The time has come for the British Methodist Church to end our adolescent war of attrition with the lost generation.The war has now been raging for over 30 years and the result as been Methodist churches throughout the land with steadily aging congregations and just a sprinkling of members under the age of 50.
Methodism's war against the lost generation started in the 1970s. The denomination had already lost its appetite for evangelism, feared regarding the Bible as the word of God, and made the mistake of seeing Methodism as genetically and culturally transmitted from generation to generation.
I joined Methodism in the early 1980s when the war was gathering pace. Thousands of young people, tired of dead churches proclaiming a dead philosophy streamed out of the main denominations and headed for the house churches.
City Road Methodist Church in Birmingham was one of the few mainstream denominational congregations that reversed this trend - young people were finding a place in Methodism. Then in my thirties I was one of those young people, it was what we now call a "fresh expression" congregation - lively open worship, an interest in the gifts of the Holy Spirit, a fervour to read scripture and an extensive witness of social action that penetrated deep into the surrounding multi-ethnic community.
Within two years of joining Methodism I was catapulted into the cockpit of the denomination and served for a period as acting Press Officer. I saw at first hand the dismissive way senior Methodists regarded Evangelical and Charismatic expressions of the gospel.
The denominational newspaper, the Methodist Recorder, ran stories week after week attacking the new energy that was sweeping the wider church and part of our own denomination. So fierce was the attack on Evangelicals in Methodism that Cliff College, was forced to ask the editor for a special reserved space to report its news.
I heard for the first time those daft phrases "child of the manse" and "cradle Methodist" from people who had lost sight of the fact that Christ fought for every soul in every generation. Coming from a Methodist family was a good start, but it certainly wasn't the end of the story.
I met grown, grey haired self assured and complacent "Methodist luminaries" at Westminster Central Hall, then the headquarters of British Methodism, who assured me that the Charismatic movement was a passing phenomena that would soon pass. They could not see that their cosy little bureaucratic world with its regular conferences and all enveloping tiny minded suffocating cliques was a massive turn off for thousands of young people.
Locally I saw colleague after colleague from our "fresh expressions" church broken by a local preacher training system which exalted the foolish over the spiritual. I personally was ticked off for being "to enthusiastic", "sounding dogmatic", and "pastorally insensitive" for offering prayer to a woman dying of cancer. I survived as a local preacher, many others didn't. But our congregation was an exception, elsewhere in Methodism anyone walking into a church and using a certain sort of language was shown the door pretty quickly.
Share Jesus International and East People were an encouragement, but we know full well the petty battles that were fought to marginalise the founder and strip him of his Methodist stipend.
Now these complacent bureaucrats are retired and in their 70s and 80s. They rattle around their empty churches wondering where the young folk are. They ought to be told.
At worse the generations under 50 gave up on Christianity long ago. The half million children and young people connected with Methodism in the 1980s now live lives devoid of Christian contact and are now no different from anyone else in their community.
At best this generation has drifted off to the lively and committed worship and witness of those churches that embraced change then. Go to the local Pentecostal Church or Christian Fellowship and there you will find Methodism's lost generation.
The Methodist establishment declared war on a whole generation of enthusiastic believers.
That war is now over.
The Methodist establishment lost.
We now face empty churches, a depleted Ministerial team and desperate, though welcome, attempts to bring in young people
Now is the time to seek peace terms, to welcome Evangelicals back into our Methodist family.
To embrace the work of the Holy Spirit. To place Scripture at the centre of our lives and worship.
Now is the time to restore the passion for souls that built one of the most formidable evangelistic movements Christendom had ever seen.
Now is the time to repent.
30 comments:
Please also see todays post from Fat Prophet:
http://fatprophet.blogspot.com/2008/04/lost-generations.html
As a displaced methodist living in Britain from America, I agree with this totally. Nothing is sacred in England - family, work, money or church. Churches are dead and dying and a revival is needed to bring its life back.
How about having an answering machine at the church with people who return calls or a working and up to date website?! Start there and see how many work their way to church.
~Mrs Franklin
Thank you Mrs Franklin you are right - the simplest ideas such as an ansaphone that works can encourage people to come to Church.
