What UK Evangelicals think about the atonement

This is another piece based on a compilation of data from the various surveys of the Evangelical Alliance 21^st Century Evangelicals research Programme 2011 -2016. A version that is easier to download and print can be found here

https://btcloud.bt.com/web/app/share/invite/EuWWcsb5d6

Bebbington suggested one of the distinguishing features of the evangelical movement has always been what may be termed crucicentrism, a stress on the sacrifice of Christ on the cross. This emphasis may have originated in the European pietistic roots of 18^th Century revivals, but rarely is expressed among evangelicals in sacramental form or devotion to the body and blood of Christ. Indeed when evangelicals celebrate holy communion it is referred to as the Lord's Supper or breaking of bread and is a symbolic shared meal described as a memorial of the passion of Jesus who died for our sins. In a number of our surveys we posed a range of specific questions around this issue some of which sought to unpack more detail about the various emphases and atonement theologies held by UK evangelicals today. In recent years theories of atonement have been debated and certain accounts have proved controversial. Our data show that the vast majority of evangelical believers accept and map their personal experience of Christ unto the penal substitution account. However there are some who are theologically educated or reflective, who countenance multiple perspectives or feel uneasy about taking the idea of blood sacrifice to appease an angry God too far.

The clearest evidence that the cross is important for all evangelicals is the finding that

• 99% either agree (12%) or strongly agree (87%) that the message of the cross has made a huge difference in their own lives . Does belief touch society? - survey Easter 2011

In the same survey almost as many endorsed a penal substitution view.

• 91% strongly agree (and a further 5% agree) that on the cross Jesus bore the punishment for my sins

Even among younger Christians surveyed for the "Building Tomorrow's Church Today" report in 2016

• 89 % agreed that On the cross Jesus received God's punishment for our sins (81% agreed a lot – 8% agreed a little)

In Confidently sharing the gospel? - August 2012

• 90% agreed (27%) or strongly agreed (63%) that the central message of the gospel is that on the cross Jesus bore the punishment for my sins.

In Does belief touch society? - Easter 2011 we tested out some other formulations of atonement theory.

• 91% strongly agreed (and a further 6% agreed) Christ's blood is the final and only effective sacrifice for our sins

• 89% strongly agreed (and a further 9% agreed) that Jesus defeated the powers of evil through his death

• 84% strongly agreed (and a further 11% agreed)that God Himself was suffering in Christ for us in the crucifixion

• 59% strongly agreed (and a further 36% agreed) that Jesus' sacrifice inspires Christians to make sacrifices for others

• 39% strongly agreed (and a further 11% agreed) that at the cross God poured out His holy anger upon his son.

The most interesting response in this section was to the statement that at the cross God poured out His holy anger upon His son. Just 51% of people agreed with this particularly stark formulation about propitiation, with 22% unsure, and nearly 27% rejecting it. Women were less likely than men to agree, while those aged 35-55 were less likely to agree with the statement than younger people or older people. There was a significant variation in terms of denominational beliefs about the statement: members of the Pentecostal tradition and the Church of Scotland had high levels of agreement (50%+), compared with Anglicans, Methodists and those from emerging churches (less than 30%).

Although just a few denied the statement that Jesus' sacrifice inspires Christians to make sacrifices for others, the number strongly agreeing (59%) with the statement was significantly lower compared to most of the other statements, suggesting that this is not seen by many evangelicals as the central message of the cross

In Evangelical about Evangelicalism - March 2016, we framed a set of questions designed to delve deeper into interpretations of the atonement. The different theological emphases were mainly expressed in terms lines taken from of hymns and songs frequently sung in evangelical churches.. In all probability this would tend to raise the level of endorsement by evangelicals... which as the table shows was overwhelming. To underline the point that atonement theology remains a distinctive feature for evangelicals an additional column shows the proportion of the 140 or so respondents who did not identity as evangelicals who were totally convinced on each point.

Table How far do you believe in these statements?
Answer Options	I'm totally convinced	I accept and believe this in general terms	I have some doubts or questions about this		Non evangelicals who were totally convinced
On the cross as Jesus shed his blood and died the wrath of God was satisfied	80%	11%	7%		39%
The crucifixion is the greatest turning point in history	87%	8%	3%		64%
On the cross Jesus defeated all the powers of evil	90%	7%	2%		59%
Jesus died on the cross to take the punishment for my sins	90%	6%	2%		50%
Love so amazing so divine, demands my soul, my life, my all	93%	6%	0%		71%
Jesus died on the cross as the perfect sacrifice for the sins of the world	93%	5%	1%		58%
All who come in faith find forgiveness at the cross	94%	5%	1%		71%
answered question						1433
skipped question						51

There were 283 comments on this block of questions; one can assume that most of these came from respondents who were more theologically literate than average, an more likely to be in church leadership roles.

95 responses highlighted the importance of the resurrection alongside the cross as central to the Christian Gospel. For example:

The cross cannot be separated from the resurrection. Only when the two are combined can one say that this was the turning point of history.

In Scripture the revelation of the cross is always accompanied, fulfilled and completed by the resurrection of Jesus. We do not worship a dead Saviour but a living Lord.

I believe the death and resurrection give us the greatest turning point in history and that the two shouldn't be separated as the coming of God's Kingdom depends on both events. The same applies to 'On the cross Jesus defeated all the powers of evil" - one of the greatest powers of evil is death itself.

But also

I think we jump too fast to the resurrection and don't stop and wait at the cross to take in how much pain Jesus takes on behalf of a suffering world. We've lost how to lament.

38 responses concentrated on the idea that there were a number of approaches to atonement and explanations of the purpose and power of the crucifixion to be found in Scripture and tradition and that mostly these were complementary and to be welcomed.

Modern evangelicals throw the baby out with the bath water - it's not just that it's correct to believe Jesus satisfied the wrath of God (although it is); it's that ALL these voices can be affirmed. It's the typically termed 'liberal' evangelicals that are not only wrong in denying penal substitution; they're actually *missing out*. Theirs is a deficient view but also a dissatisfying one.

The statements seem somewhat PSA ( penal substitution atonement) loaded. I don't have a huge problem with PSA, but as one approach to the atonement amongst many, a partial explaining in terms that we can grasp but which aren't necessarily 100% literal or accurate, because of the other problems raised if they are.

I believe there are many ways of explaining and understanding the cross and atonement and that they're not mutually exclusive. Often I find that the Church today makes this a very personal and individualistic thing and in doing so might sometimes miss the point.

The atonement can be seen in many ways - penal substitution, satisfaction, christus victor, etc, and I wouldn't want to be excessively dogmatic here!

I believe the cross is multi-faceted, both absorbing and defeating evil (Christus victor), and satisfying God's righteous anger at sin (Christus mediator), as well as being an example for all disciples (Christus exemplar).

