Christianity is declining in the UK. In particular, the numbers participating in churches are decreasing each year. Of course, not all denominations are declining. A few are growing. What is the pattern of growth and decline across the UK denominations? And what does the future look like for these churches?
These are the types of questions my church growth models are designed to answer. This post will compare church growth and decline for the last five years of available membership data. Then, I will use the Limited Enthusiasm Model of church growth to estimate the strength of each church, represented by its “R” number. This number can indicate that a church is heading for extinction. Another method can estimate the extinction date. Finally, I will examine how churchmanship may influence growth and decline. (A second post will deal with the relationship between decline and progressive ideology.)
Some caveats. Firstly, models are based on assumptions. Thus, they are unlikely to capture a given church’s membership dynamics fully. Usually, though, they are close enough. Secondly, models make forecasts, not predictions. There are always random events that prevent an accurate description of the church’s numerical future. Also, the data is rarely that accurate or consistent. However, the forecasts can help churches examine their policies to enhance growth or combat decline.
The original analyses appear on other pages on this website[1]. I mainly use data collected by Peter Brierley, but where possible, I enhance with data using denominational reports[2].
Growth and Loss Rates for UK Churches
I will use the annual rate of change of membership for the five years to 2020 to estimate the current strength of the denominations[3]. Figure 1 shows these rates in rank order using blue for the “historic” denominations – ones founded before 1900. Red indicates those established after 1900[4].

All bar two of the pre-1900 churches in this set are declining. Only the Free Church of Scotland and Seventh Day Adventists are growing. By contrast, all the post-1900 churches are growing[5]. Have the older churches gone stale? Do the newer ones still retain some of the fire of their founders?
The Welsh denominations are doing particularly poorly: The Welsh Presbyterian, the Church in Wales and the Union of Welsh Independents. Are there some peculiar factors in Wales that act against Christianity?
Both decline and growth rates have stayed constant over many decades. I could have presented a similar chart twenty years ago! The main factor in church decline is the lack of conversions[6]. These churches then get older, and their losses get worse due to higher death rates. Why have the declining churches been unable to increase conversions? How have the growing churches been able to sustain conversions?
Reproduction Potential
In 1999, I proposed that churches grow in a similar way to the spread of an infectious disease[7]. The analogy works when existing church members add new members through personal contact, whether directly or indirectly[8]. I called the model the “Limited Enthusiasm Model” as only a subset of the church recruit and only for a limited time. These people are called enthusiasts.
Using the model with church membership data provides an estimate of the current R number for each denomination, figure 2[17]. We heard about R numbers during the COVID outbreak. For churches, I call it the “Reproduction Potential”. If this number is less than one, enthusiasts fail to reproduce themselves, conversions are too weak, and the church dies out (the shaded region, figure 2)[18]. If the reproduction potential is greater than one, conversions are strong enough to counter losses, and the church may grow. How many people get converted depends on R.

Figure 2 shows that most UK denominations have R less than one and are heading for extinction[9]. They are the same churches as in figure 1! However, the reproduction potential shows that conversion is at its worst in the Welsh and Scottish churches. Is this weakness in recruitment a national trait? Is England somehow more “Christian”? Perhaps there is less theological diversity in the Celtic churches, quenching movements that would stress the need for conversions.
Three churches are increasing their numbers of enthusiasts; FIEC[10], Newfrontiers and the Elim Pentecostal Church. Although their R numbers are only just over one, that is typical for social diffusion[11]. If they maintain this potential to convert, they could reach five times their current number by the end of the century. But they would have to keep this value for eighty years. Quite a challenge!
Range of Reproduction Potentials
Data fitting is fraught with uncertainties. In figure 3, I give a range of values for the reproduction potential. The upper values assume very extreme values for losses from the churches. High losses could mask underlying conversions, though this scenario is unlikely. Even so, the model still indicates that most historic churches will become extinct. It is possible that Catholics, Anglicans and Baptists could just survive, but at vastly reduced numbers.

To narrow the ranges in figure 3, I would need data on conversions, losses and deaths. I was able to obtain such data for the Church of Scotland, where additions are well below losses. Its narrower range for R, well in the extinction region, shows that it has a mountain to climb even to prevent extinction, let alone stop its decline. I expect most of the other denominations above have similar challenges.
Estimated Extinction Dates for UK Churches
Although the Limited Enthusiasm Model can determine church extinction, it cannot forecast its date because this model does not take into account ageing. As congregations age, the proportion of losses caused by death increases. However, I can estimate an extinction date by assuming ageing is a significant component of the church losses. Membership data for ageing churches follow a downward straight line[12]. Figure 4 shows a typical straight-line decline, predicting the United Reformed Church will become extinct by 2038. The decline could slow down, but there is no evidence yet that it will[13].