It is also interesting to hear an American perspective from some one living here. I hope some of my British colleagues take note.
I have no link to Fat Prophet's blog. Much of what you say about our history is true - and I suffered badly myself at times but not more tan my Lord who calls us to follow him in suffering for others'sake. However, you seem to have blinkers on so that you cannot see that things have changed, or at least are rapidly on the change, now. We are rejoicing in having an evangelical President of Conference this year, who this summer will become the General Secretary of the Methodist Conference and its chief spokesman! Whoever would have thoought that possible a little while ago? MET (Methodist Evangelicals Together) are growing in number and their AGM held during the ECG Event in Llandudno at Easter drew an unprecedented number - to an AGM!!!
Please stop crying about the past! I'm not! Just like childbirth, we endure the pain for the joy of the new birth - and the church is like that. Maybe not in Birmingham yet, but we are now in a new, exciting era! Please, please put your griping behind you, forgive what is past and sing a new joyful tune with us. I am a great believer that 'if you want to build something up, the best way is to ignore the negative and accentuate the positive'.
Olive
I couldn't agree more with the sentiments you outline above, the problem however is that I feel you are also being a little blinkered.
Whilst I have no doubt that the MET are growing just as you say the problem is that yet again this seems to be a top down approach to a problem that needs to be solved in the trenches of everyday Methodism in everyday local churches.
I, as a Methodist of some 6 years now, had not even heard of the ECG event until I read your blog and the same can be said of Easter people. Is this the fault of me for not looking? Perhaps. But then if there really was a true movement to accept and embrace these ideas I'm sure I would have heard about these events, especially since FP, my father, is the district local preachers secretary.
It is pointless having a Methodist movement where our "generals" stand and embrace a more evangelical Methodism and the "soldiers" who fight the fight in the churches on a day to day basis are the same people who helped to create this void in the first place.
If we truly want to move on as a church and fill the void that was created and start to bring fresh young people into church it HAS to start with a change in attitude. The Methodist church as a whole needs to realise that this is a problem, they need to talk about it, and they need to listen to the "moaners" who have been saying its a problem for the past fifteen years or so as we have watched the numbers attending church continue to plummet, with the biggest decline in the younger age bracket.
The Church, and I feel particularly the Methodist Church, faces an uphill struggle and the only way to rise victorious is to start listening and having these kinds of discussions in our churches, not just at conference. Will it seem like we are moaning? YES. Will some people not like it? YES. Should this matter? NO.
We need to realise that whilst the events that Olive describes are amazing moves and I am sure deeply moving and spiritual occasions we cannot afford to let ourselves be spiritually fed by these one or two events for the rest of the year. We have to try and take these good things and move them into our churches in all of our circuits and that will not happen until everybody is willing to sit down at the table, admit there is a problem and accept that we need to change in order to move on.
I feel I worship as part of a very accepting, welcoming, caring church but I still feel that the idea of speaking in tongues would raise quite a few sharp intakes of breath in our church. If we accept that my church is probably the most accepting of these sorts of ideas in our circuit, and that we would still encounter this response from at least 30% of the congregation, what hope do we have with the other churches? To me, this is where the problem lies, you can change your policies and official stance all you want but you need everybody on board to make your new "pose" look good, or even to make it effective at all.
Son of FP - Why didn't you hear of ECG? Evidently you were not part of the final Easter People1 Your father's job has nothing to do with it! Presumably you are meaning that he would have had an official communication. ECG is a movement of the Spirit - isn't that what you and the other 'moaners' (your word) are looking for? If you had been at Easter People 2007 you would have known that it was the ordinary people who clamoured for something to happen in 2008 in the place of Easter People. It was certainly NOT inspired from the top down, though we are very thankful that there were leaders who were listening to the cries and longings of the grass roots folk.
You cannot say that ECG is a top down movement with a title like ECG! The emphasis right from the start, has been on Equipping, Calling, Going. It was the young people who led the worship and went out into Llandudnoto take the Gospel in word and action and all who responded to the very varied calls at the end of the Bible study and worship sessions were left in no doubt that they were being called to go back to their home churches and put their calling into practice.