Substitutionary atonement is only one way of understanding the cross, there are other biblical understandings, just as important, and some more understood in today's cultures, e.g conquering the powers of evil.

Penal substitution was the central theme of a further 38 comments, mostly endorsing this emphasis although 9 were clearly against the doctrine and 3 questioned or had some doubts on the matter.

I think that it is vital that we believe in penal substitution, that Jesus died on the cross for the forgiveness of the sins of those who have faith in him, taking upon himself God's righteous anger against sin. This isn't just 'a theory' of the atonement, it is the heart of the gospel.

Christ is my substitute on the cross. He died so that I don't have to.

It is not the Roman torture device that is worth remembering but the substitutionary death of Jesus Christ that's important.

I am totally convinced of penal substitutionary atonement, understanding that it is not the only work that occurred on the cross and that we should not necessarily regard any of these works as more or less significant than the others.

And with a different view

This is very hard to explain. I consider myself "evangelical" because I believe in the resurrected Christ and think the lives of others become complete when they do the same. I previously held a very mainstream atonement theology. Now I would view things very differently regarding how the cross works, and also believe the Bible can in fact support that alternative view. I still consider the cross pivotal in how we are brought home to the God who made us, shown how to live in His love, and reconciled with him in our sin and brokenness.

Difficult to understand how God who is love can decide that his Son must be killed even if it is because he "so loved the world". Easy to see that primitive cultures think that their god can be satisfied with a blood sacrifice (very simplistic), but harder to see that this is actually how it works with God who is so beyond us in everything

I don't find penal substitution in Scripture. I regard it as a human interpretation of the atonement that may in some contexts be useful in helping people to understand but is certainly not the only true model. I am concerned that in contemporary culture it can do more harm than good.

The Bible nowhere says that Jesus was punished - that would be the opposite of "justice". "The chastisement of our peace" does not say the punishment of the sacrificial lamb. How could the lamb be punished? Nowhere in OT or NT is there any such suggestion. Jesus stood in the way of the wrath of God.

The comments contained several (17) which discussed the doctrine of propitiation, or the satisfaction of God's wrath. Some wanted to affirm the importance of this view of the atonement but a majority of them expressed a disagreement or unhappiness (9) or at least a questioning (3) of this emphasis.

I believe the Bible teaches propitiation, that is, that there is an offence against God that needs to be dealt with (and was by Christ's sacrifice) as well as the removal of sin from man. The cross satisfies the wrath of a holy God as well as cleansing man from sin.

The wrath of God is against sin not people. I now find it illogical to believe in a God of love who would punish and take His wrath out on His only Son. God's wrath was not satisfied by seeing His Son die in agony - that is not the God of love I know and worship. Jesus did not therefore 'kill' Jesus. The sin of the people - us - did. Yes, His was the perfect sacrifice for the sins of the world and we can only find forgiveness at the cross.

I believe that Jesus did choose to fulfil God's plan by agreeing to go to the cross so that man could be fully in relationship with God. I do not think this was linked to God's anger and wrath being satisfied - rather so that God's love could be fully glorified.

I am unsure about "propitiation" as a basis for a theology of the cross.

Substitutionary Atonement is primary way of explaining the Cross and its efficacy, but should not be taken as a sacrifice to appease God's Wrath.

I understand that no 2. is a line from a song which I enjoy very much but if pressed I am uncomfortable with the use of the word 'wrath'.

There were 9 comments which specifically mentioned approval of the Christus Victor theory of atonement albeit recognising that the full victory is in the "not yet".

God is overall sovereign, but the devil still has limited control.

I would use the word 'overcame' rather than 'defeated' as the eschaton is ahead of us.

I have moved to a Christus Victor perspective - and believe this was the belief in the early church.

I also am attracted to some of the 'Christus Victor' views of atonement

The theme of redemption and reconciliation of sinners and the establishment of a new people was foregrounded in 9 of the comments.

Jesus was God's gift of love to us as He died on the cross because Jesus shared this overwhelming love for us with His Father and demonstrated perfect obedience to His Father. It was an act of His own faith in God the Father who's redemptive power would raise Him and all of us with Him. This perfect love removes our fear of death and prepares us for, and paves the way to heaven and empowers us in our lives before we leave this earth.

God redeems a new people for himself through His Son and by His Spirit - I know this and see it every week in our church life

One of the comments specifically included the notion of "ransom" in a multi-faceted account of the atonement.

I do not believe that Jesus died to satisfy His Father's wrath, but to be the sacrificial offering to release us from Satan's power - He ransomed or redeemed us. God was in Christ reconciling us . I do not believe forgiveness was ever a problem for God for any who would come humbly to confess their wrongdoing, ie agree with His view. I see He forgives His people many times in the Old Testament when they that come in repentance back to Him. His desire has always been for restoration of relationship, at measureless cost to Himself.

8 responses expressed a Calvinist view that the atonement is limited in it's effect to the number of God's elect.

I'm a Calvinist and believe in a limited atonement.

The cross atones for the sins of all those whom God will ultimately save, not for those who will be condemned. In practice, this means that since we never know the final outcome we can regard anyone as saveable but need not burden ourselves unnecessarily with the outcome of our evangelism since unbelief/lack of apparent salvation is not ultimately our responsibility but God's decision.

I generally lean more towards 'definite atonement' - i.e. Jesus' death was sufficient for the sins of all the world but only efficient for the elect who come from all kinds of people in the world. I do believe the Bible is unclear on this matter and am not 'totally convinced' and still think it generally right to speak of a sacrifice for the sins of the world.

A few comments (7) drew out the cosmic significance of the cross for the redemption of the whole created universe.

Any explanations of the cross that get too mechanical in how atonement 'works' makes me uncomfortable- I think it's too great and seismic an event for us to really comprehend so concretely. And also I feel there's more going on on the cross than just atonement for personal sin- that feels like a very me-centred way at looking at the central event in all of human history!

The word "sacrifice" was mentioned in 22 comments and was central in about a third of these. However, there is an ambiguity in the term as some usages seem rooted in the idea of substitutionary blood sacrifice as practised in the Old Testament, while other references are more in the ordinary language of "making sacrifices" or giving up something for the sake of others.

It also acts as the sacrificial model for the behaviour of the church and individual Christians

I don't see the Father punishing Jesus for my sins, but Jesus offering Himself to clear up the mess my sins have caused and the mess in my heart. The Father accepts me because of that sacrifice and its effect on me.

Working through some questions that suggest the cross was to show man that ongoing sacrifice are no longer needed. God does not require a sacrifice.

Half a dozen comments suggested that the respondent was unhappy to talk about the atonement without reference to the need for repentance on the part of the sinner.

"All who come in faith find forgiveness at the cross" leaves repentance out.