In figure 5, I have given a timeline of extinction dates for the churches with an R number less than 1. The Baptists and Brethren should last until the end of the century. Their decline is slow, and there is hope that they could return to growth if they make conversions their priority.

The Church of England and Catholics should last until the second half of the century. However, they need to take urgent action now. Stemming losses is not enough. None of us can prevent ageing! Whatever their current denominational emphases, they should put all aside to encourage members to make new disciples who can replicate themselves. Praying for an outpouring of the Holy Spirit would not go amiss either.
Sadly, the immediate future looks bleak for the Church in Wales, Church of Scotland, Episcopalians, Methodists, and older Welsh nonconformists. They need to seriously ask themselves how they have gotten themselves into a situation where extinction is less than 30 years away. What is wrong with their beliefs and practices that are stopping them from making converts? A quick about-turn is needed.
Growth & Decline by Churchmanship
I could provide some pointers to the causes of decline by revisiting the growth & loss rates in figure 1. These rates suggested that decline and extinction are more likely in the older denominations. Maybe they are coming to the end of a lifecycle. But why?
In figure 6, I give the same change rates indicating the churchmanship of the denominations. Specifically, I am thinking of the balance of congregations with evangelical beliefs and those who are liberal[14]. All the evangelical denominations are growing, except for the Brethren. By contrast, all the mixed denominations are declining, with the liberal ones declining the most. Is this because evangelical beliefs on judgement, salvation and Jesus as the only way drive their members to seek converts? Do liberal Christians have insufficient theological reasons to want to spread their faith?

In the 1980s, sociologist Dean Kelley proposed a theory that strict churches are stronger than lenient ones and are more likely to grow[15]. His data showed that conservative evangelical churches in the USA were growing, but the liberals were declining. Figure 6 indicates that nothing has changed. Theology influences behaviour, and there has been a substantial theological drift over time in the older churches. The data suggests that the declining churches are unlikely to survive unless they change their beliefs back to that of their founding fathers.
There is a challenge to evangelicals also. Do all members of evangelical churches know what they are meant to believe? How many are convinced by the realities of hell, heaven and salvation? Do they only talk about these things and do little practical evangelism?
Conclusion
With church decline still continuing after 60 years, I can’t help feeling that God has a controversy with his people (Micah 6:2, AV). God is the author of church growth (1 Cor 3:6-7). Without his Spirit, not one conversion could take place. So, if we keep declining, and he is giving few conversions, we must ask why? Are we offending God? We need to take in the “writing on the wall” summarised in figures 1-5 and answer that question. Or, as He puts it Himself :
If my people, who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven, and I will forgive their sin and will heal their land. (2 Chron 7:14)
One thing is clear, if things carry on as they are, the future of Christianity does not lie in the hands of the older denominations[16]. These products of the Reformation and Puritan times have run their course. They have fulfilled God’s purposes and are no longer part of his plan. The Church of England will cease to be a national church, and the Churches of Scotland and Wales will disappear by the middle of this century. Instead, God will work through the next cycle of denominations – Pentecostal and Evangelical ones, picking up the pieces left by the extinct historic churches.
Is that the future we want? Or could we envisage a future where God sends his Spirit on all denominations, restoring their beliefs, back under the Lordship of Jesus? A future where we finally had the courage to humble ourselves, pray, seek him and turn.
Read Part 2: UK Church Decline and Progressive Ideology
Read: Help! My Church is Heading for Extinction
References & Notes
- The analyses appear on pages: Church of England, Church of Scotland, Church in Wales, United Reformed Church, Methodist Church, Welsh Presbyterians, Welsh Independents, Elim Pentecostal, UK Baptists, Newfrontiers, Roman Catholic, FIEC, Scottish Episcopal Church.
- Brierley P. (2020). UK Church Statistics, No 4, 2015-2025, Brierley Consultancy. Also, previous volumes.
- Sometimes I use 2014-2019 if the 2020 figure is not available. I used attendance for the Church of England and Roman Catholics, generally more accurate than membership in their cases.
- I have excluded some denominations because the most recent data is only estimated. For example, membership in the Assemblies of God Pentecostal church has peaked recently and now declining. But these are only estimates, and they may not be a fair reflection of the church.
- Brierley indicates that some of the smaller “new” denominations are declining, e.g. the Pioneer network.
- See blog post: Church Decline Caused by Lack of Conversions.
