What about that class divide?

[JoeWill]

In the city of Bath where I live, there is a common pattern in which a parish church adopts a modern style of worship (modern hymns - Delirious, Hillsong etc, drums, guitars etc), incorporates elements from the Pentecostal Movement, and within a short space of time becomes filled with like-minded middle-class evangelicals. Many of the members don't actually live in that area but come in from outside.

(The sociologist Grace Davie was one of the first to identify this new type of church, some years ago.)

The problem is that the churches where all of this is going on, are located in some of the most deprived areas of Bath. They are literally situated next to vast areas of local government built housing containing large populations of working-class people, unemployed, single-parents and loads of people with problems such as drug addictions and alcoholism.

The growth of these churches makes almost no impact at all on these areas and peoples (I used to attend one of the said churches and have studied another.)

Now a similar thing is starting to happen on my doorstep. A new vicar has introduced the above changes, and lots of young middle-class couples have started to turn up. Great. But the local working-class estates are virtually unrepresented.

What's the reason?

What can be done?

 

[ContentInHim]

I'm not sure, Joe. Often those in what we in the States call public housing are more traditional if they are believers - i.e. traditional order of service - hymn, announcements, Bible, hymn, sermon, hymn, home! I know that my stepdaughter is really disconcerted when people clap modestly during singing. Personally, I'm disconcerted if they aren't clapping, raising hands and dancing during singing! LOL.

Are the churches doing any outreach into their neighborhoods? Rounding up kids for Sunday School? Going door-to-door to personally invite people to services?

 

[Lisa0315]

In the city of Bath where I live, there is a common pattern in which a parish church adopts a modern style of worship (modern hymns - Delirious, Hillsong etc, drums, guitars etc), incorporates elements from the Pentecostal Movement, and within a short space of time becomes filled with like-minded middle-class evangelicals. Many of the members don't actually live in that area but come in from outside.

(The sociologist Grace Davie was one of the first to identify this new type of church, some years ago.)

The problem is that the churches where all of this is going on, are located in some of the most deprived areas of Bath. They are literally situated next to vast areas of local government built housing containing large populations of working-class people, unemployed, single-parents and loads of people with problems such as drug addictions and alcoholism.

The growth of these churches makes almost no impact at all on these areas and peoples (I used to attend one of the said churches and have studied another.)

Now a similar thing is starting to happen on my doorstep. A new vicar has introduced the above changes, and lots of young middle-class couples have started to turn up. Great. But the local working-class estates are virtually unrepresented.

What's the reason?

What can be done?

Interesting thread! I live in a very remote area. We do not have any mega churches here. However, it seems that the more liberal a church is, the larger it is. There are a handful of mega Conservative Evangelical churches in the State, but not like the Liberal ones.

I never thought about the social class at all. Where I live, you have trailers, modest houses, and mansions practically on top of one another.

I wonder if the social class thing is more of a European thing than here in the States. Like in my church, we have everything from dirt poor farmers to Doctors. Honestly, you cannot even tell the difference here.

Lisa

 

[Criada]

In our church, some of the 'middle class' members have chosen to live on the 'working-class' (or, more accurately, non-working class estates.
We have neighbourhood prayer groups, street barbeques and outreach events - and because church members live there and can invite people to homes on their own 'territory', a lot of the barriers have come down, and we are beginning to see mor
e and more people from these areas coming into the church. But only after they have got to know us and formed real relationships on the outside.

 

[jive4005]

Quote: But the local working-class estates are virtually unrepresented.


I'm wondering how any spirit-filled Christian gets unrepresented... when all along he has had the Great Intercessor sitting beside the throne of God, working on his behalf.

It would appear religion is getting in the way of RELATIONSHIP (with God) out there in Bath. This isn't a slam. It happens right here in my New England town.

People must get over religion and get on with living Christ. We say we put on Christ, then we complain and slack off and find all sorts of reasons not to be part of the solution. If we can't get a group of Christians together and agree enough to be of use to God... where is that victory we say we seek?