No sin is too great for Jesus to forgive when genuinely repented of. However there can still be consequence on earth for the sinner.

Repentance is necessary along with faith

A small number of comments wanted to stress the inclusiveness and solidarity that was shown (or won) for all humanity through Christ's suffering on the cross. Such thinking can not be easily considered as central to traditional evangelical understandings of the atonement and tend towards universalism.

I believe that Jesus died to redeem the world. The history of the Bible shows a continuous widening of people's understanding of God's inclusiveness.

Jesus crucifixion is the perfect expression of Father's love and commitment towards me and towards all mankind.

Jesus underwent physical, mental and spiritual torment beyond anything any human will ever have to endure, so he can identify fully with any horrible experience we have to go through.

In summary then it remains the case that the Cross of Christ remains of central importance to evangelical Christians in the UK. Almost all accept and easily use the Penal Substitution account of the atonement. However, most also understand the value of other explanations of what was happening through the cross, and the variety of comments suggest a rich multifaceted understanding of the death of Christ, as well as a desire to locate it in the context of the victorious Resurrection. There are two main issues where our panel is divided or uneasy. The firsts is around the effectiveness of the atonement (whether "for all for all my Saviour died" or just for the elect. The second is around the notion of an angry or wrathful God who needed to be satisfied or propitiated by the blood sacrifice of his own son.

 

Virus-free. www.avast.com

What UK evangelicals understand and believe about the Bible

In this post I present another compilation of findings from the 21^st Century Evangelicals research programme sponsored by the Evangelical Alliance.

A more easily readable pdf version of this post is available at

https://btcloud.bt.com/web/app/share/invite/Cf1ho2m4wj

There is no doubt that the Bible is of central importance to UK evangelicals

• 93% strongly agree that the Bible is the inspired word of God. (Baseline survey 2010)

• 83% of evangelical respondents strongly agreed that the Bible has the supreme

authority in guiding their beliefs, views and behaviour, compared with only 43% of other respondents surveyed at Christian festivals and churches who did not self define as evangelicals.. (Baseline survey 2010)

• 99% of evangelicals think every church should faithfully teach the Bible as the word of God. Life in the church? - February 2013

• 96% agreed or strongly agreed that 'God spoke to people thousands of years ago and that message is recorded accurately in the Bible.' Are we communicating? - August 2011

• 90% say they study the Bible every day or several times a week Time for discipleship? - November 2013

In Omnibus survey one (August 2013) when asked to locate yourself within the evangelical community and which of the following descriptions they would be happy to use about themselves. The most popular category was "bible-believing Christian" with 53% saying I would often describe myself in this way and a further 34% saying I would accept this as a description of myself.

However they do not limit the voice of God to what is written in the Bible.

• 94% agreed or strongly agreed with the statement 'I believe God often speaks directly to people today not only through the Bible but in other ways.' Are we communicating? - August 2011

Nor do they all claim that the Bible itself is inerrant (a belief that has been a litmus test for orthodoxy in North American Evangelical Fundamentalism). In the Baseline survey -2010 54% of evangelicals agreed a lot and a further 14% agreed a little that The Bible, in its original manuscript, is without error. Thus just over two thirds supported inerrancy. The same statement was used in the survey for the Building Tomorrow's Church today where with a sample of Christians under 35 year old, a lower proportion of 56% agreed or strongly agreed. However among respondents from BME background the figure rose to 72%.

What Evangelicals believe about The Bible

In our survey in Spring 2016, What is Evangelicalism? We asked a series of focussed questions about the four elements of Bebbington's quadrilateral... Table … gives an overview of the responses from 14339 evangelical respondents.

1846 and All That - What is Evangelicalism? - Spring 2016
How far do you believe in these statements
	I'm totally convinced	I accept and believe this in general terms	I have some doubts or questions about this	I used to believe this, but can't any longer	I have never believed this
The Bible is the revealed word of God	87%	11%	1%	0%	0%
The Bible is the highest authority in matters of faith and doctrine	82%	15%	2%	0%	0%
It's important for children to have a good knowledge of the Bible	76%	22%	2%	0%	0%
It's important to me to try to read the Bible every day	71%	24%	3%	1%	1%
We should obey the plain teaching of the Bible in every part of our lives	62%	29%	6%	2%	1%
The Bible is a reliable and accurate historical document	56%	31%	9%	1%	2%
The laws of our country should be based on the teachings of the Bible	32%	40%	20%	2%	5%
Every word of the Bible is literally true	18%	37%	18%	6%	21%
The Bible is subject to new understandings and interpretations with each generation	10%	37%	28%	2%	22%
answered question						1439
skipped question						45

A total of 307 more extensive comments about the Bible were offered by respondents as glosses on this battery of questions. Many touched on the questions of inerrancy, infallibility and authority of the Scriptures. Having tagged and coded them into groups it becomes clear that the largest number (78) major on the idea that "literally true" cannot be applied to a collection of writings which represent diverse literary genres. For example I believe the Bible is God's word to us, but it includes documents of all kinds including historical accounts and poetry, so it is not all to be taken in a literal way, although it contains absolute truth. I don't believe poetic, apocalyptic or some OT prophetic parts of the Bible are to be taken literally I am surprised to see the literally true phrase- given there is poetry song etc, within scripture, where idioms and similes etc abound. An inappropriate term which raises questions about the EA's understanding of Scripture! "Literally true" is not very helpful. When Jesus said "a man went from Jerusalem to Jericho" that was a story. He really said it. However that story wasn't true. That doesn't mean we can't trust the Bible. I think you need a better question God intended us to search out the scriptures and infer from them, hence the wide range of styles e.g. poetry, parables etc. Being overly literal leads to legalism.

The phrase "literally true" is meaningless, a trap laid by the Enemy into which so many believers willingly fling themselves. Human speech just doesn't work like that, no-one speaks "literally." Those who most loudly shout about "literally true" don't believe it themselves. If they did they would castrate themselves as did Origen (Matt. 5.29-30)

The next most frequent category (65) was around the issue of reading Scripture in double contexts, that of the writers and that of today, as well as in the context of complete passages and narratives. It was not, however, easy to detect an overall consensus in the details of how such hermeneutical issues should be approached.

We have to remember that language changes over time, cultures are different and we need to seek God's guidance in understanding the bible.

A text without a context is a pretext, and the meaning of certain passages (esp OT laws) have to be seen in the appropriate cultural context

An awareness of the cultural language, historical context and narrative aims of the Biblical writers is essential to correctly applying it to today's Christian living. The church is pretty poor at doing this though which leads to unnecessary stances and conflict.

It is all too easy to make mistakes when trying to follow the Bible because we don't usually appreciate the context and culture in which it was written So called plain meanings can be plain wrong because they are too literal and/or too zealous.

