A friend asked me these questions. This was my quick response... better answers would have been achieved in dialogue!
What characterises Gen Y?
This generation expects everything instantly – email, photos, results. RSVP’s are outmoded because people don’t commit until the very last second. Information is not a scarce commodity or hard to come by. They are overwhelmed with information. The biggest challenge is knowing what information to trust… and so the source becomes more important than the content. In this context, relationships take on a whole new meaning. Relationships, not information, are now the source of power. And relationships themselves are morphing. Facebook, etc. make keeping in touch with hundreds of people regularly so much easier. And some people are substituting real intimacy for electronic interaction – facebook, online gaming, etc. It is a false intimacy because people only reveal what they want to of themselves.
What do they value?
Freedom and authenticity. They feel that it is important to be able to do what they want – no commitments (hence no rsvps), so limits.
But they are also aware that so much of what is presented is managed by the image makers – TV producers, internet websites, even their own facebook pages. Authenticity becomes a rare commodity – and powerful when encountered. Slick is good (almost essential) but real is better.
What are they searching for?
Hope. Materially their lives are better than any previous generation, and they know it. They are also aware that their self-centred consumerism is destroying the planet. But there seems little point in one person stopping, so they all continue. And they refuse to think about the consequences. There is no viable alternative. But if someone presented “hope” for a better future – one that could “top” their present high – then they would be interested.
What are their needs?
They need to learn how to relate authentically. They need to learn the core values of living in a democracy – not just a secular, humanistic society. They need to learn how to live simply. They need to understand how spiritual life underlies the rest of their lives... informing it and shaping it and determining it.
How are they unique from other generations?
They are the most prosperous. They are the most connected. They are the most ignorant of spiritual things.
How can we best reach and address their needs as a mission or church body?
I really believe that a multitude of approaches is needed – broad sowing (to regularly connect with the disconnected), focussed relational (so that Xns are working specifically with their friends) and incarnational (being salt and light).
The problem with the Church is that the trend in Western cultures over the last 30 years has been to higher quality, more professional ministry. The distance between the average pastor and the average layperson is growing. Lay people are not being expected to do as much – and they are walking away from active ministry. Therefore, even the few non-Churched people who have Xns friends are less likely to be effectively engaged by them with the gospel. We need to do better at mobilising (equipping and releasing) the laity.
Mobilising Gen Y Xns means forming them into mission teams who can work flexibly towards a common goal together. Isolated Xns are ineffective.
The Church can use multimedia effectively to conduct broad sowing ministry. It can also be used for certain types of follow up. And it should be used far more for equipping Xns. Online courses are becoming increasingly popular (even on iTunes) but need to be directed more to mobilising laity rather than repeating formal theological training.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
3 comments:
Interesting thoughts Geoff. That authenticity in relationships, that allows real intimacy can be so hard to come by, yet it is what so many people are searching for.
I was also interested by your comments about church becoming more 'professional'. At our church we are looking at how we do our services, and what we can do better. One of the hard things is to figure out the balance between having the service run smoothly and 'professionally', whilst still allowing it to be real and warm and meaningful to both the current congregation and newcomers.
Thanks Tony.
I appreciate the struggle you describe your church going through, but I meant something a little different (although it has implications for Sunday services).
I grew up in a church with no professional clergy. The teaching was provided by gifted lay leaders, and it was high quality. And that used to be quite common - especially among Brethren and Methodist churches. But I know of many churches in Sydney that would never dream of letting a lay person preach. In fact, some only let MTS-type people lead their small groups. Increasingly only "professionally trained" people are allowed to do the ministry and lay people become spectators. But that's not the picture of the church I pick up from, for example, Ephesians 4.
Now, if the pendulum swings too far one way we end up with amateurish church (ineffective, error-ridden, embarrassing, etc.). If the pendulim swings too far the other way we end up with professional church (limited participation, emphasis on performance gifts - preaching, etc., lazy laity, low impact on community, focus of church is on events). And professional churches suck up a lot of resources - to employ more professionals, to provide better equipment, to conduct bigger events.
I would advocate the role of the professional is to equip the laity to do the work of ministry. Not amateurish, but trained. Not professional, but authentic (i.e. real, everyday people doing extraordinary things).
Yes. Percentage-wise, the laity essentially _is_ the church. An apathetic laity, thus, makes for a mediocre church. Or, to put it the other way, healthy, active churches will have involved and participating congregations.
Oh, that God would wake me, wake us from our somnolence!
Post a Comment