Is it just me or have we, as the church, forgotten about Generation X? So much attention is given to the Baby Boomers because of their narcissistic view of what it means to be church (a generalization but based on truth). A ton of attention is turned to Millennials and we wait on bated breath to know if they really like the church or not.
Generation X is there, stuck in the middle. X marks the spot of transition in our country, society and church. We stand between competing generations and at times...well it sucks. Generation Xers were raised with divorced parents, called latch-key kids, buried themselves in Hip-Hop and Grunge, and were eye witnesses to some of the best and worst humanity had to offer (see image for some examples).
Generation X is stuck on a ladder with the Boomers going no where because they have to work later in life and do not want to give up leadership positions and power. Then the Millennials, who want to take our place, are nipping at our heels.
I felt like I needed to vent after reading the 2428th article about what Millennials want out of Church. We need to be looking for what the 35 and under crowd is looking for in a church because we need to adapt what we do for the sake of the Gospel and reaching people for Jesus. Yet, who will be doing this moving, adapting, transitioning, leading, and calling out to the generation coming if we are going to survive? Who will be the ones to give up power earlier, relinquish control of committees and leadership roles to make the church more fluid and pliable to work with the next generations? What Generation has to figure out how to straddle a childhood and worship with limited technology and mix it with an adulthood where both are soaked in it?
The generation that will do that, is Generation X. Not the Boomers or the Millennials, but the latch-key, grunge, broken home kids that became adults in the last decades of the nineteen-hundreds. I know we will do it, and we will do it for the sake of the church and mission of being Christ's body. Just don't forget about us during the whole transition.
"When I win the lottery, I'm going to build that new sanctuary we have always talked about." "When I win it big, we will finally get that new industrial kitchen." "When my ticket is called, this church will be set for life!"
Ever hear that phrase? I have heard it at about every church I have pastored. It tells what we truly trust in. It is telling where people's 'expendable' money goes to. It tells me we put more trust in gambling to support inflated government budgets then you do the local church.
Reality is if they gave that money to the church the church would get those improvements much faster then hoping they win the lottery.
Quick math: 1/4 of your 100 person congregation plays the Powerball once a week ($2 per ticket). For the next ten years they promise to give that money to the church building fund instead (which is kept in our conference foundation earning 1.5% interest). The chances are 100% that at the end of that 10 years the church will have just over $28,000 more in the building fund.
Another 1/4 of the congregation still plays the lottery once a week. They purchase the Powerball ticket and will give the church 10% of whatever they win. After ten years no one wins because the chances of wining are 1 in 175 million. There is actually better chance of getting bit by a shark in the open ocean 175 times then winning. At the end of the ten years the church has $0 in their building fund.
Please explain which is the better option for the future of the church?
Sure, $28,000 isn't much for ten years of giving BUT it is more than $0. This is a much better way to 'fund' the church than purchasing lottery tickets.
Below is a great piece John Oliver did on his show about state Lotteries. PAY ATTENTION NORTH CAROLINA!!! Yes, 3.5 billion dollars has been raised for our educational system in the last 8 years through the lottery. But that isn't 3.5 billion more dollars, that is simply 3.5 billion the state government can put somewhere else. Yet the NC school system is actually worse off then it was eight years ago. (according to John Oliver's video below around the 11:25 mark) . . . . . . . . . . .. . .. .. . . .. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
These dots aren't lining up.
One last point before I jump off my soapbox. I usually hear the above statements from some of the most tax adversed people. Those who complain about the government and taking their money via property tax, sales tax, or state and federal income taxes. IRONIC because the lottery, as Dave Ramsey would call it, is a "stupidity tax."
If you think this is a liberal or conservative take on things...it's not. Both sides echo the same point. here is a conservative view from Dave Ramsey. Below is a more liberal point of view from John Oliver. (video does include bleeped language and middle fingers...you have been warned)
To sum up...if you want the God-size dreams to happen in your local congregation, then giver generously and you can do so by first STOP PLAYING THE LOTTERY AND GIVE TO YOUR LOCAL CHURCH.
In Ft. Lauderdale there is a new law. According to a WCNC report found here, "According to the Sun-Sentinel, the new rules dictate that feeding sites "cannot be within 500 feet of each other, that only one is allowed in any given city block and that any site would have to be at least 500 feet away from residential properties." Here is a video of 2 clergy and one 90 years old homeless advocate being arrested for feeding people. It is sad, very sad. I celebrate the ministers and advocates who are stepping up and taking a stand. I think they are doing the right thing and this situation calls for acts of civil disobedience. The only thing that bothers me is the attitude the people taking videos or are bystanders are giving the police. The police didn't create this law. They are the ones who have to enforce it. Whether they agree with it or not, they are doing what they have to do. They did so in a kind and gentle way and by the video there seems to be no signs of harassment or mishandling the people or the food. To yell at them is really uncalled for. I am sure this moment is not why they became police officers to begin with. Let them be.
Who these people really need to bug is the county commissioners who passed this law 4-1 at 3:30am.
Once again, my prayers and pride are with Arnold Abbott, Rev. Dwayne Black and Rev. Mark Sims. Well done good and faithful servants.
I was asked this question by a more seasoned colleague one day over lunch. It caught me off guard. I never thought about the type of person who is attracted to my ministry but as we shared a meal, he lopped that grenade on the table and it has been unsettling since.
