September 08, 2004

scandalous

What do you guys think of these words? Jennifer posted them a couple of days ago. I had one friend suggest...no...state that they were cruel. I wonder.

"Why is that young adults make the worst church members? Is it because they want another set of activities for their kids? Is it because they want to turn the sacred organism called the Church into some ecclesiastical version of the YMCA? ...And maybe I'm foolish and naive, but I actually believe that [the church] is intended to be the center of God's redemptive work in the world. So pardon me if I'm not more concerned about planning another lock-in for Junior and his buddies...We would be better off if we just said what we really expect church to be. I think the young adults would say, "Look, just keep my kids entertained. Give them something to do. Don't hassle us about having our lives restructured by the gospel. Because that's not what we want. We want activities and programs and pop religion that can make us feel better about ourselves. Keep our children off crack... keep them off our backs... and keep their $90 designer skirts down. But don't talk too much about denying self... don't dwell on caring for the poor... don't depress us with Psalms of lament... and please don't talk about carrying any crosses."
Does it matter that my friend has kids who are young adults? Hmmm. I do not find these words particularly offensive.

Posted by tripp at September 8, 2004 08:54 PM
Comments

It's definitely a rant, but I don't find them cruel. I'm guessing the pastor who wrote them (who I linked to) is just a bit fed up with some people in his church and is venting. To say, all young adults are this way is an exaggeration, but I posted it because an attitude towards church as a place where we get our needs met is linked to an idea of a nice god who exists just to meet our needs.

The lock-in quote made me laugh, because I went to lock-ins when I was a teenager. There was a lot of fellowshipping going on in my youth group but very little discipleship.

Posted by: Jennifer at September 8, 2004 10:23 PM

Where I'm from, young adults who don't want the Gospel don't come to church, because it's not expected of them in order to maintain or establish respectability!

Posted by: dave at September 9, 2004 06:22 AM

Good point, Dave. When you ar ein the South, the YMCA and all that wondrous stuff are in competition with the church because the church offers "respectability." It simply does. Now, even in Virginia, this is less the case. But it still exists. In Mississippi, according to Father Reich and Bishop Gray, they are beginning to see the results of secularism. So, they have to revision the competition as well.

But it is an interesting thing. Does Willow Creek, for example, have all of these small groups because it is ministry or because it attracts young adults? Both/and? And is the church simply to be a place of worship? How does it discern the needs of its congregants? Should it? I struggle with this. Rome, Greece and other places with long standing traditions of being culturally Christian where churches simply serve as places of worship (generalizing here) hae some of the lowest church attendance on record.

So, again, does it matter how many people show up and why?

Posted by: AngloBaptist at September 9, 2004 06:38 AM

re: lock-ins

A great place to make out. That's what I remember. I sorta gritted my teeth through the rest.

Posted by: AngloBaptist at September 9, 2004 06:39 AM

I went to a few lock-ins, and I remember some pretty disturbing things.

I like the rant, and I really mostly agree - it seems like very typical behavior and as a young adult, reminds me also of my Mother and Step-Father's behavior, sadly; and I'm sure they weren't alone. So many folks attend church, but how many people do you actually see structuring their lives around the teachings of Jesus Christ? I really HATEHATEHATE the stereotypical viewpoint that some people have about the "hypocritical" church, etc., but it is so hard to fight off those feelings sometimes myself.

Posted by: Beth at September 9, 2004 10:54 AM

I don't know, Tripp, I don't know the first thing about "small groups". I am used to people having relatively small groups in church, a YA group, or a seniors group, or a social justice group- but it's not anything like what I understand "small groups" to be.

I wonder if the "small group" movement grew out of the failures of gigantor-sized congregations.

The author's comments are really acute- but off target. She seems to be griping about people with shallow faith, and people with teenagers. I have met people at every age who have shallow faith, but so far I have not met any young adults who are the parents of teenagers.

I don't know what the author's definition of "young adults" is- I really wonder.

Posted by: dave at September 9, 2004 11:54 AM

Dave, I didn't write it; I quoted it from another blog, so I don't know about the young adult/teenager thing. I think young adult groups vary in age. Some are for twentysomethings, but the one at my church includes those in their later thirties and even forties (because my husband is 12 years older than I am and I drag him along).

here's the blog it came from, which I did link to at my site:
http://thestumblingrunner.blogspot.com

Posted by: Jennifer at September 9, 2004 12:22 PM

You know, I think we may make too much of the sentiment, but I do think that there is a ballance that a congregation must make between providing services to their members and instructing disciples. Somehow we just need to live with the reality that some people will join a church simply because of what it provides and no other reason. Perhaps they may be among the "least of these?"

And yet, we are called in order to be called out. How do churches demand discipleship? I do not think that we can. We can only model it and value the models that we learn from. Perhaps we could have the daycare center, but not bragt about it. We should boast in Christ but offer daycare nonetheless.

Heh.

Posted by: AngloBaptist at September 9, 2004 01:35 PM

If there's one group that's responsible for problems in the church, I'd have to say that it is the infants. I mean, when's the last time you've seen one involved? Do they participate? Do they take committee posts? No! And yet they are here every week, demanding services. Sheesh!

Posted by: Mark J. at September 9, 2004 02:08 PM

We Baptists have taken care of that. They are not members of the church. Come or not, it does not matter. You can have a nursery if you like, but that just keeps 'em occupied until the parent arrives to do their duty. See? Problem solved!

Posted by: AngloBaptist at September 9, 2004 06:19 PM

a couple of things...

1) i was considering young adults to be the people from age 20 to mid-40's.
2) i was frustrated when writing the words
3) i think the words describe a brand of faith that has been presented to the said young adults.

are the words cruel? maybe so. are they meant to belittle the faith of all young adults? not at all. i am a young adult and, in my own narcissism, i didn't intent to belittle myself.

what i have bumped up against in parish ministry is a generation of young adults who have bought into the "mall mentality" of American life. they expect the Church to have various departments to meet their needs. most of the young adults that i know rarely take the opportunity to let senior adults be crucial to their own faith experience. i'm trying to help people experience the Church as an inter-generational organism... and all i ever seem to see is more compartmentalizing.

when are we going to realize the limitations of being Church with people just like me?

that's where it all came from.

Posted by: TheStumblingRunner at September 13, 2004 08:07 PM

Stumbling,

I thought that exactly. I was speaking with my own pastor about that very dynamic yesterday. Whether it is the megachurch or not, we have managed to "sell" our churches in the worst way possible.

Thanks. You sparked off some good conversation.

Posted by: AngloBaptist at September 14, 2004 06:31 AM