New understandings and interpretations only in the context of current day events and application , not in the fundamental truths and beliefs.

Literally true in context. I don't believe you can just pluck a phrase out and say 'this is literally true', e.g. 'there is no God' in the context of 'the fool says in his heart…'

There was some concern also about general hermeneutical issues and the matter of varying translations of the original texts.

Plain teaching' I agreed with, however I am aware that I disagree with many traditionalists on what the 'plain teaching' is.

Multiple versions can cause confusion in some people's understanding of the Bible.

Due to the handed down nature of the Bible, and the fact it's been translated so many times I would not put weight on individual words, but rather on the meaning of a sentence.

I have been trying to learn Greek to read the New Testament, to understand better why there seem to be contradictions.

The Bible is authoritative/ trustworthy in its original manuscripts/languages (Greek, Aramaic, Greek)

A fair number of comments ( 43) addressed the issue of inerrancy directly among which a minority (13) were clearly opposing the concept.

I believe the Bible is perfect in the original autographs but there are a few manuscript errors/controversies.

The Bible as originally revealed is the inerrant word of God.

I take the view that the Bible is infallible not inerrant. (The concept of inerrancy is a recent development resulting from American church politics).

I was a fundamentalist (literally true) in my younger days but have expanded my understanding of Biblical interpretation.

Many comments (51) simply stressed a love of the Bible as the living word of God.

I love it and it is the best book ever written.

If we stick to the Bible, we will be firmly rooted in our faith

It is the living breathing word of God and therefore is always relevant to all generation

........ life-changing book

The Bible is like a signpost for all or most of our decisions as it contains God's wisdom and helps in difficult situations

The word of God is the great means whereby we know the gospel and are saved.

More than a dozen comments spoke about the priority of Jesus as the incarnate word of God

I believe Jesus is a higher authority than the Bible although he is revealed through it.

Jesus is the highest authority. The Bible is a vital revelation about him but has become a god in its own right to some.

While a small number wanted to emphasize the Grand Narrative or "big story" of salvation history.

I believe that the Bible is the living word of God but we need to contextualise and understand the full story of God's people in line with a loving God

and a few others the importance of the Holy Spirit as interpreter of the text.

The bible cannot be understood apart from revelation by the Holy Spirit

The Bible and Church

A majority of evangelicals evaluate and choose churches according to the emphasis placed on and quality of the teaching of the Bible. In our Life in the church? Survey - February 2013

• 99% of evangelicals think every church should faithfully teach the Bible as the word of God.
• 74% agreed that Our church leader is excellent at preaching and teaching the Bible

and when asked What do you look for when choosing a church

• 63% chose among their priorities The depth and relevance of Bible teaching to my personal growth

with significantly higher proportions among those who belonged to very large churches.

More extended comments reinforced this:

I always look for similar qualities in a church, most notably strong Bible-based teaching and genuine, contemporary worship

Churches that preach the Bible clearly and consistently, love each other, pray much and work to serve those around them are the ones that grow.

Though some expressed a measure of disappointment.

In nearly 50 years' experience I feel that many churches deliver very weak Bible teaching.

PERSONAL BIBLE READING

So how do UK evangelicals actually study and use the Bible? Various surveys gave slightly different statistics based on slightly different questions, but it is clear that a large majority say they make efforts to read the Bible at least a few times a week in their private devotions.

• According to the Baseline survey 2010, 49% read (or listen to) the Bible on their own daily and a further 26% at least a few times a week.
  • Women were slightly more likely to be daily readers 50% compared with men 47%.
  • Older people were more likely than younger people to read their Bibles each day. Among 12-24 year olds 36% were daily readers and the proportion rose with age so that by the age of 65 and over the figure was around 65% .
  • Church leaders (59%) were more likely than average to be daily readers by about 10 percentage points above the average.
  • 71% said they read (or listen to) the Bible with others, presumably in a church congregation or small group setting at least once a week.
  • When asked In a typical week, how long do you spend reading the Bible?ical week, how long do you spend reading the Bible?
    Less than 30 minutes 15%
    Up to 2 hours 48%
    More than 2 hours 37%

• In Time for discipleship? - November 2013, 88% agreed it is important for every Christian to read or study the Bible on a daily basis (of these 50% strongly agree). However, In practice, just over half (50.5%) say they engage with the Bible daily and a further 40% at least several times a week. In the same survey 42% said that they find it difficult to find time on a regular disciplined basis to pray and read the Bible. In this survey Ten to 20 minutes is the most common length of time people claim to spend studying their Bible.
  • Less than 10 minutes (16%)
  • Between 10 and 20 minutes (43%)
  • Between 20 and 30 minutes (20%)
  • Between 30 minutes and an hour (17%)
  • More than an hour (3%)
  • N/A - I don't do any regular Bible reading or study (1%)d helpful

IAccording to Omnibus Survey 3 among the evangelicals in the panel 70% said they read the Bible in private daily and a further 22% more than once a week. (This highest figure is probably best explained by the possibility that this survey which was presented without a clear topical focus was completed by the most loyal members of our research panel combined with the question appearing in the form of a grid – both factors which might affect the results in this way).

• According to the 2016 report Building Tomorrow's Church Today, based on a survey of Christians (not all of whom identified as evangelicals) aged 35 or under, Bible-reading seems to be less popular with younger adults – with just 25% reading their Bible every day, and 41% a few times a week. Young Christians from Black and Ethnic minority backgrounds were more likely to read the Bible at least several times each week (74% compared to 65% of white British), and men are more likely to read it daily than women (31% versus 23%).

• While the traditional picture of a Victorian Christian household involved a daily ritual of formal family prayers and Bible reading our How's the family? - survey of November 2011, found that within families we can assume to be Christian, just 40% report praying together daily, but only 12-15% reading the Bible together. There was little evidence of a significant change in these figures across the generations still living.

IMPACT OF THE BIBLE

In the Omnibus 2 survey on May 2014 we asked

How significant have the following factors been in developing your personal walk with Christ?

Personal Bible study/daily devotions was Very significant for 63% and of some significance for another 33%

and What are the most important elements you would hope to find in attending a regular small group within your church?

Bible study was rated as Very Important by 77% and of some importance by 22% (only very slightly less important than prayer support)

In Are we communicating? - survey conducted August 2011, we asked How recently have you read or heard something from the Bible that caused you to change something significant in your life

Today 11%

In the last week 34%

In the last month 30%

Less recently 26%

Never 0.3%

In Time for discipleship? - November 2013

• 82% (perhaps unsurprisingly) said they find it hard to live up to the commandments and challenges found in the Bible.
• 55 % find it hard to understand what the Bible says (at least sometimes).
• 48% admit they find it hard to understand how God could order or allow some of the things recorded in the Bible.