Here in Reading we have experienced a movement of the Spirit drawing all Christians together to Regenerate Reading and without having a huge gathering with an evangelist invited to speak.
Believe me, I have proved, over my many years, that moaning does no good, rather, the reverse. 'Laugh and the worldlaughs with you. Weep and you weep alone.' What's more, your moaning can eat away at your own faith if you're not careful. It is much more effective and very much harder to be a faithful disciple working for change in a difficult environment, puting up with what doesn't seem right and building on what is in line with the Gospel. But you must seek out a fellowship that will allow you to grow as a Christian and give you the strength to carry on without moaning, being Christ's front line where he has placed you. I am not blinkered. I have suffered too much! To be a Christian is not all joy. It means carrying a cross and doing that in quiet witness speaks far more than loud protests and changes people in the end. I hope you aren't forgetting that God the father sees all, knows all and, when the time is right, controls all.
Olive, I was interested in what you had to say and then I saw the give-away. You are in Reading! Part of Britain's Bible Belt. It really is different further north. It has always been more of a struggle in the Midlands and in the North.
As for information, if a minister/church secretary/senior steward controls the post then it is amazing what can be suppressed. One person can decide that something is of no interest to the congregation. Having, in the past, sent information to churches, I know that it is necessary to find the person who will tell the church. Often, this is not possible and all one can do is send several letters to different people and hope, if one can afford to do this.
David is not griping about the past. There are some hints of change but these battles are ongoing. The problem we have now is not one of active opposition, but rather that too many people are too old to change or lack the energy to change. It is not confined to Methodism, other denominations, made the same mistakes and I can list churches that will die of old age unless the Lord sends new people in.
As for finding a fellowship, the West Midlands is a waste-land. I hear of the odd church here and there, but it would involve travel and for many that is impossible.
Olive
Unless I am misinterpreting what you have said, which I must admit is very possible, you seem to be advocating the line of when the going gets tough, the tough sit down. I agree that simply being an advocate of our faith, whether quietly or not, should be enough, but I have to say that it so often isn't, which seems to be what you are saying when you allude to having suffered too much. Methodism is not a place where the quite get noticed however much we would like to think so. He who shouts loudest, gets heard most.
How can any of the people who were at these events go back to their churches and instigate change without standing up and telling people about that change? I am pleased that in your area you have managed to do this but this does not happen everywhere. We cannot simply go in search of others who agree with us and be content at that if we truly feel that we should be making a change.
In our circuit we have recently tried to instigate a new united evening service where the worship is more "up to date" and evangelical. It is down in our plan as a circuit event and was agreed upon at the circuit meeting. I fully accept that some people will not want to take part in this kind of worship but unfortunately at least 2 of our churches have stood up and point blank refused to take part and have decided to hold their own usual evening services "in opposition" to a circuit agreed upon course of action.
If you don't wish to worship in this manner, fine, as I have said I am happy to accept that people don't and that doesn't make it any less heart felt, but surely you shouldn't be organising opposing events that will split the loyalties of long standing church goers who feel they have a loyalty to their church but would really like to go to the circuit service. The power of those long standing church goers who would look down upon people who do not go along with what they consider to be the norm can often be enough to push people away from our churches in and of itself.
I can accept that people don't want to take part in this kind of service but it won't stop me trying to get people involved, just as I am sure they would make there opinions on the subject known as well. Yet again the churches who have members that can shout the loudest get their way. It has made a mockery of the service and quite frankly leaves the people helping to organise it feel despondent and like the whole thing is a waste of time.
When you have people who are crying out for this sort of service, as appears to be the case in your area it is easy to say that we shouldn't moan, but unfortunately we are in a circuit where no one wants to know. What do you do then? Should we simply say that's life, accept it, not moan and sit down and go on quietly having our own form of worship at home or in our own little groups? How does this help us fill the void in our area of young people?
I agree that there are people out there who want to make this move and that is wonderful, but our biggest challenge comes from the areas where there is objection to this sort of move but still a desperate need for it to happen. We are not fighting the fight against our area, they want the move, we are fighting against people within our own churches and unfortunately the politics so often mar any attempt to move forward. Simply being a quite Christian making a change in small ways does not get anything done when you are faced with people who are willing to be loud, brash and disruptive.