- Hayward, J. (1999). Mathematical Modeling of Church Growth, Journal of Mathematical Sociology. 23(4), 255-292. The model is mathematical, using differential equations. It can be presented in system dynamics diagrams that highlight the feedback mechanisms.
- Person-to-person contact, also called word-of-mouth, is used to model the spread of many social phenomena such as ideas, political affiliation or lifestyle choices. See the review in Jeffs R.A., Hayward J., Roach P.A. & Wyburn J. (2016). Activist Model of Political Party Growth. Physica A: Statistical Mechanics and its Applications, 442, 359-372. DOI: 10.1016/j.physa.2015.09.002; arXiv:1509.07805. Physica A.
- The model is calibrated using denominational membership data. See the links in [1] above for more information. I could not perform the analysis for some denominations in figure 1 due to quirks in their membership data. They are excluded from figures 2 and 3.
- FIEC stands for the Fellowship of Evangelical Churches.
- See examples in the paper in [8] and its references. I have earlier estimates of reproduction potentials in Hayward J. (2005) A General Model of Church Growth and Decline. Journal of Mathematical Sociology, 29(3), 177-207, 2005.
- See Ageing and Church Decline.
- Previously, I have been challenged over my use of straight-line analysis to forecast extinction dates. See Anglican Church Decline in the West – The Data. There are many reasons why the decline should eventually slow down. For example, not all congregations have the national dynamics; some may not become extinct. But, until there is persistent evidence of the decline rate slowing, it is legitimate to assume ageing will continue to be the dominant dynamic, and the decline remains straight.
- I based this analysis on the churchmanship in Peter Brierley’s Church surveys. There are churchmanships other than Evangelical and Liberal, e.g. Catholic. My analysis is only a rough indication.
- Kelley D. (1986). Why Conservative Churches are Growing: A Study in the Sociology of Religion. Mercer University Press.
- These conclusions assume that COVID and its associated restrictions do not affect church numbers. It will not be apparent how this shock to the system will manifest itself for some time. Not all church members have returned. Perhaps more people will turn to Christ. We shall see.
- I could not obtain R numbers for some of the churches in figure 1. For example, Vineyard and the Redeemed Church of God did not have consistent data over the 20-year period. There were similar data issues with some other denominations.
- David Flavell has estimated the R number for the Methodist Church from 1930 to the present, showing it drops from 1 to a value below 0.7.
The Church R Number, and Part 2. David E Flavell, August 2020.
Tags: Church Statistics, Evangelical, Extinction, liberal, Reproduction Potential
Pingback: UK Church Decline and Progressive Ideology - Church Growth Modelling
Pingback: Religion news 24 May 2022 - Religion Media Centre
Fascinating article. Does your data show whether the sex of the lead minister is significant in whether a church is more or less likely to grow?
No, that level of detail is not in the public domain. Even if it were available, it might not give a fair comparison. I once heard a paper at a conference that indicated in one USA denomination women ministers were more likely to be given failing churches than male ministers.
Pingback: Unless the Church of Scotland returns to the Gospel, it will die - SAVED News
I track the Church of Scotland’s membership figures every year and I have my own model.
I model the attrition rate and that is starting to flatten out, to around 5% per year.
If that is correct then the membership will stabilise at around 100,000 around 2040.
However, age is a factor.
Edinburgh Presbytery:
70 congregations
25 new members in the past year
18,700 members in total
51% of these are over the age of 65
This means that by 2040 51% of the current members will be very old or dead.
About 2/3 of the losses each year across the denomination are due to deaths. The other third is people leaving, and there is no evidence people are leaving because the church is too socially conservative. If anything it is the opposite, with people going to the Free Church of Scotland, independent churches or no churches at all.
Thank you for all these details, I will think on them.
If losses level out, then growth should slow down. Whether that slow down leads to survival will depend on whether church members can reproduce themselves enough through new converts. It is this ability to make converts which measured by the R number. It is this number that is well under the threshold of extinction for the church of Scotland. As the church gets smaller, less people get added. The loss of congregations would make this effect worse. Ageing means the total loss rate will increase as church death rates increase.
But there is hope. It does not take many people to reproduce themselves in converts to initiate future recovery. This is not just about training church members in outreach, but that they are convinced by the need to make new converts. That is, for the sake of the eternal destiny of those people, rather than the survival of the church.
John
Till a congregation opens up and talks about Christ then their future is gloomy, We need to love the Lord and not just love our church. Many say their faith is private but that is contrary to scripture. There are none so good that they need not be saved and none so bad that they cannot be saved,
Very interesting thanks.
A question on the extinction date. Many of the churches due to be extinct by your model have young and commitment members who will be alive,and atleast some still committed, well past your extinction dates. What is your baseline in membership for ‘extinction’ ?
