{Many Questions and Few Answers Along the Never-Finished Journey of Faith}
The Myth of Young Adults Having a Voice For Change
Why is it that church leaders want to “hear from young adults” as long as they can frame the conversation? Why is it when young adults are asked about the church, every conversation centers on what’s wrong with the system? And why is it so common that the aftermath of these conversations are riddled with older church leaders shaking their heads at the “sense of entitlement” on display among younger clergy?
United Methodists are probably aware of a meeting that happened recently sponsored by the General Board of Higher Education and Ministry. This was the first of what promises to be many meetings funded by a new line-item of $7 million dollars from the denomination marked for the development of more young clergy for the ordained ministry. The meeting was largely geared towards assessing the current track towards ordained ministry [Note: I was not present so if I'm wrong, please correct me and know that I'm merely reporting what was reported by The United Methodist Reporter in their article]. While the entire gathering seemed largely positive (despite the tone of articles), there was a good deal of critique levied against the current system of ordination.
I’m also reminded of a gathering held last year in my own annual conference where young clergy gathered for dialogue. The event was a good time of fellowship and it was geared towards giving young clergy an opportunity to give voice to thoughts on the church system — Does the appointment-making process suit young clergy? How does the system ignore the needs of young clergy? Can the system be improved in order to better meet the needs of young clergy?
All of this is fine and good but I think gatherings like this have created a myth that somehow young adults are a growing voice for change in The United Methodist Church.
You see, when meetings are geared towards airing grievances, then that’s what you’ll get. If we want to empower young clergy to help address issues of decline in the church, why are gatherings focused largely on complaints about the shortcomings of our system?
Let me applaud both gatherings for what they were intended to be — a first step in empowering young clergy. But why are we not talking more about ministry?
Battling the Sin of Entitlement
Could it be that in a culture of decline, one of our major issues is our collective sense of entitlement? I’ve got some older pastor friends who’ve told me about “entitlement among younger clergy” — and they’re right. We have a lot of debt and complicated family situations and it can be frustrating at times to work in a system better suited for a 1950s style of living. But for those of us who grew up in The United Methodist Church, served on committees as lay people, answered a call to ministry, and now serve as clergy we also know the temptation of entitlement is something you learn from others. All of the debate centered on guaranteed appointments, more apportionment giving, and salaries are laced with a sense of entitlement among all clergy — “we deserve 100% job security,” “we need a large conference staff and spending accounts even when local churches and lay people are suffering,” “I deserve that raise because I work harder than most.”
I don’t think everyone in our system operates out of a system of entitlement — please hear that. Like many sins, entitlement is a temptation that lurks below the surface and masks itself as a choice for something good. But all clergy, young and old alike, suffer from this temptation whether we want to admit it or not.
What Should We Talk About With Young Adults?
If we want to avoid nit-picking the system in favor of dialogues centered around ministry, where should we begin? If The United Methodist Church is serious about reaching out to younger adults in the pews, then leaders should get serious about learning what makes a young adult in 2012 tick. If most church leaders are 50 and older, then there’s a growing need for these leaders to learn about other generations. Young clergy are a great place to begin this educational process! As young adults, a majority of the people we pastor are old enough to be our parents and grandparents. On the other hand, older leaders are largely pastoring their contemporaries or folks old enough to be their parents.
With the gap widening between those over-50 and under-50 in the church, what if we could have grand conversations where learning happens across generations? Older leaders can learn about a generation foreign to them, and younger pastors can learn how to be leaders.
If the young clergy are to lead, then we need to grow into it starting now. You’re not a leader simply by virtue of being a part of a demographic. However we can’t operate in a system of “pay your dues” any longer — the church won’t survive it over the long run. And if older leaders want to mentor and truly lead the next generation, then it’s time for more education on what it means to be a young adult — the church won’t survive decisions, sermons, and vision devoid of the concerns of a younger generation.
One thing is for sure, exercises in placating young adults by giving room for them to vent are fine and dandy if they eventually lead to true dialogue about ministry. But dialogue requires one side be ready to talk about ministry — not themselves — and the other side be ready to listen as though something is at stake beyond their own personal interests.
