PASTORAL and THEOLOGICAL REFLECTIONS

---

Abstract

Migration has transformed family structures across the world, resulting in increasing numbers of transnational families in which adult children live geographically distant from their ageing parents. Within such contexts, a subtle but recurring dynamic often emerges: parents appear to demonstrate greater emotional warmth, trust, or reliance toward the adult child who resides locally rather than those living abroad. 

This article explores the socio-psychological mechanisms underlying this perceived parental favouritism. Drawing on qualitative pastoral observations within migrant communities in the United Kingdom, and informed by sociological and psychological theories of family relationships, the article examines the role of geographic proximity, relational reciprocity, ageing anxiety, cultural expectations of filial responsibility, and emotional labour in shaping parental behaviour. Integrating insights from attachment theory, socioemotional selectivity theory, and intergenerational solidarity frameworks, the study argues that proximity significantly influences emotional bonding, caregiving opportunities, and perceptions of reliability. 

While such parental differentiation is rarely intentional, it may nonetheless generate feelings of resentment, marginalisation, or misunderstanding among siblings living abroad. By highlighting these dynamics, the article seeks to promote greater awareness among parents and adult children in transnational families, encouraging more empathetic interpretations of family relationships and fostering healthier patterns of intergenerational interaction despite geographic distance.

Keywords

Transnational families; parental favouritism; geographic proximity; diaspora studies; intergenerational relationships; attachment theory; emotional labour; ageing and family dynamics.

Introduction

Global migration has reshaped family life in profound ways. Increasing numbers of families today exist across national borders, with adult children pursuing education, employment, or marriage opportunities abroad while their parents remain in their country of origin or relocate elsewhere. Such transnational family arrangements often involve complex emotional, economic, and relational negotiations.

Within migrant communities, a commonly reported yet underexplored phenomenon concerns perceived parental favouritism toward the adult child who lives geographically closer to parents. Despite maintaining regular communication, sending financial support, or providing emotional care from afar, children living abroad may experience a sense that their contributions are less visible or valued compared with those of siblings who remain nearby.

This perception raises important questions about how physical proximity shapes emotional bonds and parental behaviour. Why does geographic distance appear to influence parental attachment and trust? To what extent do cultural expectations about caregiving reinforce such patterns? And how do these dynamics affect sibling relationships within transnational families?

The present article seeks to explore these questions through an interdisciplinary perspective that integrates insights from sociology, psychology, and pastoral studies. Drawing upon qualitative pastoral observations within migrant communities in the United Kingdom, the article examines the social and psychological processes that may contribute to parental differentiation among adult children.

Theoretical Framework

Understanding parental favouritism toward geographically proximate children requires engagement with several theoretical perspectives that illuminate the dynamics of family relationships across the life course.

Intergenerational Solidarity Theory

Intergenerational Solidarity Theory provides an important framework for analysing relationships between parents and adult children. Silverstein and Bengtson (1997) identify several dimensions of solidarity, including emotional closeness, frequency of contact, functional support, normative expectations, and geographic proximity. Their research demonstrates that physical proximity strongly correlates with higher levels of interaction and support, which in turn reinforce emotional bonds.

Lawton, Silverstein, and Bengtson (1994) further found that geographic distance significantly influences the frequency of social contact and the perceived quality of parent–child relationships. Thus, proximity functions not merely as a logistical factor but as a structural condition that shapes emotional attachment.

Attachment Theory

Attachment theory, initially developed by Bowlby (1969) and expanded by Ainsworth (1978), emphasises the importance of physical closeness in maintaining emotional security. Although traditionally applied to childhood relationships, attachment processes continue throughout adulthood.

In later life, ageing parents may seek reassurance through the physical presence of trusted family members, particularly during periods of declining health or increased vulnerability. Proximity therefore reinforces emotional security in ways that remote communication may struggle to replicate.