Hi Ben
Thank you for this question. The purpose of modelling is not so much to forecast the future but to inspire people, to ask questions, challenge the models, and hopefully pick up some ideas on how to turn decline into growth. Your question reveals a possible flaw in the modelling or some flaws in the thinking.
Firstly I used two models to indicate extinction. The first one determined R numbers. If less than 1, then the church is heading for extinction. The models are sophisticated and the result is robust. But it averages across people regardless of age. So although it indicates extinction, it cannot say when extinction occurs. If extinction is to be avoided there should be sufficient slowing down in the decrease of membership. For most of the churches indicating extinction, there is no slowing down.
The second “model” is much simpler. It simply fits a straight line through the data. if it is straight in then projects to the date membership is zero. The underlying assumption is that the dominant process is ageing, leading to death. So how can a date of, let’s say, 2050, be consistent with a denomination that currently has members in their 20s? As you rightly say, they should still be alive in 2050!
In reality, a denomination is made up of individual congregations. Some are close together, but most a long away apart. the total denomination figure has averaged across all congregations. To get a more accurate figure, we would need data for every individual congregation and see which ones could still survive by 2050. These would include the ones containing those people in 20s now. It all depends on where these young people are. If they are all in one congregation, then the congregation survives and the denomination survives, but only as a handful of congregations. However, if these young people are spread between different congregations, then although they are still alive by 2050, there are not enough of them in one place to sustain a congregation, especially if they are far apart. They will have had to move to a different denomination when their congregation is too small. and their original denomination has died out. So, having young people in a denomination now is no guarantee that the denomination. can last as long as the individuals. Although I preached in many Baptist churches in south Wales, they had many non-baptist members who had started life in other denominations which had closed. the Baptists were the last ones left in town.
Having said that. I would still expect the denominations with congregations over most of the country to have a slowing down in their decline, precisely for the reasons you say. I must admit, I thought by now there would be some evidence in the data, so far there is none. As post-COVID-lockdown data starts coming in, hopefully, we will see some slowing down.
Thank you for an excellent question
John
When you say UK do you not mean GB? Would love to see this with the full UK figures including the churches in NI.
They are mainly churches in the GB countries. Many, like Church of England, Church of Scotland, are in just one country. Some, like the Baptist and Newfrontiers include Northern Ireland, which is why I titled it UK churches. I have made a note to myself that should look at Northern Ireland in the future. Thank you for your comment. John
Thanks for your interesting work. You ask, ‘How have the growing churches been able to sustain conversions?’ But have they? The question assumes that is how they have grown, but this doesn’t account for the growth in those congregations by transfer from other churches or immigration. The Free of Church of Scotland has had growth from the CofS, the charismatic churches have also grown by transfer, and the SDA and African churches through immigration. Considered as a whole, is there any percentage increase in UK church membership through conversions growth?
How might population decline affect some of those figures? If, for example, Welsh Presbyterianism, or what’s left of it, is concentrated in the valleys and areas of declining population, does the comparison tell us much?
Another thing that would be interesting would be to discover if smaller or larger churches tend to produce more converts per member.
Conversion vs transfer. No churches record how much of the additions are conversion and how much transfer. It would be fascinating to know. Studies on Vineyard additions in the USA indicate most were conversions though from nominal Christian backgrounds. I have personal knowledge of a number of newer congregations in the central belt of Scotland where the bulk of additions are conversion. But then I also know of some mainstream churches where all the growth is through transfer. For the total picture, we do not know.
Free church of Scotland has seen transfers from church of Scotland. But they are also planting churches and I have heard they have seen conversions. I know of one Charismatic church that went through a period of substantial conversion growth – mainly through Alpha courses – and running through family and friendship networks. African churches have benefitted hugely from immigration. The only one I looked at was the Redeemed Church of Christ. They are planting many churches but I do not know the transfer convert balance. Clearly I an going to need to contact some churches and try and find out more!
Welsh Presbyterian. Sone of their decline could be due to a decline in the Welsh-speaking population. But that is not the sole cause. On a national level, they had 1600 churches in 1920, they now have 600. That does not sound too bad. But the average congregation size has gone from 112 to about 30, across English as well as Welsh congregations. Indeed the Welsh ones in the North and West hold up better. One area where they have been hit is the Rhondda Valley. around 35 congregations in 1920. I think it is just 4 now. The population of the valley has about halved in that time. Welsh speaking has declined, but not by that extent. They lost people faster than population decline. But they losses are consistent with a failure to convert and congregations ending through ageing.