Sorry if I sound harse. The intent is honest and loving. We MUST do better... ALL of us!

His,
Rev J

ps: and if the KIDS come to church... how it that bad!?

 

[scraparcs]

Let me ponder this a bit. Needless to say, it's a problem.

 

[Simon_Templar]

I don't think the church's prime concern is social engineering or making sure there is an even social representation within the congregation.

Further, I tend to object to the idea of classifying people by their income level.

However, there are often definet differences in mindset between working class and middle class people.

Working class people tend to be more traditional. Middle class people tend to be more swept up in the vogue of the day.

Working class people tend to be more local community oriented, middle class people tend to be more disconnected from local community.

Working class people tend to stay in the same areas where their families live etc. Middle class people are more mobile, more likely to move to a new area and establish their own family apart from their extended family.

Probably the biggest reason this types of churches appeal to younger middle class, and not really to working class is simply that religion for the working class is more a matter of tradition and community identity. The newer stuff is frequently seen as weird, odd, etc. In the middle class, the kids who were bored in church growing up are now on their own and don't really feel any sense of tradition, or community identity so they are simply looking for something that will keep them interested, offer them some sense of connection etc.

Churches that focus on providing entertaining services, will attract people who to go church for entertainment, or expect church to be entertaining.

sadly, churches for the most part measure success by attendance and membership more than anything else. If they have good numbers then everything is good. So they look around and they see what marketing techniques are working to bring in the numbers and they start doing that.

Usually, not always, but usually when you get to that point churches begin to have less effect in the community because if you're all about numbers, you can't teach things that make the members uncomfortable. you can organize some programs because you have more money... but the vast majority of the members are probably never really going to get involved in any way other than tithing, and its people.. not money, that really has an impact on communities.

 

[JoeWill]

The situation in Great Britain is probably quite different to that of the USA.

The sharpest decline in church attendance since the end of the Second World War has been among the working-class. In the past, statistics have shown that working-class people have a tendency to "believe without belonging" i.e. to retain faith in some Christian doctrines without seeing the need to belong to a church.

One answer might lie with the working-class distrust of institutions.

There must be more to it than that however. When I used to talk to the men I worked with, and people living on the council estates around Twerton, I noticed a massive gulf between their mindset and culture and that of the churches I have been involved with.

It really will take a miracle to bring revival to the working-class areas of Twerton, so I've asked the vicar to do a prayer walk around the area with me.

 

[Simon_Templar]

The situation in Great Britain is probably quite different to that of the USA.

The sharpest decline in church attendance since the end of the Second World War has been among the working-class. In the past, statistics have shown that working-class people have a tendency to "believe without belonging" i.e. to retain faith in some Christian doctrines without seeing the need to belong to a church.

One answer might lie with the working-class distrust of institutions.

There must be more to it than that however. When I used to talk to the men I worked with, and people living on the council estates around Twerton, I noticed a massive gulf between their mindset and culture and that of the churches I have been involved with.

It really will take a miracle to bring revival to the working-class areas of Twerton, so I've asked the vicar to do a prayer walk around the area with me.

I think the same is probably true in the US, refering to the decline in church attendance among the working class. I think the main reason for it is that most just don't see the relavence or importance of active regular attendance.

I think that goes back in part to the more traditional nature of their religion. Mainline traditional churches have experienced more of a decline in attendance than pentecostal contemporary style churches in general across the board.

There are two reasons, I think for that, one is bad one is not so bad.

First, many traditional churches long ago gave up their emphasis on evangelical faith. Its easy for this to happen when the church institutionalized and everyone is technically a member etc.
However, one of the primary tenets of evangelical faith is the necessity of personal conversion, and personal involvement in worship and faith.

When people lose the emphasis that tells them they need to be personally involved in the church and really have a personal faith, a personal relationship, church attendance becomes largely irrelevant.

At that point all that matters is that you maintain membership, and give basic assent to the teachings.