Socioemotional Selectivity Theory

Socioemotional Selectivity Theory (Carstensen, 1992) provides further insight into relational patterns in later adulthood. The theory suggests that as individuals perceive their remaining time as limited, they prioritise emotionally meaningful relationships and interactions.

Older adults often reduce their social networks and invest more deeply in relationships that provide immediate emotional satisfaction. Because geographically close children offer more opportunities for spontaneous interaction, they often become central figures within ageing parents’ emotional world.

Emotional Economy and Kin Work

Sociological theories of emotional labour also contribute to understanding family dynamics. Hochschild (1983) introduced the concept of emotional economy, highlighting how emotional expressions and relationships involve forms of labour and exchange.

Similarly, Di Leonardo (1987) describes kin work as the often invisible labour involved in sustaining family ties, including caregiving, organising social gatherings, and maintaining communication networks. Local children are typically better positioned to perform such work, which may lead parents to unconsciously reward them with greater affection or reliance.

Together, these theoretical perspectives provide a framework for understanding how proximity, caregiving opportunities, and emotional labour interact to shape parental preferences within transnational families.

Methodology

Research Design

This article adopts an exploratory qualitative approach, drawing on pastoral observation and community engagement within migrant populations in the United Kingdom. Rather than presenting a formal empirical dataset, the study reflects a practice-informed inquiry grounded in lived experience and pastoral encounters.

Pastoral contexts often provide unique access to family narratives and relational tensions that may not surface in formal interviews or surveys. Through informal conversations, pastoral counselling sessions, and community interactions over several years, recurring themes emerged concerning perceptions of parental favouritism within transnational families.

Pastoral Observation Framework

The methodological approach may be described as qualitative pastoral observation, a reflective framework commonly used in practical theology and pastoral studies. This method involves attentive listening to lived experiences within community settings and interpreting them through theoretical and scholarly perspectives.

Key observations informing this article include:

• narratives of migrant adults who perceive unequal parental affection
   
• accounts of ageing parents expressing dependence on geographically close children
   
• discussions of sibling tensions arising from differential expectations of caregiving
   

These observations were not systematically recorded as formal interviews; however, they provided consistent thematic patterns that align with findings in sociological and psychological literature.

Analytical Approach

The analysis therefore combines:

1. Pastoral observation
    
2. Theoretical interpretation
    
3. Integration with existing academic research
    

This triangulated approach allows the article to situate lived experiences within broader theoretical frameworks while maintaining sensitivity to the complexities of transnational family life.

Discussion

Proximity Bias and Emotional Presence

A central factor influencing parental favouritism is proximity bias, the psychological tendency to form stronger attachments to individuals who are physically present. The mere exposure effect (Zajonc, 1968) suggests that repeated interaction naturally increases familiarity and affection.

For ageing parents, even occasional physical encounters with nearby children may carry greater emotional significance than frequent digital communication with distant children.

Relational Reciprocity and Practical Support

Proximity also facilitates instrumental support, including assistance with transportation, household tasks, or medical appointments. Over time, such acts reinforce perceptions of reliability and commitment.

According to Rossi and Rossi’s (1990) contingency theory of support, assistance within families is often determined by both need and opportunity. Because geographically proximate children have greater opportunities to provide support, they may become central figures within parents’ support networks.

Ageing Anxiety and Emotional Security

As individuals age, concerns about vulnerability, loneliness, and dependency intensify. Physical proximity to trusted family members therefore becomes an important source of psychological reassurance.

Attachment theory suggests that such proximity strengthens feelings of security, which may explain why parents gravitate toward nearby children during later stages of life.

Cultural Expectations and Filial Responsibility

In many collectivist cultures, physical presence is traditionally regarded as the most visible expression of filial duty. Kagitcibasi (2007) notes that within such cultural frameworks, children who remain geographically close are often perceived as fulfilling moral obligations toward their parents.

Meanwhile, contributions from children living abroad—such as financial support or digital communication—may be less visible or culturally recognised as equivalent forms of care.