The relationship between congregation size and conversion would also be fascinating. I know of no such studies in UK churches.
Thank you for your questions
John
Hello,
I am just wondering if there is any data relating to Catholicism and breaking it down by theological outlook. Liberal, Conservative or traditional.
Given in the Roman Catholic Church there is one church ergo liberals and conservatives are in the same church. Although from personal experience they do tend to gather in different parishes. Anecdotally I’ve seen many more young people and converts from atheism and Protestantism in conservative parishes.
God Bless.
Pingback: The Free Church General Assembly – Has the Free Church Plateaued? – TheWeeFlea.com
Pingback: WHAT MAKES A CHURCH GROW? UK RESEARCH SHOWS IT IS ENTHUSIASM FOR EVANGELISM | New Life Narrabri
For churches with a very diverse theology, i.e. C of E, is there any evidence that there is a difference within the denomination based on the theological position of individual sections? I wonder if the C of E is actually seeing growth in “Holy Trinity Brompton”-type congregations (evangelical, charismatic) whilst greater decline in more liberal wings. Certainly I would expect that most of the evangelism is being carried out by members of such churches.
Hi Matthew
That is a good question that I would like an answer to. Church denominations do not break down membership or attendance figures by the churchmanship of their congregations. If we had that type of detail, we might find the C of E is not heading for extinction because there is a growing component. However, Peter Brierley did 3 church growth surveys in England when working for Christian Research: 1989, 1998 and 2005. The data was compiled using responses from every congregation in England. Each one was asked to report their churchmanship. In the Church of England, the number of evangelical congregations increased:
1989 2,929 18%
1998 3,589 22%
2005 4,273 26%
By comparison, the number of liberal congregations decreased:
1989 2,934 18%
1998 2,163 13%
2005 1,630 10%
With the percentage share of liberal congregations going down and evangelicals going up, that would support the hypothesis that liberal congregations are more likely to decline than evangelical congregations. It would also support the hypothesis that there is more evangelism among evangelical churches. Notice, that neither constitutes a majority in the church. The other groupings, which stayed roughly the same over these years were: Anglo-Catholic 12%, Broad, 23%, Catholic 14%, Low church, 13%, Others 2%, using 2005 percentage shares. Some congregations indicated more than one category, only the primary category was given in the figures.
Among evangelicals, there were 3 roughly equal groups in 2005: Broad evangelical, Mainstream evangelical, and Charismatic evangelical. I must admit, I am not sure quite what Broad Evangelical men’s and how it differs from the mainstream! As this was self-identified different church leaders may not be working with the same definitions. But it gives some indication of the shift in the balance of the CofE towards evangelical and away from liberal. I am not sure this balance is reflected in the national leadership, or among bishops, which may be much less evangelical.
The above figures were about the number of congregations. If the number of people had been used, then all categories declined, but evangelical declined the slowest. Being evangelical does not guarantee growth, but those figures suggest evangelical congregations are more likely to grow. Among evangelicals, the mainstream evangelical is the one subgroup that saw the number of members of such congregations increase. This suggests evangelism and conversion are more likely in mainstream evangelicals than among either the broad evangelical or the charismatic.
The is no data after 2005. Has the percentage of evangelical congregations in the C of E continued to increase? Or have some of the evangelical ones become broader, and dare I say moved to liberal. We now have open evangelicals, affirming evangelicals, neo-evangelical, post-evangelical etc. Are these legitimately evangelical compared with a 1989 (or earlier) definition, or just pathways from evangelical to a liberal theology? There is scope for in-depth research here.
John
I wonder whether the Baptist churches are a special case, because they are a federation of churches with independent governance, and there is a mixture of progressive and evangelical congregations. So the extent of decline may be mostly due to the decline of the progressive congregations, and when they have died out the decline will level off or reverse as the evangelical congregations are the ones left marking time or growing.
I have also had the thought that possibly the decline in Baptists and the growth in FIEC could be partly due to transfer growth in the form of entire congregations leaving the Baptist Union (or equivalent) because of a perception of the acceptance of progressive ideology, and joining FIEC who are theologically conservative. So many confounding factors!
Most Baptists are in the Baptist Union of Great Britain and they are an association rather than a denomination with a specific confession of faith. It may well be that most of their decline comes from the progressive congregations rather than evangelical, but there is no data available to investigate this. In a reply to another questioner, I said that Peter Brierley had data on the churchmanship of congregations in England in each denomination for the years 1989, 1998 and 2005. Remarkably, the percentage of evangelical congregations among Baptists changed from 84% to 89% over that period. By contrast, liberals stayed at 5%. I have no experience with Baptist churches in England. However, in Wales, where my experience lies, I reckon the split was nearer 50:50. Perhaps Baptists often describe themselves as evangelical because that is what people expect, but they have a very broad definition of what evangelical means.