Being a Christian quietly carrying a cross should be enough, I totally agree, but when we are faced with the many temptations of every day life, the move in societies view about church and church going, and even strong opposition from people within our own churches we need to raise out cross high and want to make that difference not simply hide away with the others around us that feel the same way.
I think overall we are actually agreeing that change needs to be made, perhaps my youthful vigour forces me to be a bit more angry about these things and perhaps your right that this will not help. Unfortunately for me discussion has been a way of life and those who wont even come to the table to talk make me want to shout louder not accept it and carry on regardless.
I totally agree that all we do must be empowered by the love of God and we must work though his power. Unfortunately, and perhaps cynically I'll admit, I all to often see pride and politics get in the way of faith and love and I feel I have to challenge this, quietly, loudly, and any other way I can. I do not mean to sound big headed in any way but I often see that my faith is a lot stronger that the religion of those that surround me, and in this case faith and religion are two very different things.
I don't read Olive as saying 'when the going gets tough, the tough sit down'.
I think that individuals have at least some responsibility to do things for themselves - like find out about what's going on. I take Ian G's point that a poweful individual can manipulate a church and one would pray that such a stranglehold could be loosened in individual circumstances, but note that even he admits that the individual could be a lay person.
The picture I'm getting from all the nay-sayers is a very contradictory picture. I'm getting a picture that you all somehow want Church House to 'force' individuals in local churches to engage in bottom-up activities.
I agree that there is an issue with individual congregations not wanting to change. I don't think that this reluctance to change is confined to 'evangelical vs not-evangelical' (and I'm not sure what 'evangelical' means in this context: theology? worship style? heart for evangelising?). There is a whole range of group behaviour and attitudes that need to be tackled.
I don't think that the problems are going to be tackled by trying to cut to pieces individuals in Church House, by trying to cut ministers to pieces or by trying to cut lay people to pieces.
We have to have and communicate a clear vision of what we want to achieve and where we want to be. We have to devise achievable targets, in some instances, for small elderly congregations. We need to encourage and empower individuals to feel that they can make changes that frighten them.
Pam
I couldn't agree more on every single point you have made. I don't have issue with Church House at all and think they do sterling work and my whole point is that it isn't really them we need to change, we need to change the churches and communities we work in every day. Top down or bottom up approaches wont work alone, it has to be universal.
In order to have this clear vision of where we want to be and what we want to achieve we have to sit down, as a denomination as a whole and get on board with what is happening in terms of making our church a vibrant and relevant place to be and worship in today's society.
I agree that there are a lot of elderly churches out there that still need their spiritual needs catered for, but what happens when the members of these churches pass on? Who will keep that church going or do we just have to accept that this will be another church that becomes no longer viable?
Your totally right in that people have to take responsibility and do things. I think that ministers, lay people and congregations all need to be "singing form the same hymn sheet" as it were. We can only do this if we have people who are strong and have a passion to make these changes work and a support group behind them who are all on the same page. We need to recognise that there are these strong personalities within our church who can manipulate often an entire congregation (or even circuit)and we need to work to show these people that what we are doing isn't some form of hocus pocus that will take us all away from God. In fact, we are trying to do the opposite and become a church that can be relevant today and far into the future.
I'm sure we must all have had occasions where a difficult and strong willed member of a congregation has caused tension, often even with a minister who is trying to make change. Here is where our real challenge lies, to stand up and be counted and to educate these people so they realise how important the work we are doing is. I don't expect Church House, our Ministers, or even our Lay people to make this change alone, I expect that it will take all of us, and here is my point, we all need to get on board and, as you say Pam, to be clear about our vision so we can move forward as a church.
Thanks for all your comments - this has certainly created a debate. I'm not ducking out of the issues you have all raised I am briefly working from an internet cafe as I am in London on business for the day job.
In order to have this clear vision of where we want to be and what we want to achieve we have to sit down, as a denomination as a whole and get on board with what is happening in terms of making our church a vibrant and relevant place to be and worship in today's society.