Emotional Economy and Invisible Labour

Another important factor involves the emotional economy of family relationships. Parents may unconsciously distribute emotional warmth in response to the emotional labour they receive.

Local children often provide companionship, organise family gatherings, and maintain daily interactions. These activities constitute forms of kin work that reinforce emotional closeness and parental reliance.

Research Limitations

This study has several limitations that should be acknowledged.

First, the research is based primarily on qualitative pastoral observations rather than systematic empirical data. While these insights provide valuable experiential perspectives, future research would benefit from structured interviews, surveys, or longitudinal studies.

Second, the analysis focuses largely on diasporic migrant communities in the United Kingdom, which may limit generalisability across different cultural or national contexts.

Third, the article emphasises parental perspectives and psychological processes but does not extensively examine how sibling dynamics and migration trajectories may independently influence family relationships.

Future research could explore these issues through comparative studies across different cultural groups, as well as quantitative analyses examining correlations between geographic distance, caregiving patterns, and parental emotional differentiation.

Conclusion

Parental favouritism toward geographically proximate adult children represents a complex phenomenon shaped by psychological, cultural, and structural factors. Physical presence enhances emotional bonding through repeated interaction, opportunities for caregiving, and reassurance against loneliness in later life.

Importantly, such differentiation rarely reflects deliberate bias or diminished love for distant children. Rather, it reflects the powerful influence of proximity, caregiving reciprocity, and emotional labour in shaping family relationships.

For transnational families navigating geographic separation, greater awareness of these dynamics may help prevent misunderstanding and resentment. By recognising the emotional realities of proximity and distance, both parents and siblings can cultivate deeper empathy and strengthen family bonds across borders.

Ultimately, understanding these relational dynamics is essential for fostering healthier intergenerational relationships in an increasingly mobile and globalised world.

Bibliography

Ainsworth, M. D. S. (1978). Patterns of attachment: A psychological study of the strange situation. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Bossard, J. H. S. (1943). Residential propinquity as a factor in marriage selection. American Journal of Sociology, 48(4), 575–580.

Bowlby, J. (1969). Attachment and loss: Vol. 1. Attachment. Basic Books.

Carstensen, L. L. (1992). Social and emotional patterns in adulthood. Psychology and Aging, 7(3), 331–338.

Di Leonardo, M. (1987). The female world of cards and holidays. Signs, 12(3), 440–453.

Fingerman, K. L. (2001). Aging mothers and their adult daughters. Springer.

Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity. Stanford University Press.

Hargittai, E. (2002). Second-level digital divide. First Monday, 7(4).

Hochschild, A. R. (1983). The managed heart. University of California Press.

Kagitcibasi, C. (2007). Family, self, and human development across cultures. Lawrence Erlbaum.

Lawton, L., Silverstein, M., & Bengtson, V. L. (1994). Affection, social contact, and geographic distance. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 56(1), 57–68.

Rossi, A. S., & Rossi, P. H. (1990). Of human bonding. Aldine de Gruyter.

Silverstein, M., & Bengtson, V. L. (1997). Intergenerational solidarity. American Journal of Sociology, 103(2), 429–460.

Suitor, J. J., Sechrist, J., & Pillemer, K. (2007). Within-family differences in parental support. Research on Aging, 29(5), 410–435.

Zajonc, R. B. (1968). Attitudinal effects of mere exposure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 9(2), 1–27.

Abstract

This article examines whether Christians should consider cremation or burial in their funeral planning, engaging biblical scholarship and theological reflection with particular sensitivity to a West African Anglican congregation in inner-city London. Drawing on peer-reviewed contributions from scholars such as N.T Wright, John W. Cooper, J. Richard Middleton, and Stanley Hauerwas, the study explores scriptural foundations, historical Christian practice, and contemporary pastoral concerns. It argues that while burial holds strong biblical symbolism, cremation is not prohibited within Christian doctrine, and both practices may faithfully witness to the hope of resurrection when rightly understood.