Of the growing denominations, e.g. FIEC, there is no way of determining how much of the growth is conversion and how much is transfer. Some must be transfer growth, I know people who have made this change. But I also listen to reports by individual congregations and I know FIEC, Elim, Vineyard and Newfrontiers who continue to report conversions at the congregational level.
many thanks
John
Greetings from Sydney. I did a scenario planning exercise on the future of the Uniting Church in Australia (UCA) (formerly Methodist, Presbyterian, and Congregational) for a PhD. Yes: the UCA experience is similar to the UK one, but the UCA’s health, education and welfare work is expanding (if the UCA were listed on the Australian Stock Exchange this work would make it one of the country’s largest “corporations”). I encourage other churches to do their own scenario planning: http://www.churchfutures.com.au
Hi Keith
Thank you for sharing this. Fascinating work. I think scenario planning has much to offer churches. Did the UCA take this on board? Did they choose a particular scenario?
John
Pingback: The R-Number for UK Churches – Kouyanet
Speaking as an atheist, I was delighted by the results of your modelling. We are growing year after year, winning the battle of ideas. Even I as an atheist though, I do not think Christian churches will go extinct to the extent predicted by your modelling.
I do think your modelling is flawed. As the churches become smaller the remaining membership will become more hard core making it easier to replicate the smaller membership. I would recommend looking at Logit / Probit type models. My MSc is in Econometrics, and I do not feel comfortable with the mechanical predictions of your models, the reality is much more complex to model.
Are the main churches in trouble as mass membership organisations? Most certainly. Are they going extinct? No certainly not. What will need to change though is their structure. Maintaining expensive buildings just isn’t possible. Mostly online is the future of most congregations and perhaps coming together for important events as a wider group. Having said that the social aspect of going to church does seem important to Christians. Christians given their dependence on the over 65s are destined to decline in numbers, that is undeniable. With a flatter future age profile the opportunities for Christians to come together online as a group will increase as the largely non-internet older Christians die off.
If you haven’t seen it have a look at the British Social Attitudes (BSA) survey 36’s Religion chapter. It also talks about replication. According to BSA 36, some 33% of the British population are either very non-religious or extremely non-religious. This percentage is only likely to increase as the 65+ Christians die off during the next 20 years.
What does it say to Christians that despite atheists having no central organisation, a third of the British population (BSA 36) are now extremely non-religious / very non-religious, i.e. nearly double the 18% (BSA 36) that claim to attend a religious service at least once per month. Christians do not need large formal organisations (i.e. churches) to promote their ideas if they are sound, they will promote themselves. Atheism in Britain has clearly demonstrated that a central organisation just isn’t needed. Learn from your more successful opponent. The best atheists have is Humanists UK, which is a broader non-religious organisation rather than a narrower atheist only organisation.
As Christians you are in the best situation you are ever going to be in. You have a sympathetic Queen that in 70 years has refused to meet with atheists as a group, despite her going to church regularly and meeting with every other faith under the sun. Her oldest son and likely soon to be King ‘Chuck’ is even more anti-atheist. Schools continue to present a Christian only view of events such as the birth of Jesus. The BBC refuses to let atheists onto ‘thought for the day’. ONS continues to ask a loaded pro-religion question on the England and Wales Census thereby guaranteeing public funding to churches and faith schools.
As Christians you have a fist full of aces, but year after year you play a losing hand! How!? In 20 years time Christians will look back to today with fond memories and regret not making the most of their current advantages. Christians current privileged access to public funding, schools and Government is very unlikely to continue. Your modelling provides a worse case scenario that I honestly don’t think will actually occur, even though my heart sincerely hopes your modelling is correct. Ultimately I listen to my brain not my heart. Christians need to look up and observe the world around them, engage with it and most importantly build bridges with the non-religious majority (52% BSA) – most of which (33% / 52%) simply do not have any interest in being converted.
Dear Keith
I am not surprised at your delight in these results. I was a committed atheist myself once, and I would have been over the moon at the results! However, not now.
Let me deal with your first main point concerning the modelling.
“You do not think churches will go extinct because the modelling is flawed.”
There are two models being considered: The system dynamics “limited Enthusiasm model” and a simple ageing model.
Limited enthusiasm model.
