.[1] Between 2007 and 2014 this group jumped from 16% to 23% of the adult population.[2] Somehow, despite concerted effort to attract emerging generations they are being lost at a rapid rate. There seem to be two perspectives in response. 1. Panic – worry that the church will be all but gone within a generation or two. 2. Resignation – see the move away from the church as inevitable akin to other Western nations.
It seems that the church in the United States’ greatest desire is to return to the days when it held the cultural capital of the nation. It was a time when a significant majority of the population attended church regularly and even if individuals did not, the cultural platform of the church was assumed and generally accepted by the nation as a whole. This lasted until the early 1960’s. Since that time the
church in the US has been experiencing the decline in influence that occurred in most other Western Nations decades or even centuries prior. Maybe it was the Beatles, The Rolling Stones and the other bands that made up the British invasion that are to blame for the ensuing moral decay and undermining of the power and influence of the Christian church in the United States.
Friedman offers another possibility though. The church became stuck, enmeshed in the culture to such a degree that it was no longer able to separate itself, undifferentiated from the culture, thus unable to provide leadership. He suggests that this sense of being stuck prevented the church from breaking the necessary cultural barriers and leading a course 
in a new direction.[3]While at times it battled against certain practices it saw as evidence of a moral decline, not always in tune with current biblical understandings, (racial desegregation, divorce, rock music, free love, same-sex relationships etc.) it did so from a position within the culture and evidently more concerned about its loss of power and influence than leading toward cultural transformation.
Is it possible then for the church to extract itself, become a better version of itself, and provide the transformational leadership the culture needs? One thing it cannot continue to do is what it appears have been the major emphases for several decades. Friedman suggests that; “There are three major, interlocking characteristics common to any relationship system that has become imaginatively gridlocked: an unending treadmill of trying harder; looking for answers rather than reframing questions; and either/or thinking that creates false dichotomies.”[4] So, the church cannot just scream louder or work on techniques and marketing strategies. Nor can it spend its energies searching for answers to the troubles. And the false dichotomies created by the thinking is also decidedly unhelpful.
I recognize that most of the people who can be bothered (or are required) to read this blog see me as some sort of flaming liberal, one of those wacko Presbyterians who has coalesced in order to accommodate. However, in reality I consider myself a fairly conservative interpreter of scripture. I also hold a very orthodox
view of the main doctrinal positions of the church. I just like to push the envelope and continue to ask challenging questions of the church because I think there is a danger in approaching people, particularly those in emerging generations, as if everything regarding Christianity is clear and very black and white.
I believe Friedman is again helpful here. “The issues over which chronically anxious systems become concerned, therefore, are more likely to be the focus of their anxiety rather than its cause.”[5] What might be the cause of the anxiety evident in the US church? Is it same-sex marriage? Abortion rights? Women in leadership? If Friedman is correct in his summation those things have become the focus but are unlikely to be the cause and if all energies are concentrated on these and other issues an opportunity will be missed to address the root cause. If we are to reframe the question as suggested by this text than why are we asking, “Where have all the people gone?” We might instead ask “How has the church become so enmeshed in society that it no longer has authority to lead?”
Rather than backbiting and finger pointing we should be encouraging deep and introspective questions, ones that challenge the church to consider things from a new vantage point. Perhaps there needs to be a completely new way of approaching the culture and rather than criticizing those 
who are trying new things we should heed these words of Friedman and empower up and coming leaders to become more adventurous in their efforts to develop a new generation of disciples of Jesus. “For a fundamental reorientation to occur, a spirit of adventure that optimizes serendipity and enables new perceptions beyond the control of our thinking processes must happen first.”[6] So we can stop blaming the British for the demise of our sacrosanct Christian culture and get on with the work God has set out for us to do, not from a position of cultural superiority but one of humility and service to our neighbors.
And if you really want to know George is my favorite Beatle!!
[1]Lipka, Michael. “A Closer Look at America’s Rapidly Growing Religious ‘nones’.” Pew Research Center. May 13, 2015. Accessed November 08, 2018. http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2015/05/13/a-closer-look-at-americas-rapidly-growing-religious-nones/.
[2]Ibid
[3]Friedman, Edwin H.. A Failure of Nerve: Leadership in the Age of the Quick Fix, Revised Edition (Kindle Locations 764-766). Church Publishing Inc.. Kindle Edition.
[4]Friedman, Edwin H.. A Failure of Nerve: Leadership in the Age of the Quick Fix, Revised Edition (Kindle Locations 792-794). Church Publishing Inc.. Kindle Edition.
[5]Friedman, Edwin H.. A Failure of Nerve: Leadership in the Age of the Quick Fix, Revised Edition (Kindle Locations 1272-1273). Church Publishing Inc.. Kindle Edition.
[6]Friedman, Edwin H.. A Failure of Nerve: Leadership in the Age of the Quick Fix, Revised Edition (Kindle Locations 760-762). Church Publishing Inc.. Kindle Edition.
About the Author
Dan Kreiss
Former director of the Youth Ministry program at King University in Bristol, TN and Dean of the School of Missions. I have worked in youth ministry my entire life most of that time in New Zealand before becoming faculty at King. I love helping people recognize themselves as children of God and helping them engage with the world in all its diversity. I am particularly passionate about encouraging the church to reflect the diversity found in their surrounding community in regard to age, gender, ethnicity, education, economic status, etc. I am a husband, father of 4, graduate of Emmanuel Christian Seminary, an avid cyclist and fly-fisherman still trying to figure out what I want to be when I grow up.3 responses to “Why Can’t We Blame the British Invasion?”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
I was wondering about your favorite Beatle, so thanks for clearing that up!
Great application of Friedman (one of my all time favorite leadership books!). I agree, the church in the US is highly anxious and I love how you have rightly pointed out that being enmeshed with the culture has caused the church to lose its prophetic leadership voice. (This is how we end up with 80% of evangelicals voting for someone like Trump.)
If the Church were able to shift to being a non-anxious presence, what do you think that would look like?
I am not sure we have seen that consistently, at least not in the West, since Constantine. Being a transformational presence does not necessarily mean full acceptance as demonstrated by the early church in the book of Acts. I believe the church leadership would be more concerned about living the Gospel than appeasing the establishment. I think Oscar Romero is an example of non-anxious leadership in El Salvador and someone we would do well to emulate in that regard.
Hi Dan,
I don’t see you as some type of flaming liberal!
You made a strong statement with–If we are to reframe the question as suggested by this text than why are we asking, “Where have all the people gone?” We might instead ask “How has the church become so enmeshed in society that it no longer has authority to lead?”
I was wondering what your answer to your own question is? I am very interested to hear what you think!
Now get out there and go on a biking or fishing adventure. This book encourages it (grin).