Rationale for the Study

The present inquiry—“Should Christians accept cremation as part of their funeral plan?”—emerged not in abstraction, but within the living context of worship on Resurrection Day (Easter), the central feast of the Christian faith. The question was posed by a member of the congregation immediately following the Easter liturgy, a moment already saturated with theological significance concerning death, the body, and the hope of resurrection. Its timing renders the question particularly apt, as it invites deeper reflection on how Christian eschatological convictions inform contemporary funeral practices.

Such pastoral questions, arising organically within the life of the Church, demand not only immediate sensitivity but also careful theological engagement. In response, this study adopts a method of critical theological inquiry, drawing upon the work of biblical scholars and theologians whose contributions have been rigorously examined within peer-reviewed academic contexts. This ensures that the discussion is not merely anecdotal or speculative, but grounded in the wider corpus of scholarly Christian reflection.

Among the voices engaged, particular attention is given to N.T. Wright—former Anglican Bishop of Durham and Professor of New Testament—whose extensive work on resurrection theology has significantly shaped contemporary Christian understanding of life after death. His scholarship, alongside that of other theologians, provides a robust framework for evaluating the theological legitimacy and implications of cremation within Christian doctrine.

The aim, therefore, is not to offer a simplistic or prescriptive answer, but to present a carefully reasoned synthesis of biblical and theological perspectives. It is hoped that the insights gathered herein will serve as food for thought—stimulating informed reflection, pastoral discernment, and faithful decision-making within the life of the Church.

1. Introduction: A Diaspora Question of Body, Culture, and Hope

Among many West African Christians, burial has long been intertwined with identity, dignity, and communal memory. Migration to cities like London, however, introduces new economic, spatial, and cultural realities. Rising funeral costs, limited burial space, and pastoral considerations have led many to ask: Must Christians be buried, or may they be cremated?

This question is not merely practical—it is deeply theological, touching on the meaning of the body, death, and the resurrection hope proclaimed in the Gospel.

2. Biblical Foundations: Dust, Fire, and Resurrection

2.1 The Theology of the Body

The Bible affirms the goodness and dignity of the human body:

• Genesis 2:7: “The Lord God formed man from the dust of the ground.”

• 1 Corinthians 6:19: The body is a “temple of the Holy Spirit.”

As John W. Cooper argues, biblical anthropology resists any notion that the body is disposable; rather, it is integral to human identity and destined for redemption.

2.2 Burial as the Norm in Scripture

Burial is the dominant biblical practice:

• Abraham buries Sarah (Genesis 23)

• Joseph’s bones are carried to the Promised Land (Exodus 13:19)

• Jesus Himself is buried (Matthew 27:57–60)

For N. T. Wright, burial reflects the Jewish and early Christian belief in bodily resurrection—not the abandonment of the body, but its transformation.

2.3 Fire in Scripture: Judgment, Not Normative Practice

Cremation is rare and often associated with judgment or crisis:

• 1 Samuel 31:12: Saul’s body is burned after battle (likely for practical reasons)

• Amos 2:1: Burning bones is condemned in a prophetic context

However, scholars like J.Richard Middleton, caution against overgeneralising: these instances do not constitute a universal prohibition of cremation.

3. The Resurrection Body: The Decisive Doctrine

The central Christian claim is not how the body is disposed of, but what God will do with it.

• 1 Corinthians 15:42–44: “What is sown perishable is raised imperishable.”

N.T. Wright emphasises that resurrection is not resuscitation but transformation—God gives a new, glorified body. Whether a body has decomposed in a grave or been reduced to ashes does not limit divine power.

Similarly, Stanley Hauerwas frames Christian funerals as acts of witness: the Church proclaims hope not in the preservation of remains, but in the faithfulness of God.

4. Historical and Ecclesial Perspectives

4.1 Early Church Preference for Burial

Early Christians preferred burial, partly to distinguish themselves from Greco-Roman cremation practices and to embody resurrection hope.