I agree, but I think that this is precisely what Methodism tries to do and what it has been trying to do. It's not the case that we haven't been trying. It's the case that, frankly, I don't think we know how to go about it. Look at the debacle with Network; they tried really hard to communicate and consult and now everyone is saying that they didn't know anything about the restructuring and they haven't been consulted. I'm not blaming anyone, but that's the reality of the situation in a 'volunteer organisation'.
What you say sounds good. It sound right. But most people would agree with that. The question is how do we do it? I really don't think it's true that people are actively plotting a war against the 'lost generations' - as David suggests is the case in the first sentence of his post.
I agree that there are a lot of elderly churches out there that still need their spiritual needs catered for, but what happens when the members of these churches pass on? Who will keep that church going or do we just have to accept that this will be another church that becomes no longer viable?
I agree with this too. But I'm trying to explain the reality of the situation. How do I work with a congregation of 30 elderly people and convince them to change their congregation so that young people would want to attend? My suspicion is that we could do everything according to what 20-somethings like, but that the minute you walk in and see that the youngest person is 50 and the median age is 78, you're not coming back. Am I wrong? My bet what you want most of all is people who you can be friends with; not a group of people old enough to be your granny. So my challenge is 'How do I start with 30 elderly people and attract 20, 30 and 40 somethings?'
We need to recognise that there are these strong personalities within our church who can manipulate often an entire congregation (or even circuit)and we need to work to show these people that what we are doing isn't some form of hocus pocus that will take us all away from God.
Yessssss. In many cases, I don't think it's an issue about 'convincing'. Sometimes what's going on with people who are so 'strong' that they destroy congregations is that they have issues around being seen to be 'the leader'. Their aims may not be for any particular purpose other than to get their own way. In which case, trying to convince them of a point of view is futile. It's more about somehow getting them to be a team-player, which is tricky.
I think Pam that in order to get younger people into church you have to do what I suggested last time this came up and accept that you need to hold a totally different service to get younger people into church and then bring them into the main church slowly.
I'm sure that if your church of over 50's had a giant influx of under 30's it would be just as daunting for them as for the young people seeing the age of the majority of the congregation.
The point I was trying to make, and perhaps didn't do it justice, was that often even if this happens there can be issues and people can complain and actively work to make things difficult for this sort of service, as is the case with our circuit services.
Your right, making team players out of our strong personalities within the church is difficult, and your spot on that sometimes the issue is one of a power trip.
On your point of people not actively plotting against the lost generation I tend to agree to a point. Unfortunately, I think that "My generation" haven't done themselves any favours and there are a lot of people of my age who have a big fat zero of respect for anyone, thing or institution. I think this has lead to a feeling of fear and anger from many older people and this has spread into our churches. "The Youth of Today" attitude has permeated the way many people think about younger adults and I have to say I don't blame them. The point though is that this doesn't mean all of us are this way and until the stronger willed and more influential amongst the congregations we have can be subdued a little you wont welcome new younger people in. Worse than being in a room full of older people would be a room full of any aged people who are looking at me like I don't belong or deserve to be there.
I honestly feel a part of a big family at our church and am excepted by one and all, and I am only one of probably 5 or 6 regular worshippers under the age of 50. I feel comfortable because I know I'm not judged and people will stop and listen to me. The reason? Because I have earned the respect from them over a long period of time.
I think the bridging of the gap left by the lost generation has to be a bridge built form both sides. Younger people have to be taught to give church the respect it deserves but the church also has to learn the young people expect the same in return and not just to be written off. There needs to be more of this type of discussion where older people, and particularly influential people, stop and listen to "our" opinions.
So, how do we bridge this gap? Compromise. Does this sound contradictory to what I said earlier, maybe a little yes, but I think the difference is that I'm willing to accept that I can be wrong and to learn from it. The question is can the remainder of the "in situ" generation in our churches do the same? If not then there will always be men just like me willing to get angry at not being catered for, listened to, or respected, and older people ready to bring me up on my lack of respect. A sad state of affairs when I know "my generation" and "the older generation" can worship together, and together make it the MORE relevant, in depth and respectful worship that it can and should be.
