Know your congregation

Instruction in preaching always entails some consideration of the various contexts in which we preach, and should encourage a commitment to gain greater and more intimate knowledge of the congregations we serve regularly and are charged with shepherding (which includes protecting, as well as feeding, leading, etc.). Staple preaching textbooks that deal with congregational contexts look at things like generational composition, racial and cultural demographics, language, gender, income, and the like.

None of the textbooks that I know of, however, give much attention to health concerns as a major aspect of preaching's contexts. I wish I had known some of the following data and thought them through more carefully before preaching a recent sermon that, in light of the idea of suffering with Christ, raised the health concerns many people are facing, and often facing in isolation and shame because of the way their concerns have been dismissed by the dominant culture (which, it turns out, may not be so dominant after all).

But here are two key statistics (and two assumptions) that we can superimpose over one another in order to arrive at what I think is a fair representation of attitudes in both church and society, and thus add an important layer to our understanding of context. [After stating the statistics, I will round the stats to the nearest tenth, so that we can speak of a "congregation" of ten whole people, rather than partial people.]

The first statistic is the loss — documented here in a 2024 study published in JAMA — of "trust in physicians and hospitals ..." from April 2020 to January 2024, a shift from 71.5% in 2019 to 40.5% in 2024. That is a huge 31% drop in less than four years; let's call that 3 people in 10 who have lost trust in physicians and hospitals.

The second statistic is the roughly 80%/20% ratio of people who received at least one needle-based C-jab to those who did not. Some estimates place the rate of uptake at 79%/21%, others at 81%/19%. But let's say: 8 of 10 vs. 2 of 10.

The first assumption (which the JAMA study also suggests) is that the 20% (or 2 of 10) who declined were already distrustful of physicians and hospitals in 2019; so, that 20% (those two people) would be counted among the original 28.5% (roughly 3 in 10) who expressed distrust going in to the (nearly) four-year period in question.

The second assumption (for which I have no data) is that churchgoers responded basically along the same lines as the larger society. Most churches — in the interest of neighborliness and good citizenship — cooperated with public health recommendations (and, in some cases, mandates — whether threatened by government or imposed by employers), shut down, flipped services online, and went along with all the promoted protocols. Many urged participation in the medical programs, though I know of no churches that were overtly coercive. Very few churches refused to close and many of those who refused faced a number of legal challenges as a result. The present post does not weigh in on the wisdom of those responses, but simply assumes that the participation of the church was roughly equivalent (statistically speaking) to what is reflected in the broader culture: 80%/20%.

Rounding our percentages to the nearest 10%, we can characterize the views represented in our congregations (as of 2024) as follows:

• 40% — 4 in 10 (a distinct minority) took the C-jab and continue to trust physicians and hospitals and evidently see no reason to do otherwise. 
• 60% — 6 in 10 do not trust physicians and hospitals. This majority can be further distinguished among:
• 30% — 3 in 10 who trusted the system in 2019, took the C-jab, and now do not trust the system; 
• 10% — 1 in 10 who distrusted the system, reluctantly took the C-jab for whatever reason, and continue to distrust the system, either from persistent distrust or with reasons reinforced by recent experience;
• 20% — 2 in 10 who never took the C-jab.

If you are ever led to mention this from the pulpit, do so with great care and caution, and may the Lord fill, anoint, and inundate you with grace, mercy, peace, and love for every group mentioned above. If you think — perhaps more wisely — this topic of conversation should be addressed outside the pulpit, say, in educational settings or around the kitchen table, may you likewise be blessed with abundant grace to listen well and temper your zeal. Perhaps circumstances will unfold that will make it unnecessary to address it directly at all, though I would suggest great yawning silences about such things have their way of gaining greater negative force the longer they are ignored. Either way, it is important to know your congregation. I hope this offers a clearer view of the attitudes and experiences reflected by those in the pews, and for that matter, by those who are no longer in the pews.