4.2 Contemporary Anglican Position

The Church of England permits both burial and cremation. Its funeral liturgies affirm:

“Earth to earth, ashes to ashes, dust to dust… in sure and certain hope of the resurrection.”

This liturgical language itself acknowledges both realities—decay and hope—without prescribing one method over another.

5. Cultural Theology: A West African Diaspora Lens

For many West African Christians:

• Burial signifies honour, continuity, and belonging

• Gravesites function as places of memory and communal identity

• Funeral rites express theological convictions about life, death, and ancestry

Yet diaspora life introduces new considerations:

• Limited burial space in London

• Financial constraints

• Transnational family dynamics

A rigid insistence on burial may unintentionally burden families. Conversely, cremation may feel culturally unfamiliar or emotionally difficult.

Here, pastoral sensitivity is essential: theology must engage culture without being captive to it.

6. Ethical and Pastoral Considerations

6.1 Arguments for Burial

• Strong biblical precedent

• Symbolism of “sowing” the body (1 Corinthians 15)

• Cultural resonance in West African traditions

6.2 Arguments for Cremation

• Practical (cost, space, mobility)

• Theologically permissible (no explicit biblical prohibition)

• Affirms God’s sovereignty over the body regardless of its state

6.3 A Pastoral Middle Way

Scholars broadly agree: the method of bodily disposition is secondary to the confession of resurrection faith.

7. Conclusion: Faithful Witness Beyond Method

The question is not ultimately burial or cremation, but what story the Church tells about death.

Christians proclaim that:

• The body matters

• Death is not the end

• God will raise the dead in glory.

Whether committed to the earth or returned to ashes, the Christian dead rest in the same hope:

“For you are dust, and to dust you shall return” (Genesis 3:19)—

but also, “He will transform our lowly body to be like his glorious body” (Philippians 3:21).

8. Final Pastoral Word to the Congregation

For a West African Anglican congregation in London:

• You are free, within Christian doctrine, to choose either burial or cremation

• Let your decision be guided by faith, conscience, family context, and pastoral counsel

• Above all, let your funeral plans proclaim the Gospel—not fear, but hope.

In the end, whether by earth or by fire, the promise remains unchanged:

Christ is risen—and in Him, so shall we be.

1. Prayer Before the Sermon (Luke 24: Emmaus Road)

Our Father in heaven,

As we gather on this Emmaus Road of worship,
we come as your people—sometimes hopeful, sometimes confused,
sometimes carrying questions we do not know how to answer.

Lord Jesus, just as you drew near to those disciples,
draw near to us now.
Walk with us through this moment.
Meet us in our thoughts, our doubts, and our silent struggles.

Open the Scriptures to us,
so that what we hear today is not just words,
but your living voice speaking into our lives.

By the power of your Holy Spirit,
cause our hearts to burn within us again—
with faith, with hope, and with fresh understanding.

Lord, we do not want you to pass us by.
We invite you: stay with us.
Stay with us in this place,
stay with us in our hearts,
stay with us in our homes and in our journeys.

Open our eyes,
that we may recognise you—
in your Word,
in one another,
and in the breaking of bread.

We ask this through Jesus Christ our Lord,
who is alive and reigns with you,
in the unity of the Holy Spirit,
one God, now and forever.

Amen.

2. Introduction

Beloved in Christ,

There is something deeply familiar in this passage — especially for those of us living far from where our story began.

Two disciples are walking away from Jerusalem —

· away from what they knew,

· away from what made sense,

· away from what they thought God was doing.

In many ways, it is a migration story.

They are leaving the place of promise, carrying disappointment, confusion, and unanswered questions.

And if we are honest — many of us know that journey.

Not just spiritually… but physically.

· We left home with hope.

· We came to London with expectations.

· We believed certain things would fall into place:

Ø Careers would stabilise 

Ø Home Office papers would come through quickly 

Ø Families would settle easily 

Ø Life would feel clearer 

But somewhere along the journey, reality became more complicated.