Martha was the Biblical character most often identified with, with 43% of the panel and 58% of the women identifying with her. She was selected almost three times more than her contemplative sister Mary, indicating that busy lifestyles are a widespread feature of contemporary discipleship. Simon Peter is also popular with just over a third identifying with him. Paul was the third most selected figure with 27%. Some 35% of men and 13% of women selected him.

In the same survey we asked about BIBLE STUDY AIDS that were in use

Bible commentaries or other books 50%

Printed Bible study notes 43%

A Bible app on your phone or other mobile device 33%

A Bible-reading plan 29%

A Bible website 28%

Emails from a Bible study organisation 20%

Podcasts or other audio recordings

from a Bible study organisation 13%

None of these, just an open Bible 12%

DVDs or other video resources 11%

The Bible in Public life

In the midst of academic debates about how far secularisation has gone and with many suggesting that we now live in a post-secular or de-secularising age it is perhaps surprising that UK evangelicals are far from confident about asserting the relevance and importance of Scripture to public life.

In our Faith in politics? survey conducted in August/September 2014

• 74% agreed or strongly agreed that "My political views and the way I vote have been greatly influenced by my reading of the Bible"

However, few respondents made a direct connection between Scripture texts and policies and still less voting for a party. More typical quotes were these.

I have absolutely no idea what the Bible teaches or does not teach about politics.

The Bible tells us we should care for the poor and vulnerable – this requires a political as well as charitable response to tackle the root causes.

I don't think the Bible talks directly about politics, but it does talk about how we should treat others and how we should live in community, so its principles would inform my views.

In the British Values- survey conducted in May 2015 we asked

Which of (a list of 12) values or principles are important for being British and should be taught in British schools?

A good knowledge of the Bible was seen as the least important with only 48% of respondents believing it should be compulsory.

	Should be compulsory
A good knowledge of the Bible	48%
Loyalty to Queen and country	52%
A good basic understanding of all religions widely practised in Britain	56%
The right to object to government policy and make a peaceful protest	63%
Tolerance of different faiths and beliefs	75%
Not to discriminate on the basis of race, gender, sexuality and disability	77%
An understanding of the contribution of Christianity to our heritage and institutions	77%
A good knowledge of British history	79%
Support for democracy	82%
The right to religious freedom	86%
Respect for other people, their opinions and beliefs	89%
Accepting the rule of law	91%

Virus-free. www.avast.com

What almost all UK evangelicals agree -A compilation of findings from the 21st Century Evangelicals Research Programme

One of the ways we can build a picture of the shared experiences, practices and beliefs that identify evangelicals and give them a distinctive identity is to list the characteristics that are almost universally shared. In this way we can identify some of the norms on which they build their values and lifestyle. So here we draw on the data from our surveys and list many of the questions where the same answers were given by 90% or more of our evangelical respondents. With the overwhelming agreement on these questions it makes little sense to attempt to analyse any differences between demographic sub-groups in the sample.

We group the data items in categories of belief, practice, politics, economic and social values, freedom of expression, media and lifestyle choices. Finally we examine in questions that relate to the Bebbington quadrilateral – some of which elicit similar overwhelming agreement.

Beliefs / Theology

Almost all UK evangelicals believe in the uniqueness of Jesus Christ (in a way which may make them distinctive from some other Christians).

• 91% strongly agree that Jesus is the only way to God. (Baseline Survey 2010)

• 97% agreed or strongly agreed with this same statement in the Confidently Sharing the Gospel panel survey – August 2012.

• (in the Religions and Beliefs survey in 2016 when asked to choose from a number of options 84% ticked "Christianity is the only path to God." - this compares with only 24% of Anglican clergy confronted with the same question in Linda Woodhead's 2014 survey).

They hold the traditional orthodox view of the resurrection of the body in line with the Apostles' and Nicene creeds

• 91% agreed or strongly agreed with the statement that Jesus rose from the tomb with a physical body (Does Belief Touch society Spring 2011)

• 91% agreed or strongly agreed that at the end all who have died will be raised to face judgement. (Does Belief Touch Society - Spring 2011)

They expect to personally share in an eternal happy future

• 95% agreed or strongly agreed that I'm looking forward with great hope to the new heavens and the new earth promised in the Bible. From generation to generation - Feb 2016.

• 96% agreed or strongly agreed that Christians should always be hopeful for the future - even if Jesus does not return for many centuries.From generation to generation - Feb 2016.

Though this does not divorce them from the present world – i.e. they are not simply hanging on until Jesus comes to rapture them from this evil world.

• 93% agreed or strongly agreed it's the duty of all Christians to work and strive to build a better world for people today and for generations to come. From generation to generation - Feb 2016.

• 91% agreed or strongly agreed that The Bible teaches us to pray and struggle for economic and social justice. (Ethical Consumerism - survey conducted in Jan 2016)

• 96% agreed or strongly agreed that Human beings have a God-given responsibility to take better care of creation and the environment.(Ethical Consumerism - survey conducted in Jan 2016)

• 94% agree that it's a Christian's duty to care for the environment. (baseline survey 2010) …

They also believe in an powerful interventionist God

• Do you believe God miraculously heals the sick today? 98% said Yes (Yes, often 28.0%, Yes, sometimes 70.1%) Health and Well-being survey August 2015

However they also trust and turn to scientific medicine - in the same survey

• 95% agreed or strongly agreed that when we are ill it is always wise to seek medical help, even if we believe God can heal us. Health and Well-being survey August 2015

Christian Identity and Practice - Church - Spirituality

Evangelicals are characterised by a deeply personal faith that transforms their life and shapes their being.

• 92% agree or strongly agree For me Christianity is not a 'religion' - it is a personal relationship with Christ. Religions and beliefs survey 2016

• 98% agree or strongly agree that they can see God at work in my life over the long term Time for discipleship? - survey conducted in November 2013

• 99% say their Christian faith is a very important element of their personal identity, (with family as second most popular element at 85%.) Omnibus Survey 3 February 2015

They value a regular prayer life

• 96% pray at least a few times a week, 77% do so daily (Baseline survey 2010) …

• 98% say they pray more than once a week (86% daily) Omnibus Survey 3 February 2015

  • among younger Christians in the Millennial church diversity survey the figure was 91% (63% daily.)

The panel members are very active and committed participants in church life.

Maybe this is to be expected given the way respondents were recruited through church and Evangelical Alliance networks. Other survey research on religious participation has frequently found a tendency to over-report actual attendance rates – this could be the case for our panels though there is no viable way of testing the idea.