This model computes the R number from the data and thus decides whether there is sufficient conversion and generation of enthusiasts to avoid extinction R>1. All with R <1 are heading for extinction. This result is robust when the ranges of R values are used. The model does not indicate when that extinction occurs as the model does not take account of the age distribution of members – that is its “flaw” – more correctly, a simplifying assumption. The model just shows the denomination getting closer to zero in a negative exponential fashion. It is possible to build age effects into the model, but as denominational age distributions are not known, it would not be possible to calibrate such a model. The R number is unaffected by age profiles, so is this result is not flawed
Simple Ageing Model
Most declining denominations are showing an approximately straight-line decline for the last 20 years. None are showing any consistent slowing down in decline. This behaviour suggests ageing is currently the dominant causal force. Fitting a simple straight line says that “if ageing remains the dominant force, then extinction must occur at the determined date.”
I agree there are reasons why some slowing down should happen. The main reason is that the total figures are an average over many congregations. Some are growing and probably will survive beyond that predicted denominational extinction date. But at this point in time, the effect on the data of such healthy congregations is not discernible. Giving these extinction dates does help in providing a warning to denominations that complacency is not an option. The model will become “flawed” once slowing down is observed, but the evidence is not there yet.
Potentially, as congregations become smaller, the remaining members could become more “hardcore” and start replication again. Possible for younger people. In practice, most declining congregations are elderly and do not go down the hardcore route. Their pastoral needs are high, and their ability to become “hardcore” is low.
The internet will help connect people when buildings cannot be maintained. But the lesson from the growing churches overseas is that their growth is linked to physically meeting together and engaging with local communities. Of course, local physical meetings and internet connections can be combined.
“Logit, Probit models”. I am aware of these. I use system dynamics models, as do an increasing number of economists, because such models explain behaviour over time in terms of the causal structure of the model hypotheses. The different effects of the causal processes can be compared, and potential intervention points may be identified. Generally, this makes system dynamics models better than other methodologies regarding behavioural explanations, system change and theory building. Stochasticity can be added if variations around a mean behaviour need to be investigated. Normally, it is not possible to pursue this with statistical hypotheses because the non-linearities in the model mean that the statistical errors are not normally distributed.
“BSA surveys”. Always interesting. I used to set student modelling projects where they had to explain these BSA trends. The trouble with such surveys is that they measure opinions, but they cannot test how strongly those opinions are held, especially when people get stressed through poverty, persecution etc. Many years ago, most people in the UK would have said they were Christian, but in practice, they were quite nominal, not attending church, or engaging with religion much at all. They said it because, in their context, it was expected of them. People overestimate how religious people were in the past. Apart from a brief period in the middle of the 19th century, it is doubtful if most British people were ever particularly religious. Practising Christianity was always a minority interest. So, with Atheism now a viable option on a survey and the institutions and the state no longer expecting people to be Christian, surveys are probably now giving a more realistic assessment of religious attitude than in the past. The context has changed, and people can now say atheist when once they would have said “Christian” but thought, “but I don’t do anything about it”. That will could accelerate once our sympathetic queen has passed. But it could also change back in the future if the context changes again.
“Religious Expression vs Atheist Expression”. Christians, and other religions such as Islam, do not need organizations to promote their ideas. But the power for growth in these religions comes from the weekly meeting together. There is intentional reinforcement of the faith, training in how to live as a religious person, how to share the faith etc. I agree this type of dynamic is not needed in Atheism. It is not even clear how it would occur. Some humanists tried Sunday gatherings, but I think they have declined now. There is no reason why atheists and/or humanists could not meet locally and often just like churches. But they don’t. I suspect most are not that committed to it. For many atheists, Atheism is an absence of belief, not a belief. There is no reason to meet up with others.
The BBC do not let atheists on Thought for the Day. It is a religious spot, and Atheism is not a religion. It is not really a single entity as such. Could Atheism come up with a set of core beliefs? The BBC places strict limits on the religions that go on Thought for the Day. I know some of the people who do these, and they have to be careful what they say. The BBC are always getting complaints that people use the slot to “proselytize”. In response, some of the “Thoughts” for the day have such little religion; they just as well be atheists!
“As Christians, you have a fist full of aces”. State preferment does not always create a favourable climate for Christian mission. Sociologists have investigated this over the years and conclude churches are stronger when they do not have state sponsorship. This result is one of the reasons given for the relative strength of the church in the USA with church weakness in Western Europe, especially the continent.
“Christians need to look up and …” I fully agree Christians need to look up, but not to observe the world around them; instead, they need to look up to God himself. Christians are confident that their mission will be successful not because of the response of the world, or because of the strength of the church, or any societal advantages, but because they believe in an all-powerful God. It is not that “most have no interest in conversion”. Without God’s intervention, they cannot even understand what the gospel is about, let alone be converted. But when God moves, even the most opposed see and change their mind, as I can testify. That is why I am sure that although the future church in the UK will not look like it has done for the past 250 years, I am fully confident that the Lord will use the church there is to advance belief in him across the country. I am confident because I trust him.