And we found ourselves walking a road we did not plan.

· The road of confusion.

· The road of delayed answers.

· The road of “God, this is not how I imagined it.”

But hear the good news:

Jesus meets people on that road.

The Bible says:
“Jesus himself came up and walked along with them.”

They did not recognise Him.
But He was there.

Church — you may feel far from where you started, but you are not far from where Christ can meet you.

And as we say back home:
“However long the night, the dawn will break.”

I declare this- 

Your London night will not last forever. Christ is already walking you toward morning.

3. Jesus Meets Us in the Reality of Diaspora Life

Jesus does not wait for stability before He shows up.

He comes into the realities we carry:

• The pressure to send money home 
• The quiet stress of immigration status 
• The feeling of being overqualified but under-recognised 
• The loneliness of raising children without extended family 
• The tension between African values and British culture 
• The silent comparison: “Others seem to be doing better than me” 

This is the Emmaus Road in London.

And yet — Jesus draws near.

As another proverb reminds us:

 “When there is no enemy within, the enemies outside cannot destroy you.”

If Christ is with you — the system may challenge you, but it cannot define you.

So, hear this clearly:

• You are not walking alone in this country 
• Your struggle has not pushed Jesus away 
• Your questions have not disqualified His presence 

He is walking with you — even when you don’t recognise Him in your situation.

3. God Is Working Even When Life Feels Unclear

Jesus begins to explain the Scriptures to them.

But they still do not recognise Him.

Why?

Because sometimes, in diaspora life, God is working beneath the surface.

• While you are waiting — He is forming you 
• While things feel delayed — He is aligning things 
• While you feel unseen — He is shaping your testimony 

We often want quick breakthroughs.

But God often works through process.

As we say:

 “Wisdom is like a baobab tree; no one person can embrace it.”

Some of us are in a season of understanding, not yet a season of clarity.

But something is happening.

That’s why the disciples later said:

“Were not our hearts burning within us?”

Church — even if your situation has not changed yet, is your heart still burning?

Say it with faith:

 “Lord, let my heart burn again!”

4. “Stay With Us” — Making Space for Jesus in Diaspora Life

This is the turning point.

They said:
“Stay with us.”

In diaspora life, it is easy to become busy surviving and forget inviting.

· We work long hours.

· We juggle responsibilities.

· We carry burdens quietly.

And sometimes, without realising it, we leave Jesus at the edge of our lives.

We give Him Sunday —
but Monday to Saturday belongs to stress.

But hear this wisdom:
“A visitor who does not feel welcome will not stay long.”

Jesus will walk with you —
but He waits to be invited to remain.

Invite him, not just in church —
but in:

• Your financial decisions 
• Your parenting 
• Your relationships 
• Your private struggles 
• Your immigration journey 

The breakthrough did not happen on the road.

It happened when they said:
“Come in.”

5. Revelation Happens at the Table — In Everyday Life

The Bible says:

When He sat at the table, took bread, blessed it, broke it —
their eyes were opened.

Church — this is powerful.

Revelation did not happen in a big miracle moment.

It happened in an ordinary act — eating together.

For us in diaspora, the “table” matters:

• The dinner table after a long shift 
• The phone call home to family 
• The shared meal after church 
• The quiet prayer before sleep 

As we say:
“The one who eats alone cannot explain the taste of the food.”

When Jesus is present in your everyday life:

• Confusion becomes clarity 
• Survival becomes purpose 
• Pressure becomes testimony 
• Ordinary life becomes sacred 

Some of us are waiting for a dramatic breakthrough —
but Jesus is saying:

“Invite Me into your ordinary moments.”

That is where your eyes will open.

6. A Word for Us Today- a takeaway

Church, today is not just another Sunday.

Christ is already among us.

• In the worship — He is stirring hearts 
• In the Word — He is explaining your story 
• In this moment — He is walking your journey with you 

And hear this carefully:

Many in diaspora carry hidden burdens.

· Smiling outside.