SOP, what you have just said about mutual respect and 'being listened to' may actually be getting to the heart of the matter over the longer term.
I hear what you're saying about circuit services and that's a shame. If a circuit has enough people-power to try to cater to all tastes occasionally, it's hard to understand why the people who don't want 'Worship Style X' make a fuss about others participating in that style.
By the way, I'd not want to make the same generalisations about 'your generation' as you have done. I think that older generations ever think it is thus. Personally, I don't buy the whole 'it was better in the good old days' thing. I think people tend to remember the good memories, for the most part. We also understood what we were doing as young people and we don't have that same feeling of understanding about different generations, so it can feel threatening. But, as you say, in an ideal world each person can be taken as an individual. (Even ministers! *grin*)
This post certainly created an interesting discusssion. It was frustrating for me that I was on the move most of the day.
The one thing that seems to come through is that no one denies that in the past Methodism from top to bottom has taken a negative attitude to parts of its Christian heritage such as Evangelicalism. This means that we simply haven't had the capacity to recruit new believers, nor have we been attractive to yuong people who have found the Lord.
There seems to be agreement on this single point.
Now history is always worth examining - not to apportion blame - but to help us look positively to the future.
If we are serious as a denomination that we want to attract young people we need to realise what will attract them. That will mean vhanges in the styles of worship, it will mean evangeliam. Above all we maust close down the futile and consistent attacks on Evangelicals, Charismatics and any suggestion that the Holy Spirit is an integral part of our trinitarian belief.
In order to reap we have to sow. We have been reduced to a wandering bunch of hunter gathers clutching at any and every "spirituality" or gimmick in the hope that gives us some purpose. That is not a Biblical position.
... no one denies that in the past Methodism from top to bottom has taken a negative attitude to parts of its Christian heritage such as Evangelicalism.
I don't know what you mean by this sort of thing or what makes you say it. As I asked before what do you mean by 'evangelicalism'? Are you talking about theology? Are you talking about a style of worship? Are you talking about being enthusiastic for evangelism?
And what do you mean by 'taken a negative attitude' toward? This sounds like 'the Methodist church' (whoever that is) having actively decided to take opposition toward evangelicals.
I'm not an evangelical, but that doesn't mean I'm at war with evangelicals any more than me being an introvert means I'm at war with extraverts. Where I do take exception to some (not all) evangelicals is the tendency to characterise those of us with a quieter spirituality as having a deficient faith or spirituality.
The new General Secretary is a fervent evangelical. If there is a 'negative attitude toward evangelicals', how did he get appointed in the first place?
I don't disagree that we are in decline. I do disagree that the causes of decline are unique to the Methodist Church and that culture has nothing to do with the situation Why I think this is important is because if we understand the cultural changes, we have a hope of responding to them. If we just turn inward and blame other Methodists because then we have no hope of effective response.
I also take extreme opposition to your suggestion that the Holy Spirit is only part of Evangelical or Charismatic belief. Again, I wonder what you mean by this and by these words 'evangelical' and 'charismatic'. The Holy Spirit is part of the Trinity and is therefore absolutely and utterly integral to the Christian faith. Every believer receives the Holy Spirit; this fact is absolutely clear from scripture. How dare anyone deny that traditions other than evangelicalism or the charismatic movement have the Holy Spirit?
Thanks Pam, we clearly don't have a common body of experience upon which to draw together a consensus.
You may find it worth while talking to other Evangelicals in Methodism - they may have a different view from me and others who have commented here.
The point of my original post is that we go forward. We must learn from history and shutting our doors to young people with enthusiasm, ie "business as usual" is no longer an option.
I'll agree with you on is that the church should find ways to attract and welcome young people.
I'm very willing to agree that the church doesn't know how to attract or welcome young people. I'm not at all convinced that it's been an intentional strategy to 'battle against' young people and keep them out as the first line of your original post suggests.
I also think that drawing ourselves into 'parties' of evangelicals and charismatics and sacramentalists is unhelpful at best and divisive at worst. Which is why I won't join the group that I best 'fit' Not because I wouldn't like their fellowship, but because I want the fellowship of all Methodists and because I don't want to be seen as 'standing against' anyone.