Questions:
What are some examples of gatherings where ministry and leadership are the topics of conversation? Where have you seen clergy across generations help each other in ministry and leadership?
Member of Christian Century Blog Network
I Contribute to:
Missional Manifesto for the People Called Methodist
Ben,
I appreciate what you are saying. In my coaching work with SLI, I tell older leaders that they need to practice reverse mentoring in order to understand the younger generation. A pastor leadership incubator would be a great place for the type of dialogue you are proposing. Unfortunately, the ones I have been involved with have very few young pastors as participants even though they were invited. I would be interested in your thoughts as to why this is the case.
There is an incredible danger in saying that the future of the church rests in the young adults. There is an incredible hope in including young adults in the future of the church. One is passive, the other is active. One acts out of entitlement and wanting to be “generous” and expand that entitlement…the other truly is missional and is willing to lose control to reach people for Christ.
Good post, B.
Really enjoyed your thoughts. Thanks for sharing.
Perhaps the problem is not the age of the body but the age of the mind. I have said it before but I know plenty of individuals who are calendar old but mentally young; I also know probably as many individuals who are calendar young but mentally old.
We have a system in place that encourages the ones who wait but when it is their turn, they are “old” in body and probably spirit as well.
What I think is that 1) we forget that while Abraham and Moses may have been calendar old they were spiritually young, prepared to lead in new directions. It is not a matter of how old your body is but how young you are in spirit.
Is this an advantage that the calendar young have? I am not sure. What I am sure of is that we have to get out of the mindset that those who hold the positions in power because of their age have the answers.
Thanks, Tony! I have to agree that chronological age is not necessarily an asset or a liability, while youth is not necessarily a mark of virtue. Over the years I have experienced nearly as much resistance to new methods of engaging in ministry from those a decade or two younger than me, as I have from any of those most would typically imagine to be the guardians of tradition.
Ben, I too long for a culture where we can speak clearly about the call to be the church God intends us to be; and it not already be sabotaged by defining it as having “sides.” After all, the last I checked, those who profess faith in Jesus Christ are on the same side.
Ben, The issue you are pursuing is critical. It is one thing to presume entitlement (with the consequent temptation of “I’m not getting what I should”, or even self-pity), but quite another to say “With whom can we work to make a difference?” The latter opens up the discussion across generations. Clearly we must assess “systems” and “structures” within the UMC…with honesty and a lot more trust that we often show! But alongside this we need concrete examples of collaborative ministries across the lines. Could we imagine cohorts of younger and some older pastors, lay leaders (perhaps including a facilitating empathetic theologian) working together? Yes we can…first identifying what is actually going on in particular communities that requires such collaboration of energies and reflection. I’ve seen it with my own eyes.
Under the Mercy!
I think the focus on young adult participation – from those in the hierarchy and from us below – is strange. Here in Western NC there was a big push to send youth and young adult reps, clergy and lay, to General Conference. I’m not sure that’s wise. I’m in my first appointment, just turned 30, and I don’t have much to offer as far as guidance in the general church matters. I’m also not entirely sure we should get rid of the “dues” system. I wouldn’t have much confidence in Generals that got really interested in what Corporals were thinking. If those Generals started looking to the Corporals for ideas, then you know the whole Army is in trouble.
Drew-
Thanks for commenting! I largely agree with you when it comes to matters at the general church level. What I’m talking about, however, is at the most local level. With a widening gap of a younger adult audience in church, it’s vital that pastors of the Boomer generation remember that they must continue reaching out beyond their own contemporaries. I’m critiquing the notion that we say we want younger adults in church but we use sermon illustration material that predates the very audience we say we want.
I only disagree with a “dues paying system” as long as we have a guaranteed job status and a system that ensures we get promoted no matter what our performance merits. Tenure only works in institutions that are succeeded — if the church is failing, then maybe we need to question our systems of leadership. But I’m not about to say young pastors should lead, per se. I’m simply in favor of a merit system across the board.