· Fighting inside.

But Christ sees it all.

And as the proverb says:
“The child who is not embraced by the village will burn it down to feel its warmth.”

But you do not need to strive for belonging.

In Christ — you already belong.

He is embracing you today:

• In your confusion 
• In your delay 
• In your silent struggles 

But the question remains:

Will you ask Him to stay?

7. Bring Jesus Into Your London Life

Do not leave Jesus in the church building today.

Take Him home.

Into:

• Your shared accommodation 
• Your family routines 
• Your financial pressures 
• Your future plans 

Because this is also true:
“Rain does not fall on one roof alone.”

What you are going through is not yours alone.

But when Jesus stays —
He changes how the rain feels.

Say it:

• “Lord, stay with me in this country” 
• “Stay with me in my home” 
• “Stay with me in my journey” 

Because when He stays:

Eyes open.
Hearts burn.
Lives change.

8. Closing Declaration

I declare over this congregation:

• Your eyes will be opened 
• Your heart will burn again 
• Your confusion will become clarity 
• You will recognise Jesus in unexpected places 

And as we say:

“No matter how far the stream flows, it never forgets its source.”

You may be far from home —
but you are not far from your Source.

And this week, somebody will testify:

“I did not recognise Him before — but now I see Him clearly!”

9. Final Call

If you are walking a road of confusion…
If life in this land has not gone as expected…
If you are asking, “God, what are You doing?”

Lift your heart and say:

“Stay with me, Lord.”

And watch what happens next.

In the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

The Myth of Decline: A Critical Reflection on the Growth Narratives of Mainline and Pentecostal Churches

(A Ministerial and Ecclesiological Perspective from Africa and Inner-City London)

Abstract

A persistent narrative within contemporary Christianity suggests that mainline or traditional churches are in irreversible decline, while Pentecostal churches continue to flourish numerically and spiritually. This article challenges that assumption by arguing that such a binary is overly simplistic and often rooted in perception rather than comprehensive ecclesial analysis. Drawing on two decades of ordained Anglican ministry across Sierra Leone, and inner-city London, this study offers a reflective critique of the myth that Pentecostal churches are inherently more successful in growth than traditional churches. It proposes that visible numerical gatherings do not always equate to sustained discipleship, theological depth, or long-term ecclesial stability. Conversely, smaller congregations within traditional churches may demonstrate greater resilience, doctrinal balance, and enduring spiritual formation.

1. Introduction

The statement “mainline churches are not growing” has become a common refrain in many Christian circles. Frequently, this claim is juxtaposed with the visible expansion of churches that identify as Pentecostal or charismatic, creating the impression that traditional ecclesial structures—such as Anglican, Methodist, Presbyterian, and Roman Catholic traditions—are experiencing inevitable decline.

This article contends that such a conclusion is, in many contexts, more mythical than empirical. My argument emerges from twenty years of ordained ministry within the Anglican Communion, including extensive pastoral work in Sierra Leone, and service as a vicar in inner-city London. These contexts have also included close engagement with Pentecostal communities, both through family networks and through practical experience of hosting a Pentecostal congregation within an Anglican church hall.

The purpose of this article is not to dismiss Pentecostal expressions of Christianity, but rather to question the uncritical assumption that they are universally “growing” while traditional churches are not.

2. The Illusion of Numerical Superiority

One of the strongest assumptions behind Pentecostal growth narratives is the equation of large gatherings with genuine ecclesial flourishing. Pentecostal churches often appear numerically vibrant, especially during crusades, vigils, healing services, and themed worship events. However, numerical visibility alone can be a misleading metric.

A significant proportion of attendees in such settings may best be understood sociologically as religious transients—Christians who move fluidly from one congregation to another in search of immediate spiritual or material benefits. These worshippers may be described metaphorically as “butterfly Christians,” moving from one ecclesial “flower” to another in search of theological “nectar” that satisfies present desires.