Pam
Unless I missed the point (yet again I hear you cry!), MP is saying exactly the opposite of moving away from out methodist roots into other fellowships. What he seems to be calling for to me is an embracing of those other styles of worship into our methodist way of life.
If MP or myself wanted to have this style of worship we could, just as you suggest, simply go to another church that more suited our way of thinking or style of worship. The point I think is that we were drawn to Methodism and enjoy worshiping as part of the Methodist denomination and it is a heart felt wish for that denomination to continue long into the future and for it to remain a vibrant and relevant denomination.
I don't want to stand against Methodist traditions, in fact the whole point of me coming to Methodism was that, due to the arrangement of our circuits and use of local preachers, every service is different and it is rare you get two people who have the same, or even a similar style of worship on consecutive weeks.
The point I am making is that I am quite willing to worship in some of the more transitional styles of worship and get a great deal form that, all I ask is that we can also see the other side of the coin sometimes and that this very often doesn't happen, or, in some cases, it isn't even acknowledged that there is another side to the coin.
This is where Methodism falls down and this is where the lost generation firmly sits, in the gap that is formed from the perception of the one sided coin that so many people adhere to.
Pam sent an additional comment which hasn't, as yet, shown itself up on the comments page. Pam, could you resend it as I deleted it from my mailbox.
MP, the last comment that I'm aware of sending is the one beginning 'I'll agree with you on is that the church should find ways to attract and welcome young people.' I can see this post, can you not?
Unless I missed the point (yet again I hear you cry!), MP is saying exactly the opposite of moving away from out methodist roots into other fellowships. What he seems to be calling for to me is an embracing of those other styles of worship into our methodist way of life.
SOP, I'm really not certain what you're talking about here?
Pam
It seemed to me that you were suggesting the the drawing ourselves into the groups you suggest was meaning that we would form "splinter groups" within Methodist churches or even move away to other denominations and hence my comment that we simply wan tthese styles to be recognised as much as any other form of worship that may be more traditional or established
If this was not your meaning, I apologise of course.
SOP
There has been much said here about what may or may not be the problem in respect of young people coming into the church. Comments have also been made about styles of worship and it is true that one of the good things about the plan system we use in Methodism is the variety of preachers and possible worship styles, however in my experience the worship can be dictated to some degree by the local fellowships, especially if the local preacher is a little timid and gives in to local issues.
At one of our churches the musician while being very good technically did not like Mission Praise and played the hymns almost with an attitude. In my early days I wouldn't use the book because I didn't want to cause any upset and then I thought no why should I bend to the likes and dislikes of the church musician. I am quite happy to work with them but that needs to be on reasonably equal terms - as an organist myself I play whatever the local preachers ask for and will if I think the congregation don't know a hymn or a tune needs changing discuss this with the preacher.
At two of our other churches we have people who refer to Mission Praise as the 'funny book'
I do wonder how we are going to get on with a new hymn book in 2010 when some would rather stick with Hymns and Psalms and there are probably some who would rather have the old Methodist Hymn Book.
Music is such an important part of our worship and while I love a lot of the old great hymns of Watts and Wesley and Crosby I also like the more modern stuff of Redman, Prosch and Kendrick.
There is much that could be said about the whole issue of declining congregations and the reasons that I believe this is happening but I would not want to be accused of being negative or crying over spilt milk - I have said before on a number of occasions that we need to
accentuate the positive but sometimes it is difficult, especially when you are giving much to the work and trying hard to build the kingdom.
It is well worth reading how the early Methodists worshipped, especially in the camp meeting movement in America and then here with the Prims. Much of their worship would not today seem out of place in the most radical Pentecostal congregation.
Both Wesley and Asbury note congregations falling under the spirit. Who says Methodist worship had to be a dull hymn sandwich - certainly not our founders.
It seemed to me that you were suggesting the the drawing ourselves into the groups you suggest was meaning that we would form "splinter groups" within Methodist churches or even move away to other denominations and hence my comment that we simply wan tthese styles to be recognised as much as any other form of worship that may be more traditional or established
No I didn't mean that. And no need to apologise. I'm just aware that written communication between people who don't know each other is notoriously difficult. I don't really even understand how I communicated that.