Thank you for your comments, which I have enjoyed answering, and I appreciate the time you took to put your thoughts together.
John
John’s quite right to point out that people weren’t as Christian in previous decades as is often assumed – which means that the ostensible decline isn’t all that it seems at first sight.
Keith, if you truly think that atheism is “winning the battle of ideas” you are in for shock after shock after shock.
Hi, fascinating article – but you class FIEC as a separate denomination, which it isn’t – which poses a problem for your analytics, i think! I wonder if there’s a valid reason for classing it that way?
Dear Nicola
Thank you for your comments. I agree that the FIEC are not a denomination in the sense of the Church of England or Methodists. The churches are all independent. However, the central organisation, FIEC, assists member congregations with legal matters, training, network etc. They have conferences for ministers and elders and central initiatives. Congregations that become members have to subscribe to its statement of faith. So it does act like a denomination. Someone once described it as a “presbyterian light” approach – a little bit tighter than the congregational approach because of its strict statement of faith. From my point of view, membership and attendance figures are produced for the FIEC as a whole. The Baptist Union of Great Britain and the Union of Welsh Independents have a similar associational basis.
John
Thanks John. That’s very helpful! Nicola
This is a fascinating article and just saw it posted in Premier Christian Magazine as they mentioned only 3 churches were growing. However, I noticed in your model that RCCG & Vineyard are growing faster than the other three: Elim, New Frontiers, and FIEC. I think it’s important to note that we are one body playing different roles in God’s plan. My query is how come RCCG & Vineyard fell off the grind when it came to growth – I didn’t get a clear understanding of why this happened. Secondly, in your model have you considered churches are growing online as a result of the pandemic, so now we don’t just have physical attendance but also virtual attendees. This is something that churches are struggling with as congregants are no longer committed to one place of worship but can be committed to online churches. This is excellent work and would love further information
RCCG and Vineyard did grow faster over the 5 years from 2015-2020. However, I excluded them from the R number computation due to inconsistencies in their data over the 20-year period 2000-2020. During that period, Peter Brierley revised the figures for RCCG downwards, but these revisions were not backdated to 2000. So, there was insufficient data to find an R number. Vineyard had a period where they declined before they grew again. I have no idea of the reason for this. Whether real or spurious data figures, I could not fit this to the model. A few other denominations had similar issues. It needs at least 15 years of data to obtain an R number reliably. Indeed I had to exclude some denominations altogether. For example, for the Assemblies of God, I only had estimated data for the last 6 years and any analysis based on estimates would not be reliable.
This post did not make it clear why these had been excluded. I have amended the post with a footnote – messing up my numbering system in the process! Thank you for pointing it out.
I deliberately stop the analysis at lockdown. I agree the nature of participation has changed. I would always prefer to use attendance rather than membership, but attendance figures are not available for most denominations. I hope denominations do think of recording online participation as well, but that could be tricky. I think we may have to wait another 5 years before we have a clear picture of the effects of lockdown.
Dear John,
I wrote an article a few years back https://davideflavell.wordpress.com/2014/04/25/pyramid-schemes/ comparing the straight line decline of Methodism with the infectious disease model.
There is a whole line of sociological theory called the Church/Sect model, which fits in with your analysis. A great book to read is Finke & Stark – The Churching of America – it’s not only persuasive but very wittily written.
My stats for the Methodist Church suggested that the lights go out in 2033, but with Covid, I think that might be even sooner – there comes a point where the organisation throws in the towel, and will either ask to join the Americans on the Anglicans.
Every blessing to you – David E Flavell
Dear David
Thank you for your message. I remember this paper of yours from the previous contact that we had. This is super work, along with your 2020 papers on Church R numbers. I have now cited these on my analysis of the Methodist church and on my recent blog post. I love the idea of the R number changing over time, which it must do. I have models, not yet on the website, which attempt to describe how conversion potentials change with factors in the church and society. Your graphs would be an ideal base run. I would be very interested to know how you make your estimates of R over time.
I am familiar with the Finke and Stark book the church sect model. I heard Rodney Stark speak in meetings about 20 years ago. Very inspiring and challenging.
I have sent you an email to continue the contact
best wishes
John
COMMENTS ARE NOW CLOSED
If you have any questions, please email or use the contact page
Pingback: Why are so many UK Churches heading for extinction?
Pingback: Why is the Church in decline? | Life's Random Solutions