You may have picked up that the Bible Society have recently put out a statement concerning their report on the so-called Quiet Revival. The long and the short of it is their findings were based on faulty data. It bears saying the issue is not really with the Bible Society but YouGov’s methodology which undermined the reliability of the data. You can read their full statement here.
This doesn’t mean the entirety of the findings are null and void. We can still draw conclusions from the data that we have. It is just that we cannot make quite such definitive conclusions and we cannot rely wholly on the data set. With my History & Politics hat on, political science made me somewhat sceptical of the data. Not so much that none of it was valid but that it was primarily anecdotal and there were methodological questions over the accumulation of data. Much of what we heard simply confirmed what we already knew; evangelical churches that have maintained clarity on the gospel are growing. There was a strong pull to want to believe the data as presented.
Anecdotal evidence, contrary to popular opinion, is not valueless. It does present a bit of a picture. But the emphasis is heavily on ‘a bit’. It isn’t anywhere close to giving us a systematic picture, but tiny snapshots of what is happening in some areas. It is perfectly reasonable for churches to speak into what they are seeing on the ground. Their anecdotal evidence is not moot. But we have to be careful about jumping from the pockets of anecdotal evidence we have and insisting this is the wider, national picture at large. What is more, the anecdotal evidence – whilst probably true – may well have other explanations that account for it that fit with the wider national picture, or rather would do if we happened to have reliable data concerning what is (or is not) happening nationally. A boom in a number of churches is not the same as a national revival or increased interest in faith.
Which brings me round to my question: do we need to apologise for this in our churches? Do we need – like the Bible Society – to publicly own the fact that we don’t quite have the evidence to insist there is a Quiet Revival? Should we apologise for suggesting there has been one?
As I note above, I was relatively sceptical of the data. This isn’t just me saying this after the fact. Just google any comment on this blog about the Quiet Revival. You will find me repeatedly referring to it with a degree of scepticism. You will note in the pieces mentioning it that I am not altogether comfortable with the suggestion there is a Quiet Revival exactly. Even the anecdotal bits potentially suggesting a greater degree of openness than before, I am hardly emphasising ‘revival’. In church, I don’t think we have mentioned the Quiet Revival from the front, in any service or sermon, at all. It hasn’t been a particular topic of conversation amongst our people so far as I have gathered.
If you largely approached the Quiet Revival as we have, and not really mentioned it or voiced strong opinions on it, it is hard to imagine you have much to apologise for. If you’ve barely mentioned it and made little of it, why would you need to apologise for not having made much of it? On the other hand, if you have crowed about it, if you have insisted – particularly based on the evidence in the report (or just anecdotally) – there really is a Quiet Revival, as people of the truth, you may just have to own that and make a similar noise about not knowing and not having the evidence available to back up your stance.
What I suspect matters at this stage is not whether there is a Quiet Revival or not. What I suspect matters – as always matters – is where we sense greater openness, engagement and growth locally, give thanks to God for the increase and make the most of the opportunity where you have it. If you aren’t noticing these things on the ground in your area, pray to the Lord of the harvest to make what others anecdotally report true for you. In the end, this is just the ordinary stuff of ministry and that means we continue with the ordinary stuff of ministry, Quiet Revival or no Quiet Revival.