One very telling fact in this regard is that you run into nominal christians all over the place in the traditional churches... in fact the vast majority of the membership on the roles are nominal. Meaning that they are technically members, but they are barely involved, or have any personal commitment to the church or regular worship. This means that people at least go to the trouble to maintain their church membership, get their kids baptized, confirmed, etc. They self identify as belonging to that church.

You almost never see nominal evangelicals or charismatc/pentecostals. The reason is not that people never lose interest, or leave these churches, it is that when a person leaves one of these churches they leave completely. They don't bother maintaining any ties of membership, they don't bring their kids to be dedicated, they don't self identify as members of that church.

In the traditional churches membership in the church is a point unto itself and when the evangelical aspects of faith are lost, the community, tradition etc, still remains, there is still a point for people being members, at least in name, and going to the trouble of making their kids be members.

In the evangelical/charismatc/pentecostal style of church there is no point at all to membership if you aren't actively involved in the evangelical aspects of the faith.

Another big aspect of that is in the traditional churches there is a different ecclesiology. Being a member of the church is important and you are a member of something greater tha the sum of its parts.. in most of the e/c/p churches membership means very little because the ecclesiology is totally different. People jump from one church to another without a second thought because there is no concept of "visible" church.

Both sides have negatives. On the traditional side bad teaching and the lack of evangelical emphasis has lead many people to believe that they are saved simply by church membership.
On the e/c/p side, the ecclesiology has resulted in choas, disunity, and rebellion running rampant, and basically no viable mechanism for reigning in false teachings.

 

[jive4005]

Joe, I think you're onto something. Maybe the problem stems from people putting their trust in institutions instead of putting that trust in God. People talk a good game. God usually gets a back seat in people's lives (even many Christians) and gets called on when things get tight. We've all seen it, most of us have done it.

Jesus says EVERYONE WILL LET YOU DOWN EXCEPT ME. It's true, and we can't expect man (re: church) to fix spiritual things properly.

I think so.

His,
Rev J

 

[JoeWill]

I think you both make good points. But why would the working-class be more vulnerable to the tendency to think of "religion" instead of that true relationship with God which makes churchgoing relevant?


My own ideas drawn from sociology are:

1) Working-class people may struggle more to grasp the reality of abstract concepts that cannot be directly seen, such as the notion of relationship with God.

Bernstein suggested that this characteristic could be related to working-class and middle-class forms of speech. Middle-class people, he thought, were more inclined to encourage discussion with their children, getting them to think about topics of conversation in depth.

Bernstein thought that this was why middle-class pupils performed better at school - they could better understand the abstract concepts that were being taught.


2. Studies have shown that many working-class people are fatalistic, taking the view that "whatever will be will be".

Meanwhile, middle-class people have more interest in shaping their own future and developing their personal self. Evangelical / Pentecostal churches emphasise similar things - the need to prepare for the afterlife, and also the need to develop one's personal spirituality.


3. Working-class distrust of institutions.


But how can a church work with Jesus to cut through those barriers to real faith?

 

[scraparcs]

So what I'm hearing is that there's a local working-class church. The problem is that the working-class folk don't have much money, so the solution? Bring in people and their money. Now how do you bring in people? Marketing techniques show it's by going modern and appealing to the middle class. So you bring in these middle class types and the working class folk are squeezed out by all this change they don't like. Unlike the middle class, who will church hop all they please, the working class folks will either go to the family church or nowhere at all.

To get the working class churched, it's going to have to be local or nothing at all.

(This also explains why I feel like some sort of alien creature around my family. I come from a very working class values family, but I ended up being of the more middle class mindset. It's not going to be comfortable for mixing a congregation.)

 

[scraparcs]

One thing of note in the US is that especially in newer areas (and it seems almost all of the US is quite new in comparison with the UK) that the phenomenon isn't so much that churches in historic areas change but that the middle class will form their own little enclave churches and go there.

I hate being of two mindsets with regards to class divides. I can position myself in either class structure, but I don't fit in as working class or as middle class.

