Statistic Lust

An article written by Christian Smith and published in Christianity Today (Jan.2007) expresses a concern that I have had for some time. The opening paragraph of his article is:
American evangelicals, who profess to be committed to Truth, are among the worst abusers of simple descriptive statistics, which claim to represent the truth about reality, of any group I have ever seen. At stake in this misuse are evangelicals' own integrity, credibility with outsiders, and effectiveness in the world.

Statistics are too often crafted to raise support, or to show a partial truth to gain support of donors for other causes. As long as I can remember, people have joked about how pastors count people on Sunday morning, or how a DS tells a prospective pastor the statistics of a church. I have often wondered what is really gained by inflating statistics. A good friend of mine made the observation that in reality most people in the world don’t notice and don’t really care about the statistics. He asked “Why are we so afraid of revealing more accurate numbers? Who do we imagine we will upset? It seems the administrative 'in-group' (and those intimately connected to them by power) would be the only ones who would see the difference. And, funny enough, most of them already know the lies! So, again, who are we protecting?”

As a missionary I often was involved in areas where there had been a time of rapid growth and then an equally rapid decline. I remember one particular district that showed statistics of about 5000 members and a large number of churches. In the district, however, I could only find three small churches with about 15-20 people each since there had been considerable decline after the initial growth. The people on the district told me that they felt “dirty” to report such statistics every year, but since the church (general church) would only allow them to take off a maximum of 10% per year, it would be a long time before the statistics met reality. There was always great fear of showing statistics that indicated a decline in numbers. Again, what did we really have to gain by inflating statistics? Other statistics in the church are just “slippery”. An example is found on the website for the Jesus Film Partnership which relies heavily on donor support. The page that states the statistics and goals of JFP says the following at the top: “These numbers reflect the ministry of JESUS Film Harvest Partners”, at the bottom of the page it says “*JESUS Film and other tools”. In other words, one would think the statistics are all about the Jesus Film, but in reality, these statistics are for all of the ministries (even those that have nothing to do with the Jesus Film) in all of the regions. Before I sound like the Grinch of the church, anyone who knows me knows that I am deeply committed to the church and I am deeply committed to God’s mission of restoring broken lives that have been devastated by sin, and giving people a reason for hope. I do not think, however, that using methods of an immoral society in order to gain statistical goals is consistent with the Gospel that has transformed our lives and in which we live.

On the flip side of this, are the alarmists who use statistics to show the darkest side of reality. Many have stated that the Christian church in the U.S. is dead, based on some research that has been done counting church membership and people who sit on pews. An interesting argument to much of this is by sociologist, Robert Wuthnow in his book Boundless Faith (see book of the month a couple of months ago). Wuthnow points out that we use the same statistical methods of years ago (measuring church membership, Sunday morning statistics, etc) to measure a church which is very different. He points out that the church in the U.S. is very interested in global ministry, but in ways that are very different than earlier generations. My own observations are that in many places, churches seem to lack a vibrant life. In other places, however, I see students and people in churches who are hungry for an authentic expression of faith, rather than building a bigger machine. If the students that I interact with daily are any indication of the future of the church, the future will not be driven by bigger buildings and inflated statistics, but rather by people who are in search of an authentic faith that is expressed in community more than bricks and numbers. This is exciting! This also means that Christianity in the U.S. is not as dead as some would claim. Rather, an authentic expression of faith is emerging that cannot (or should not) be measured with the old statistical methods.

I have probably gotten myself into “deep doo” with this post, but let me just say that I believe that the church should be about the mission of God and about being a people who live the mission of God as they interact with broken society. We should use appropriate means in order to do that. If raising funds to support those methods means operating in a way that is contrary to our nature, however, we have become hypocritical and our actions deny the very faith we profess. Our primary calling is not to make a bigger machine in which the ends justify the means. Our vocation is to BE a missional people and to BE Christian. To do so, we will have to sacrifice our lust for statistics in order for God to do something new in us as well as through us. What do we really have to lose?