I'm not unsettled because the question is too personal, it is just that I never thought of it before. I look at my congregations (past and present) and I'm trying to find the common denominator. Who came? Who arrived and felt welcomed, engaged, connected like never before? What type of people are drawn to how God is working through me?
Clergy always inherit parishioners. There are always people there before we arrive, and some stay and some go (minus new church starts of course). Yet there are those who only know me as the pastor of the church I am currently at. They don't know the past. They arrived in the present. I never really looked at these people and tried to figure out why they are drawn to my ministry.
I have a few men who came because their wives started coming first. Yet, now they love it. I have some who have been distant from church and never found a place to connect until now. I have some who moved and were looking for a taste of the church they grew up in and they have stayed. I have young couples with young families and retirees all coming to our small congregation.
I still don't know how to answer the question fully but I'm still searching for the answer. I do know that my style of ministry creates an open and relaxed setting in which people feel welcomed. I know my style of preaching likes to intertwine the 'real world' with 'God's world.' I'm always looking for ways to connect the common culture to God and the work we are called to do.
I know that relates to how people feel welcomed and enter our flock. But the type of peopled drawn to my ministry???? Huh...
How about you...what type of people are drawn to the way God works through you?
Young Clergy is defined in my conference as those clergy 35 years old or younger. Depending on who is talking, some people like to move the line to those under 40.Now that I am in the middle of those two lines (will be officially 37.5 years old in a few weeks) I thought I had enough experience to weigh in on this idea.As a 37 year old let me say this…stop calling me a young clergy.
I am honored that many fellow clergy and laity alike, look upon my head of dark hair (now speckled with flashes of white here and there) and you see a young whippersnapper.I will take it because part of me really wants to be young.I know I look at people 10-15 years younger than me and they still look REALLY young.So I get it.
As I wrote I started to go into a rant about how Young Clergy can seem very condescending because it denotes inexperience, lack of knowledge and cheek-pinching.However, I don’t want this post to turn into that.
Here is why I think it is important to make sure that those we call Young Clergy stays at 35 years old and younger.According to the US Census, middle age starts at 35 and ends at 54.I know the most painful birthday for me was 35 when I had to start checking the box marked 35-44 years old.Something switched in my brain because I realized I really wasn’t young any more.
As I switched boxes in my age I also switched in years of experience. 25 years old is the age someone graduates who went straight through from high school to a Bachelor’s degree to Seminary.25 years old is when you start full time ministry.Starting ministry at 25 gives a person 40+ years of a ministry ahead of them.By the time they are 35 they have been doing full time ministry for a decade.
10 years of experience in any field doesn’t equal a newbie, rookie, beginner or greenhorn.After 10 years, this minister has a vast knowledge and experience.S/he is probably on a second or third appointment and ministry isn’t new anymore.It makes sense that after a decade of ministerial experience we stop calling them “young clergy.”Continuing to do so, shifts the term from one of applause to condescending.
The larger issue is that if we redefine “young clergy” as those under 40 we are doing so to boost the numbers and make ourselves feel and look better.We have a leadership gap when it comes to those who make ministry their first and hopefully lifelong vocation.According to the Lewis Center Report on ClergyAge Trends in the United Methodist Church Report (2014), in my conference [Western North Carolina] 37.48% of the clergy (Elders, Deacons and Local Pastors) are between 55-72 years old.5.51% are under 35 years old.59 is the most represented, or Mode age, in our conference.
This is telling and painful therefore the tendency is to try and shift the data to make ourselves feel better.The numbers will jump if you shift ‘young clergy’ from 35 to 40, although not very drastically.Yet, you are not accomplishing anything in shifting that line.All you are doing is ignoring the current reality.
Baby Boomers are listed as people who are born between 1946-1964.Generation Xers are those born between 1965-1980 and the Millennials between 1981-2000.In a little more than a year the Millennial Generation will have its first 35 year old and they will have to check that new box.That is a hard pill to swallow but to adjust the age of whom we call “young clergy”, once again ignores our current reality.
Let’s keep the ages firm, 35 years old and younger are “young clergy.”Not in experience nor ability but simply because they haven’t reached middle age yet.
As a Duke fan I look at the news that is coming out about the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill and their student athletes with remorse and sorrow. I don't read articles about them taking teacherless classes with silent cheers or a constant smile on my face. I don't watch news reports about the findings of 18 years of academic fraud while dancing like Carton. As a Duke fan, I look at this situation at UNC with sadness.
Here is why. For me the Duke/UNC rivalry always represented the best of North Carolina Universities. The two top schools going head to head in every way possible; academics, sports, and pride. They are only separated by a few messily miles and yet hold some world renowned programs within their walls and stadiums. I want both schools to live up to that expectation. Actually I wish this for Wake Forest and NC State as well. I want the Tobacco Road rivals to represent the best schools and the best sports in the entire nation.
My heart breaks to hear of this scandal at UNC because now their reputation is tarnished. It will take a long time to get them back to where they use to be. I want UNC at the top of their game in the classroom, and on the field/court.
I want that because it is that much sweeter when Duke wins and I know we have beaten the best of the best. I hope UNC can get their act together and recover from this. I have a feeling they will.