• 96% attend a church service at least once a week. (77% attend a small group meeting at least once a fortnight.) (Baseline survey 2010)

• 95% said they were in church on Easter Sunday (Does Belief Touch society Spring 2011)

• 96% have given money to their church in the past year.(Baseline survey 2010)

• 90% say regularly attending church and/or a small fellowship group is helpful to their growth (and 60% say it is very helpful) Time for discipleship? - November 2013

In the second Omnibus survey - May 2014

What are the most important elements you would hope to find in attending a regular small group within your church?

Important or very important

Bible study 99%

Prayer support 99%

Friendship 98%

Growing in discipleship 99%

• 94% agree or strongly agree nurturing disciples and getting new Christians established in church life is just as important as getting them to make a commitment. Confidently sharing the gospel? - survey August 2012

• 93% had regularly attended at least one other church before joining their current one. Life in the church? - February 2013

• 95% agree or strongly agree Christians in the UK can be inspired

and learn from the Church abroad The world on our doorstep February 2012

• 94% agree that Christians should be united in truth.

• 92% agree that Christians should be united in mission.

(Baseline survey 2010) NB it would have been difficult to disagree with these statements which were presented in a rather leading way and which could have multiple interpretations.

POLITICAL AND SOCIAL VALUES

Political involvement

Evangelical Christians on our panel are very politically aware and engaged, though they have a wide range of voting preferences and prioritise and are often divided on a variety of issues.

However, Only 6% think politicians can be trusted to keep their manifesto promises (Faith in politics? Summer 2015 )

• 94% say they are certain or likely to vote in the coming General Election (Faith in politics? Summer 2015) (in our post election 2015 survey 96% said they had voted)

• 93% say when voting for candidates it is very important they are honourable and not corrupt (far more important than anything else) (Faith in politics? Summer 2015)

• 92% think more Christians need to get involved in politics (Faith in politics? Summer 2015)

• (96%) value the principle of democracy, (Faith in politics? Summer 2015)

• 91% said they almost always vote in local council elections (Are we good neighbours February 2014 )

• 94% agree or strongly agree that Christians should engage with government. ( baseline survey 2010)

Economic and Social Justice

Evangelical Christians on our panel are very concerned about poverty and economic inequality at the global and national level and support some important policies that would make a difference.

• 97% agree or strongly agree We should work for justice for the poor Good news for the poor? - November 2014

• 93% agree or strongly agree God has provided enough resources on the earth for every person's need, but human greed makes some people poor Good news for the poor? - November 2014

• 91% agreed or strongly agreed that we need to continue to campaign hard if we are to make poverty history The world on our doorstep February 2012

• 92% agree or strongly agree that It is every Christian's duty to help those in poverty. Does money matter? - May 2012

• 87% agree or strongly agree God is on the side of the poor Good news for the poor? - November 2014

• 92% agree or strongly agree Some 'top' people are paid far too much Does money matter? - May 2012

• 99% agree or strongly agree Government should act to ensure large companies can't avoid paying their taxes Good news for the poor? - November 2014

• 95% agree or strongly agree The government should take stronger action to limit high interest rates on products such as pay day loans Good news for the poor? - November 2014

• 93% agree or strongly agree that schools should encourage children to question the consumerism and individualism of today's society. Do we value education? - November 2012

• 96% agree or strongly agree There should be many more apprenticeships and high quality vocational courses suitable for less academic students Do we value education? - November 2012

• 96% agree or strongly agree Everyone has a duty to work to support themselves and their family if they can Does money matter? - May 2012

• 99% felt it was important or very important for Christian organisations to build a campaign on ...Providing protections for the victims of human trafficking Omnibus 2 – May 2014

• 99% are at least somewhat concerned about people-trafficking and modern slavery Ethical Consumerism - Jan 2016

• 92% agree or strongly agree All frail elderly people are entitled to high quality health and social care at the end of their lives. From generation to generation - Feb 2016

• 94% agree or strongly agree Care workers should be paid at least the full living wage including time taken travelling. From generation to generation - Feb 2016

• 98% agree or strongly agree Christians should always pay all the taxes that are due. Ethical Consumerism - Jan 2016

Freedom of Conscience, Religion and the media

Our evangelical panels were overwhelmingly concerned to preserve religious liberties and freedom of speech in the UK, especially for Christians.

• 91% agreed or strongly agreed that the government should ensure that no one is prevented from, or penalised for, expressing their religious convictions in the workplace . Working faithfully? - May 2013

• 92% agreed or strongly agreed that all schools should allow Christian teachers, local churches or other mission organisations to organise voluntary extra-curricular activities where the gospel can be openly presented and the Bible taught. Do we value education? - November 2012

• 92% agreed or strongly agreed that Preachers should have the right to express their beliefs about sin, judgement and hell even if people find these offensive. 92% Religions and Beliefs – August 2016

• 98% agreed or strongly agreed that Parents should have the right to teach their children (including adopted and foster children) the values, beliefs and sexual morality found in their religion. Religions and Beliefs – August 2016

However, most wanted to extend freedoms to those of other faiths

• 91% agreed or strongly agreed that Jewish people in Britain should continue to have the right to produce and consume kosher food. (76% for Muslims and halal food) Religions and Beliefs – August 2016

and around the world

• 91% wanted the UK government to speak out more strongly on human rights and religious liberty. The world on our doorstep February 2012

Yet they were not advocating total freedom of expression as some liberals would understand it.

• 98% favoured Limiting the continued supply of violent and abusive pornography

Religions and Beliefs – August 2016

UK evangelicals also fear the growing dominance of secularism and perceive it as attempting to curtail freedom of expression and belief.

• 92% agreed or strongly agreed Secularism may think of itself as liberal but in fact wants to impose its own worldview. Religions and Beliefs – August 2016

They are also very sceptical about the mainstream media – especially when it covers religion and evangelicalism in particular.

• 94% agreed or strongly agreed that the media generally does not understand religion very well Religions and Beliefs – August 2016

• 91% agreed or strongly agreed that media coverage of evangelicals always or often Concentrate mainly on extreme views and/or controversial issues Omnibus 2 – May 2014

• 93% agreed or strongly agreed that Christians should have a voice in the media. ( baseline survey 2010)

British Values - survey conducted in May 2015

Our panel overwhelmingly accepted there were some British values that were important and which they could be proud of, and that these were not in conflict with their Christian faith. However, as we shall see later there were some aspects of current government policy which were more controversial.

• 93 % agreed or strongly agreed that historically British values have been strongly shaped by Christian values.

When asked Which (of a list of) values or principles are important for being British and should be taught in British schools?

• 91% felt accepting the rule of law should be compulsory for all students.

• 96% felt it was important or very important

To be able to speak English

To respect Britain's political institutions and laws

When asked what made them feel (very or somewhat) proud of Britain

• 94% ticked Its scientific and technological achievements

• 93% Its Christian heritage

• 95% Its National Health Service

LIFESTYLE

Generally our panels seemed to favour a fairly traditional, family oriented, health conscious, middle class lifestyle, which was not dominated by materialism and embraced contemporary technology.