I've not ever been part of a Methodist congregation where people went to war over worship styles. It seems petty to me to prevent any group - young or whoever - from engaging in a worship style that nourishes them spiritually. I know that people do engage in 'worship wars' but I don't understand why.
I don't understand why any circuit would say 'These young people want a lively circuit service and we're going to make certain that we stop them'. I'm not saying it doesn't happen, but I don't think it should happen.
Pam,
Amen
SOP
I think by way of clarification I should point out that the circuit services in our circuit were proposed by one of our circuit stewards who is nearer to retirement that I am - the people involved in the organisation were generally all over 40 and some over 60 but they were very young at heart.
There were a couple of proviso's that I did not necessarily agree with in the planning of these services 1. all songs to have been written in the last 30 years, 2. service must be no longer than an hour. Obviously the first one precludes much great Christian music and the latter tends to put the person taking the service into a sort of strait jacket.
I believe there was also a problem with communication back to churches of what these services were about - although the circuit meeting agreed them I suspect representatives at the meeting who were not wholeheartedly in support did not then feed them back to the churches and in some cases seemed actively opposed them by insisting on arranging their own services. There were a number of exchanges between Superintendent and people and I in my naivety said surely if the circuit meeting have approved it then it is circuit policy to be told that there is no three line whip in Methodism. I then question the validity of circuit meeting, synod, conference if as it seems we can do just what we like and ignore the governance system that is in place.
Fat Prophet, lots of issues there and I'm not sure it would be right to comment on a specific situation from afar.
We've been doing a circuit consultation and we did a circuit away-day. One of the things we found out was that many people didn't realise that 'the circuit' consists of the separate churches and the people in it. People thought it was some sort of top-down governance. 'Communication' within fellowships, between fellowships, and around the circuit was actually flagged as one of our key issues.
I'm also not surprised that this group where not actually 'young' people. I think that we need to be careful here. Those of us in our 40s and 50s and 60s who were just in our 20s yesterday think that what we liked is what young people today like. This is why I keep on raising this flag with MP.
Maybe I shouldn't say this in public, but I was almost in tears (and not in a good way) at our Synod worship. They prayed for there to be younger people in our churches and then sang Moody and Sankey. Even *I* don't feel that speaks to me. I don't think of Mission Praise as 'strange' because it's 'new' but rather because it's old-fashioned. Also, this might be a personal thing, but I resented having a choir performing three out of the four hymns; I know we were 'allowed' to sing if we wanted to, but the arrangements sung were choir arrangements, not congregational ones. (There we go, I can complain too! *grin*)
My 16 year old daughter tells me that my idea of "modern" music is completely out of date. She recommends songs by Tim Hughes.
Any outpouring of the Spirit results in new music - some of it survives beyond the original generation, much is discarded.
I have a very rare recording of a BBC Songs of Praises based on the life of Moody and Sankey (the Director General sent it to me personally when I complimented him on the programme. Some of those songs will really stand the test of time - try "God Be With You" sometime as a farewell hymn (NOT the version in H&P), you really will be in tears!
We used Songs of Fellowship in the 1980s and occasionally use it today. Many of the songs there, written in the 1970s now seem dated, whereas some such as "Oh Lord My God" and "There is a Redeemer" will be sung for many years to come.
My sadness is that we haven't the out pouring of the Spirit today that will produce new hymns and songs.
By the way Pam I really take your point about Choral arrangements and Choirs. It grieves me when I can't join in.
Dare I be critical of Synod I wonder - my heart sank when we walked in and saw the choir sitting up the corner - I thought no modern worship here. As for the afternoon choir I partly agree in that I prefer to be involved in worship either singing or playing but then they did sing a southern gospel song which is one of my favourite genre's and it was one I knew quite well.
I note your thoughts about modern music and from a personal point of view I am fortunate in that I have a 24 years old son and a 17 year old daughter who keep me up to date with Hughes, Redman and company
Post a Comment