One of the most groundbreaking books that I have read in some time has been Bill Bishop's The Big Sort: Why the Clustering of Like-Minded America Is Tearing Us Apart. As someone involved in church leadership and community development approaches, this book is very enlightening. The main premise of this book, is that primarily since 1965, and especially since 1990, Americans have become increasingly mobile and have been sorting themselves geographically according to their personal preferences and lifestyle choices - not just because of economic necessity. The book is full of statistics to back it up and I have no intention of reprinting them all here. But, what I would like to do is to think through the implications of Bishop's thesis on the Christian life and church leadership over the next several posts.
While this is not a religious book, Bishop devotes chapter 7 (Religion: The Missionary and the Megachurch) to the emergence of the Homogenous Unit Principle in the rise of the megachurch. The idea presented in this book is that affluence has allowed Americans to do what they want, and what they want to do is to be with people like themselves - even in church. The more that people are educated and the more resources that they have, the more that they segregate themselves according to their personal preferences. So, you have the rise of cities like San Francisco that has become full of cultural creatives. In 1976, 44 percent of San Franciscans voted for the Republican candidate for president, Gerald Ford. In 2004, only 15 percent voted for George W. Bush. As time has gone by, liberal creatives have pushed out conservative value-oriented voters and those groups have moved to areas where they are able to live with people more like themselves. These groupings have happened all over the country. People have done this in every walk of life, even in churches, as megachurches have arisen to cater to the desires of people who have similar socio-economic and value orientations. Just like the denziens of San Francisco move their because of the cultural values, people choose churches based not on theological or denominational distinctives, but because of cultural values.
The more that people gather together with people like themselves in larger groups, the more safety that they can secure, or so the thought goes. A reviewer on Amazon was nice enough to relay Bishop's interview with Republican strategist Matthew Dowd, who explained the thinking behind the 2004 re-election strategy of George W. Bush:
Dowd understood that "American communities were 'becoming very homogeneous'. He believed that to a large degree, this clustering was defensive, the general reaction to a society, a country, and a world that were largely beyond an individual's control or understanding. For generations, people had used their clubs, their trust in a national government, and long-established religious denominations to make sense of the world. But those old institutions no longer provided a safe harbor. 'What I think has happened,' Dowd told me (Bishop) early in 2005, 'is the general anxiety the country feels is building. We're no longer anchored'." Bishop decodes this further, saying "Unsurpassed prosperity had enriched Americans---and it had loosened long established social moorings. Americans were scrambling to find a secure place, to make a secure place...Most Americans have done that by seeking out(or perhaps gravitating toward) those who share their lifeworlds---made up of old, fundamental differences such as race, class, gender, and age, but also, now more than ever, personal tastes, beliefs, styles, opinions, and values."
So, we are no longer necessarily experiencing "White Flight." Rather, we are experiencing "Middle-Class flight," "Liberal Flight," "Conservative Flight," "Religious Flight," "Educated Flight," etc., etc. People want to be with people like themselves. So, they are moving en masse to communities where they can share the same lifestyle as their neighbors. As Bishop says, "Americans joined communities, churches, and political parties in a manner that was almost tribal."
What are the implications of this for the church? Is this thesis even true? As Bishop states in Chapter 7, many used this to appeal to people on the basis of their preferences or lifestyles when it came to the discipline of church growth. The church itself is becoming more tribal as churches form around personal preferences and the place that congregants are in their life. So, you have "niche" churches based on lifestyle choices begin to emerge. Is this a good thing? Personally, I don't think so. The Body of Christ is not to be divided based on economics, interests, race, or personal preference. We are to be one in Christ, not in our hobbies or political persuasions. But, this clustering is happening faster now than ever. Smaller, community based churches are giving way to larger churches based on the preferences of people.
Bishop's research is also showing that people are not being shaped by their beliefs as much as they are being shaped by their geography, at least eventually. The more that like-minded people cluster together, the more that their beliefs harden and keep them from interacting with others who are different from them. People are finding their safety and security in an ever-changing world by grouping together with people that they share common lifestyles with and America is becoming ever more polarized.
But, what if there was a community where people different in many ways could come together and exhibit a unity that would be shocking to a world that was breaking apart? Could it be that Jesus' command for His followers to love one another in a way that the world would know that they were His (John 13:34-35) - could it be that this is exactly what America needs right now? I think so, and I am going to be exploring this thought more throughout the week.