• 91% agreed or strongly agreed that the Bible teaches us to be content with what we have and not to desire more material possessions. Ethical Consumerism - Jan 2016

• 99% of our panel had some experience of employment during their lives although only73% were currently economically active (in paid work or seeking work). Working faithfully? - May 2013

• 93% (of the employed) agreed or strongly agreed that I am interested in my work.

• 99% agreed or strongly agreed that fathers should be fully involved in caring for, and raising, their children; How's the family? - November 2011.

• 94% agreed or strongly agreed that many children today suffer because there is no good male role model in the home. How's the family? - November 2011.

• 97% of respondents said they had emailed someone within the last seven days, Are we communicating? - August 2011

• 97% had used Google or another search engine while browsing the web. Are we communicating? - August 2011

• 90% had watched TV news and documentaries in the last week Are we communicating? - August 2011

• 95 % had never been to a secular festival-type event (eg Glastonbury) Omnibus survey 3 February 2015

• 97% said they buy (some) fair-trade or ethically sourced goods. Does money matter? - May 2012

• 94% lived in a household with access to at least one motor vehicle. Omnibus survey 3 February 2015.

• 92% agreed or strongly agreed I value the education I received and see it as a great enrichment of my own life Do we value education? - November 2012.

• 92% agreed or strongly agreed everyone should honour and respect the older people in our churches. From generation to generation - Feb 2016.

• 90% agreed or strongly agreed that being involved in a local church is good for people's health and wellbeing Health and Well-being - Dec 2015

• 92% agreed or strongly agreed that Christians should lead healthy lifestyles to look after their God-given bodies Health and Well-being - Dec 2015

• 90% said their current health was fairly or very good

  • 98% that they were currently non – smokers (81% never had smoked)

  • 95% that they currently did not drink alcohol to excess (81% never had)

  • 94% that they had never used illegal drugs

  • 96% that they had never been dependent on (addicted to) prescription drugs

  • 94% that they had never self-harmed

  • 93% that they had never been in a habit of eating too little

    • Health and Well-being - Dec 2015

Bebbington's Quadrilateral

Bible

There is no doubt that the Bible is of central importance to UK evangelicals

• 93% strongly agree that the Bible is the inspired word of God. (Baseline survey 2010)

• 99% of evangelicals think every church should faithfully teach the Bible as the word of God. Life in the church? - February 2013

• 96% agreed or strongly agreed that 'God spoke to people thousands of years ago and that message is recorded accurately in the Bible.' Are we communicating? - August 2011

• 90% say they study the Bible every day or several times a week Time for discipleship? - November 2013

• • 94% agreed or strongly agreed with the statement 'I believe God often speaks directly to

people today not only through the Bible but in other ways.' Are we communicating? - August 2011

Cross-focussed

• 99% agree or strongly agree that the message of the cross has made a huge difference in their own lives (Does Belief Touch society Spring 2011)

• 91% strongly agree Christ's blood is the final and only effective sacrifice for our sins (Does Belief Touch society Spring 2011)

• 91% strongly agree that on the cross Jesus bore the punishment for their sins (Does Belief Touch society Spring 2011)

Conversion –

• 94% agree that everyone needs to be born again to become a Christian and be saved Confidently sharing the gospel? - survey August 2012

• 94% that people who come to Christ will see their lives transformed Confidently sharing the gospel? - survey August 2012

Evangelism - activism

• 90% agree or strongly agree that all Christians should be actively involved in evangelism. ( Baseline survey 2010)

• 92% agree or strongly agree Christians should invite people from other faith communities to visit their churches Religions and Beliefs – August 2016

• 99% agree or strongly agree Christians should share the gospel with those of other faiths. Religions and Beliefs – August 2016

• 99% of evangelical Christians do some type of volunteering each year. ( Baseline survey 2010)

Virus-free. www.avast.com

A reflection on a new book - The Desecularisation of the City: London's churches 1980 to the present

 Goodhew, David, and Anthony-Paul Cooper, eds. The Desecularisation of the City: London's Churches, 1980 to the Present. Routledge, 2018.
 
available  (if you can afford it) at https://www.amazon.co.uk/Desecularisation-City-Churches-Routledge-Religion/dp/0815348177

This is not a book review in the conventional sense but a reflection from a Christian social scientist who worked for many years in East London and has researched and written about urban religion. I hope it will make sense to fellow academics, but also that it will bring understanding and encouragement to church leaders, and be of interest and accessible to Christians with no specialist knowledge.

I have been reading this new collection of essays about the Christian churches in London which I would recommend to anyone who has an interest in the subject of urban religion or church growth. I was also privileged last week to attend the book launch at King's College London where several of the authors and other eminent scholars of religion presented the findings of the book and shared in discussion with the audience about what it meant. One of  the chapters in The Book is by my old friend and mentor Colin Marchant and updates my own earlier work on documenting the presence and significance of religion in that East London borough. So this blog is a reflection and an attempt to provide my own framework and understanding of the remarkable changing fortunes of Christianity in the capital city.

It is interesting that many of the contributors last week dated the beginning of de-secularisation as 1979, the year that Margaret Thatcher entered Downing Street with the prayer of St Francis on her lips. The Thatcher government marked the beginning of neo-liberal hegemony in economic policy, the dominance of the market and the globalisation of capitalism. The collateral damage of this ideology which we can now clearly observe, was growing inequality, the de-industrialization of Britain, and the overwhelming and unhealthy dominance of  London as a financial centre and economic engine of the UK, Europe and the wider world. This "prosperity" has led to the massive regeneration of London and the subsequent growth of population. This in itself is the demographic background to and a driver of the growing number of people involved in religious practice.  Added to this is globalisation and the reality that London, in parallel with other great world metropolises, is a global city, with a super diverse ethnic mix, and a population that is dominated by the young mobile professional classes.

Support services for such a population demand a cheap labour force, in transport, catering hospitality and the caring professions which has been hard to fill from the ageing and city averse white British population. There is evidence of a substantial level of white flight which has led to new patterns of segregation - the highest levels of ethnic segregation now being concentrated in majority white, coastal communities, rural areas and small market towns across the southern half of England. Yet since the millennium even those communities have been experienced European migration, resulting in rapid social change which has been unwelcome to many white English people. Within this context a nostalgic English nationalist identity politics has arisen in a form which helps to explain the patterns of voting in the 2016 Brexit referendum. London the global city can be described as "Remain Central" while the coastal, de-industrialised and rural Communities of England have become the heartlands of the true Be-leavers. It is also worth noting that 67% of voters who identify as "church of England" voted to leave the EU.