In many instances, this movement is sustained by attractional emphases on:

• miraculous healing,
• prosperity promises,
• deliverance from      misfortune,
• immediate breakthroughs,
• and the assurance of      visible success.

While these themes resonate deeply within contexts marked by poverty, insecurity, and fragile social systems, they may also encourage consumerist forms of Christianity rather than covenantal discipleship.

3. Theology, Suffering, and the Problem of Imbalance

A key concern in this discussion is not worship style, but theological balance. Some Pentecostal spaces may overemphasise prosperity and victory while underemphasising the biblical realities of suffering, holiness, sin, repentance, and divine judgment.

A robust Christian theology must hold together both the promises of grace and the cost of discipleship. Jesus himself speaks not merely of abundance, but of sacrificial following, self-denial, and perseverance through trials. When Christian proclamation becomes disproportionately centred on wealth acquisition, instant healing, or guaranteed earthly success, it risks muting the broader witness of Scripture.

Traditional churches, particularly within Anglicanism, have often retained a more liturgically and doctrinally balanced gospel framework, where themes of lament, penitence, Eucharistic formation, holiness, and hope coexist. This may not always produce spectacular crowds, but it often nurtures depth rather than spectacle.

4. Empirical Pastoral Observations from London

A particularly instructive case emerges from my pastoral experience in London, where an Anglican church hall hosted a Pentecostal congregation for regular worship services. If the common narrative of Pentecostal inevitability in growth were universally valid, one might reasonably expect such a congregation to expand steadily over time.

Yet the opposite occurred. Over an extended period, I observed no meaningful numerical increase. Eventually, the congregation ceased operations altogether.

This localised case study does not invalidate Pentecostal vitality elsewhere, but it does expose the danger of overgeneralisation. Not every Pentecostal church is flourishing, just as not every traditional church is declining.

Further anecdotal evidence from relatives attending branches of a well-known Pentecostal denomination in London confirms similar realities: some congregations remain consistently small, fragile, and numerically stagnant.

5. Reconsidering the African Context

The African church landscape further complicates simplistic growth assumptions. In countries such as Nigeria and Sierra Leone, many Anglican congregations continue to demonstrate remarkable numerical vitality, often surpassing expectations associated with “traditional” churches.

In Sierra Leone, Anglican churches remain deeply embedded within community life, education, liturgical identity, and intergenerational continuity. Closures due to poor attendance are comparatively rare. Likewise, in Nigeria, Anglican dioceses in many regions continue to experience substantial worship attendance, strong catechetical formation, and institutional resilience.

This suggests that the dichotomy between “declining traditional churches” and “growing Pentecostal churches” fails to account for regional ecclesiological realities.

6. Beyond Numbers: What Counts as Growth?

The deeper issue concerns the very definition of church growth. If growth is reduced merely to Sunday attendance figures, then churches with dramatic worship environments may appear more successful. However, Christian tradition has historically recognised multiple dimensions of growth:

• numerical growth
• spiritual maturity
• doctrinal formation
• sacramental faithfulness
• ethical transformation
• community witness
• intergenerational      continuity

On these measures, many traditional churches continue to thrive, even where numerical visibility is modest.

A small but faithful congregation shaped by Scripture, sacrament, holiness, and service may in fact be demonstrating a more sustainable model of ecclesial health than a larger congregation driven primarily by religious consumerism.

7. Conclusion

The claim that mainline churches are not growing while Pentecostal churches are flourishing should therefore be approached with caution. My ministerial experience across Africa and London suggests that this perception is often shaped by visibility bias, selective observation, and narrow definitions of success.

Pentecostal churches can indeed flourish, but so can traditional churches. Equally, both can experience stagnation, fragmentation, or renewal.

Christians should therefore resist envy based solely on visible crowd sizes. The more pressing question is not how many gather, but what kind of disciples are being formed.

Ultimately, authentic church growth must be measured not only in attendance, but in faithfulness to the gospel, theological depth, resilience in suffering, and transformed Christian living.