The Vanishing Church

How the Hollowing Out of Moderate Congregations Is Hurting Democracy, Faith, and Us

De: Ryan P. Burge

Narrado por: Jim Denison

Many people take it for granted: Evangelicals are Republican, Democrats aren't religious, and moderate Christians may as well not exist. But it wasn't always this way. Those who grew up evangelical in the 1980s were just as likely to sit next to a Democrat as a Republican at church. What happened in the decades that followed?

Data scientist Ryan Burge demystifies the recent polarization of American pews, helping listeners understand why the religious landscape has changed so much in the last fifty years and how this divide impacts every aspect of society. Burge argues that Americans prioritized their political parties over their denominations amid the culture wars. As many churches embraced conservative politics, moderate and liberal Christians left the church in droves.

Yet Burge shows us that returning to church may be just what America needs. Many Americans want to be people of faith and believe deeply in the principles of religion. Churches provide support systems for needy families. And statistically, churchgoers tend to be more tolerant and have better mental health than Americans who don't attend church. Blending personal narrative and carefully presented data, Burge urges listeners to rebuild faith communities that can reach across the aisle.

©2026 Ryan P. Burge (P)2026 Christian Audio

Mainliner pleas for more of what killed the mainline.

The author points out that mainline should understood as “moderate”, at least in the sense of the clergy accepting a large degree of doctrinal uncertainty. And this is what killed the mainline: progressives and conservatives alike defected from the mainline in the 1970s because it wouldn’t take a strong stand on either side. This gave rise to the evangelical boom of the 1980s and the rise of the Nones in the 1990s, and we continue live out this dynamic in our politics today: secularists are on the left, evangelicals are on the right, and mainline moderates continue their collapse. All of this historical analysis is edifying upon understanding the mainline as moderate.

The author, however, openly blames the Religious Right for dividing the country politically in the 1970s onward. There is notably, however, virtually no mention of the divisive issues of the 1960s that the Religious Fight was reacting against. This is a fatal blind spot to the political analysis, and it underscores why nobody thinks of the mainline as moderate: when leftwing ideas are accepted as legitimate options but right wing ideas are rejected as divisive, that’s choosing a side.

The author clearly wants the clergy to embrace uncertainty and a diversity of views, as the data clearly shows that the laity accept a diversity of views and do not align with the “official” teachings of their denominations. But this is exactly the style of leadership that killed the mainline. Arguably, it’s not even leadership.

The concluding advice the laity is much better: while it’s reason to expect to agree with official teaching most of the time, church is also supposed to challenge you to be better. Church cannot make you better, if you think you have all of the best opinions already.

Finally, the author is very much a Protestant’s Protestant. While there is a lengthy discussion of trend within Catholicism, the territory of Catholicism is clearly foreign to the author. There is essentially no discussion of liberal Catholics (much less liberal orders), and the discussion of traditional Catholics is essentially just stereotyping. You will also find virtually no mention of Mormonism, nor avowedly progressive denominations. While a book cannot cover everything, these seem to be notably blind spots.

Altogether, the book is a helpful look at the American (mostly Protestant) Church from the perspective a devoted mainliner. Of course, it’s reasonable for a mainliner to think that mainlinerism is good, and the world would be better with a more mainline approach. It’s difficult to believe, however, that many will be convinced by this appeal.