Why do so many people want to change the teachings or practices of their church, when it would be so much easier to join a different church they agree with or leave Christianity altogether?
Catholic writer Matthew Becklo asks in the Catholic World Report, “Why, when so much of the world has embraced the revolution—when it would be so easy to leave or ignore the Church—do progressives desperately try to change the Church, to make it into something it’s not, and never can be? ”
He is speaking specifically of the sexual revolution and the pressure being exerted on the Roman Catholic church to change its teachings about sexual morality, contraceptives, divorce, homosexuality, and the like.
He goes on to answer his question by exploring the “psychology of sin,” the need for people to justify their actions by receiving the church’s approval.
But I’d like to linger on that initial question a little more. He is concerned with the Catholic church, which does have one specific teaching about this and many other issues. Joining another church is not an option for a Catholic who believes that there is only one church, namely, that headed by the Pope. (Although I’ve found that many disgruntled Catholics don’t believe in the Pope or the exclusive claims of their church, so they might as well become Episcopalians.)
Disgruntled Protestants have it easier. Though earlier this week we posted about the finite number of Protestant traditions, I daresay there is a congregation somewhere that will support just about anyone’s personal beliefs, though you might need to be in a large city to find it.
Even with us Lutherans, if anyone in the Lutheran Church Missouri Synod believes in the ordination of women, why not join the ELCA, which does ordain women? Actually, I think that has happened, not just with that issue but with many others, so that with the exodus of progressives, the LCMS today is more conservative than it was a few decades ago.
But more broadly, many people have indeed left the church altogether, often over the issues Becklo raises. Hence, the rise of the “Nones.”
To be clear, it isn’t primarily people outside the church trying to change it to make it conform to the patterns of this world. It’s people inside the church.
We know why some people who no longer believe in what the church teaches leave. The question is, first, why do some of them stay? And, second, why do they try to change the church’s beliefs until they agree with them?
Some people feel a sense of ownership about their church. “This is my church.” “My grandparents founded this congregation.” “You pastors come and go, but I’m not leaving.” That mindset can resist change, of course, but it can also demand it.
Let’s look at a specific change in mainline Protestantism that we discussed yesterday: replacing the gospel of salvation through Christ for everlasting life in Heaven with the social gospel of saving society through social reforms that will establish Heaven on earth. Whose idea was that?
I know that we laypeople need pastors to keep us in line. But it is also true that some of the biggest deviations from orthodoxy often come from pastors. The Wikipedia article on the social gospel cites dozens of ministers and theologians, with hardly any laypeople.
Laypeople can leave or stay to bring change, but more often they stay to obediently follow whatever their pastor says, even when it deviates from orthodoxy. Laypeople tend to be conservative when it comes to their religion, but sometimes that conservatism manifests itself as blindly following their progressive pastors off a cliff. Other times, though, laypeople will keep their church faithful, as happened in the LCMS with the Seminex walkout.
In terms of Becklo’s question, ministers and theologians often feel that they can’t leave a church. This is their livelihood. The minister might live in a parsonage owned by the congregation or the denomination. The theologian might have tenure at a seminary. If they no longer believe in what their church teaches, they have to remain and try to change that teaching so they can agree with it.
This is why progressives stay, but this is also why conservatives can still be found in progressive denominations.
What we have, in general, is progressives leaving conservative churches, with a rear-guard agitating for change. And conservatives leaving progressive churches, with a rear-guard agitating for change.
So churches can always expect a certain amount of conflict and controversy, not just on the conservative/progressive, orthodox/heterodox spectrums but also on less consequential issues. We shouldn’t lose heart at that.
Illustration: Argument by Mohamed Hassan via StockVault, CC0, Public domain
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In