It could be puzzling therefore that it is the capital city, rather than the traditional peripheral areas where the church seems to flourish, or at least is able to stem the decline in membership attendance and influence. Classic secularisation theory would suggest metropolitan areas are the drivers of growing unbelief - and indeed it is true that there are many affluent areas in North and South West London where census figures show proportions of "no religion" to be much higher than average. Meanwhile the statistical evidence in the book suggests that in inner London, particularly in the East and South-east, the numbers and proportions of Christians are actually growing.  Case study chapters in the book show how particular churches and ministries have developed and grown over recent decades. In Newham for example, in 1975 when I first lived there I was told that the Christian church was likely to be extinct in the borough by the year 2000.  Having become aware that this prophesy was false in the 1990s I co-ordinated research for three editions of the Newham Directory of Religious Groups which counted over 180 churches, the majority of which were recent arrivals. Colin Marchant's chapter now lists over 350 churches which emerged in the borough between 1975 and 2015, of which many - may be as many as 100 have since closed, moved on to other boroughs, rebranded or merged.

One might expect some growth in church attendance numbers in a city with a rapidly growing population such as London. Nor should this be any surprise given the historical precedent of the New Testament church starting in cities such as Jerusalem, Antioch, Ephesus and Rome and then spreading to more remote areas of the Roman Empire and beyond. Christianity has long been an urban religion. No one disputes that a major driver of church growth in London has been increasing ethnic diversity while the white British population has become a minority across the city. In almost every tribe and nation in London there is a Christian church or ministry, which primarily serves a particular ethnic group. However, there are also many mixed congregations and "minority majority" parishes in the mainline denominations. There are also mega-churches of various types which attract often diverse congregations of 1000 or more each Sunday. More intriguing is the substantial attendance growth in the London diocese of the Church of England (but not in Southwark diocese across the river). Much of it associated with Holy Trinity Brompton network  and the renewed congregations it has planted in several struggling in a city Parishes. Yet what seems to matter most has been dynamic leadership and a change of strategy form managing decline to enthusiastic mission enterprise.

It is significant both in the London context and in wider church statistics across Britain that a substantial majority of new and thriving and growing churches are evangelical or Pentecostal in emphasis. The exception to this seems to be the growing attendance at worship in cathedrals across the country, and exemplified in the book by Westminster Roman Catholic Cathedral. Grace Davie asks what is it that attracts worshippers to these forms of religious practice. She suggests that in a market economy, where consumer preference and individualism is highly valued, and a sense of religious obligation is less commonplace, the "customer" may be attracted by experiential religion, by high quality music and by the relatively low demands on participation, belonging and ethical behaviour. However the situation is not that simple. In the anonymity and stress of daily life in the global city many people may be looking for an oasis of support and belonging. Whether you are a young single professional in a high powered job, (but because of the distortions of the housing market living in a shared rented property), or an African, Brazilian or Polish migrant worker struggling to make ends meet by working 60 hours a week in a cleaning job (and constantly worrying about your immigration status), you are likely to value the bonding social capital that comes from meeting regularly together in church. The establishment recently of the non-religious Sunday Assembly as an atheist pseudo church seems to confirm the possibility that "community" itself has a market value.

Almost any religious group which meets regularly for worship and prayer offers much more than religious belief and teaching, and spiritual encouragement. For some people brought up outside England there may still be a profound sense of obligation to take part in the religious life of a national or ethnic community. Participation in rituals is likely to strengthen a sense of identity, and belonging to a church helps to develop friendship networks, which can be extremely important in the middle of the stressful churn of global city life, especially for new arrivals. The majority of Christian churches also offer practical pastoral support, which helps people cope with the crises of everyday life, such as birth, marriages, relationship breakdown, illnesses and death. They often also offer financial advice, networks for childcare, pathways to housing and employment, immigration advice, educational opportunities, and opportunities to volunteer and serve in projects for wider community benefit. Of course they may also make demands on people's time, behaviour and finances. But overall churches do wonders in helping people to cope with and bring meaning to urban existence.

The majority of Christians in London seem to be found in gathered congregations, which entail commuting into the centre or across the city to other boroughs each Sunday, and to attend midweek services and activities.. But there are also plenty of examples of parishes and congregations which are firmly located in particular neighbourhoods. This second category generally do much better than the first in providing localised community projects, and strengthening bridging social capital across ethnic and other identity groups. And if they belong to one of the main line denominations there is a chance that they can provide linking social capital to power holders and decision makers  in the national Church, in public services, in local and national politics and in the business world. This is particularly the case in London for those faith communities who have intentionally worked together on political issues through the London Citizens movement. However, for the majority of churches, particularly the newer congregations ministering in particular ethnic communities this linking social capital is often absent. Many of them are hidden in the back streets, meeting is rented premises that do not look like churches, and thus the Kingdom of God grows silently like leaven in the lump, rather than making a public impact in politics or the media.

Finally an important question is how far are the churches in London an exception, merely a statistical blip brought about by unique social and demographic circumstances in the decades around the turn of the millennium. Will London's growth continue following the turn to national isolationism that is signalled by Brexit. Or are London's churches a sign of things to come? Will the vitality and diversity trickle out to other cities or even to the coastal towns, the former mining villages, social housing estates and the countryside where the majority of the English now reside? It is difficult to predict but in some places there are hopeful signs.

In my own small northern city of Preston there are a growing number of new churches, that mainly serve migrant communities, Nigerian, South Asian, Chinese, Polish and Romanian. There are also a handful of new church plants and fresh expressions, and in the coming year an Anglican resource church for the city is going to be established with the input of staff and money from the Holy Trinity Brompton network. There is solid commitment to outreach through social action projects, such as food banks, homeless projects, job clubs, debt counselling, street pastors and English classes for asylum seekers and refugees. And in 2019 there seems to a new spirit of hope and a fresh commitment to pray and work together across the denominations and streams of theology. On the other hand many traditional denominational churches are struggling, ageing and in some cases dying out. Meanwhile the surrounding coastal, rural and former mill town communities of Lancashire seem a very different world from the vibrant religious life of London. They may need a miracle if they are to follow the trajectory of London's churches.

Yet as the Gospel records (in Matt 9 35-38), and the bishop of Lancaster quoted to the Preston Deanery synod this week -

Jesus went through all the towns and villages, teaching in their synagogues, proclaiming the good news of the kingdom and healing every disease and sickness. When he saw the crowds, he had compassion on them, because they were harassed and helpless, like sheep without a shepherd. Then he said to his disciples, "The harvest is plentiful but the workers are few. Ask the Lord of the harvest, therefore, to send out workers into his harvest field."

Virus-free. www.avast.com

My new blog for the William Temple Foundation

My new blog for the William Temple Foundation 

https://williamtemplefoundation.org.uk/blog-peace-on-earth/

Virus-free. www.avast.com