 

[JPPT1974]

Sadly people don't want to put
Their trust in God when you should
As God will help you when other things
Like institutions won't.

 

[Tangeloper]

I'll have to think more on this, but I've got a question about the "classification"... Here in the U.S. the Middle-class IS the working class in most cases... So, I'm guessing you are referring to earnings levels and not otherwise (i.e. low-income vs. middle-to-upper income?)

Also, are you sure that the younger people coming to these churches are not from the area? I know when I go to church I dress-up and often you would not be able to tell that I'm not as "well-off" as I would appear...

I guess I'm not familiar with this either because I grew up Catholic and you went to your local parish (by addresss), so almost everyone was from the same area.

Personally I was raised in an upper-middle class home and now could likely be considered part of the "working poor" so I really don't like all the classification (like the stuff you put in your last post Joe). Perhaps it's just my upper-middle class background that accounts for the differences in what I see in my own children though... I do see a difference in cultural and social things though as I have lived in both types of areas -- upper-middle class, middle-class/working, and low-income.

 

[JoeWill]

I'll have to think more on this, but I've got a question about the "classification"... Here in the U.S. the Middle-class IS the working class in most cases... So, I'm guessing you are referring to earnings levels and not otherwise (i.e. low-income vs. middle-to-upper income?)

In this thread, one emphasis has been upon housing type as a crude indicator of social class. In Britain, local government built housing estates are likely to contain large proportions of working-class people.

I've looked at American empirical studies and how the researchers investigate and try to explain the greater religious participation of the middle-class over there. Usually the researchers use more than one measure of social class such as income plus level of education. Some use type of occupation according to various class schemas - e.g. taking factors such as skill levels into account.

Also, are you sure that the younger people coming to these churches are not from the area?

Most are from the area at the moment. Because housing prices have soared in Britain, many middle-class couples are forced to buy homes at the bottom of the housing market in working-class estates.

Personally I was raised in an upper-middle class home and now could likely be considered part of the "working poor" so I really don't like all the classification (like the stuff you put in your last post Joe). Perhaps it's just my upper-middle class background that accounts for the differences in what I see in my own children though... I do see a difference in cultural and social things though as I have lived in both types of areas -- upper-middle class, middle-class/working, and low-income.

I agree that painting social groups with a broad brush is a problem. Then again the overall differences between social groups are profound and need to be understood.

About 18 months ago I took a questionnaire from door to door, in a disadvantaged working-class estate in Bath called Foxhill. One of the questions was: "If you walked into a local church, how much would you have in common with the people there?" Only 54% of the people that I questioned felt they would have "a lot" or "some things" in common with the churchgoers.

Then I conducted the same questionnaire in an area of expensive privately-owned housing across the road. The same figure rose to about 84%.

People talk a lot about the spiritual mechanics of salvation - how people need to see that Christianity is a relationship, how it is Jesus and not the church who does the saving etc.

But another reality is that there are very real factors that constitute obstacles to working-class people coming to faith. I think the church needs to look into these problems, pray into them, and see what can be done at the practical level.

 

[Simon_Templar]

Joe,

I think some of the factors you mention probably do play an important role. Especially the difference in outlook in regard to working class not looking at things abstractly.

I think that the daily life of the working class are taken up with practical concrete issues. Getting through the day at work, getting enough money to feed the family, provide housing, pay for necessary things for the family etc.

I don't think its really that they are less capable of abstraction, but rather they see it as more irrelavent and pointless. If it doesn't help them put food on the table, or make a living.. its not really relavent to them.

The middle class, or higher classes, don't have to worry at the same level with the 'necessities'. Thus they spend more time considering the more abstract questions of life.

Of course, all that we are saying is generalization and thus probably completely wrong in many individual cases.

However, I also think that a big contributor is simply the mindset and character of the old line traditional churches. They, by and large, do not have an evangelical outlook. Is it really surprising then, that the people who are members of those churches also do not have an evangelical outlook. (or inlook as the case may be).