Is Youth Ministry a Failure?
by Ed Dickerson
“Modern Youth Ministry a '50-Year Failed Experiment,' Say Pastors.” That's the headline on a recent article at the website "the Christian Post."[i] The article then goes on to detail what readers of this column have been discussing for some time. Young adults are leaving the church, all churches, in droves. By that measure, youth ministries have been and continue to be a failure. But it seems to me that verdict is either mistaken or unfair — take your pick — on two counts.
First, let it be said that youth ministries have not failed because of a lack of dedication or effort on the part of those ministering to the youth. I am not claiming that those involved in youth ministry are necessarily purer than those working with the older members of but neither are they any less dedicated. I have many friends in youth ministry, and I'm proud to be associated with them.
Second, declaring its ministries a failure as a matter of misplaced responsibility, a perpetual problem is when it comes to the question of why so many young adults leave the church. When I work with families in crisis, I generally start by saying, "I'm not much interested in blame. When it comes to blame, I find there is usually plenty to go around. But we need to know what went wrong, so that we can fix it." So when I say where I believe the problem lies, it's not so much about blame, as I see it, is understanding why, after so many years, and so much investment of talent and resources, we still are losing the vast majority of young people.
In the article on failed youth ministries, a number of youth pastors declare that segregation of the Church by age group is "not biblical." And while that is correct, it still doesn't focus on a remedy. Please pardon the fact that the following comes from a paper I presented at the 2008 180° Symposium for Youth Retention at Andrews University.[ii]
A note I received from a Filipino pastor’s wife crystallizes the issue. “Dear Pastor Ed,” the note began,
Thank you for sharing Jesus to reach out for our ‘young professionals.’
This age group in our church. . . is the concern of all parents in our congregation. The Adventurers, the Youth, and the high school are very visible in church, but our young adults – the ‘young professionals’ the way we call them– aren’t.
Unless you live in a large Adventist center that single negative word succinctly expresses how young adults attend, participate, and contribute to the church– they aren’t. Note that an active Adventurers club and youth ministry had no effect on the retention of the young adults of that church. A similar experience in many other churches confirms that though they offer many benefits, Pathfinder clubs and youth ministries do not ensure retention of young adults. That would appear to be a strong indictment of youth ministries. After all, as Adventist Review editor Bill Knott wrote in a 2003 editorial, “The goal of all genuine youth ministry is the promotion of Christian maturity and the successful integration of children and youth as fully functioning members of the adult church” (italics mine). By that definition, our efforts for young adults are failing. But why?
Scripture speaks of integrating individuals into the church as a process of “grafting in.” Grafting involves the bud or branch to be grafted in, called the “scion,” and the established plant, called the “rootstock.” So far, nearly all of our efforts have been directed toward preparing the scion, in preparing the youth to join the existing congregations, while we have essentially avoided the thornier problem of renovating the rootstock– of inducing existing congregations to change. Our attempts at grafting young adults into the existing congregations have met with frustration precisely because we limit our attentions to the young adults. But the science of grafting tells us that no matter how well prepared the scion is, the graft will not take unless the rootstock is prepared to receive it. Let me share an example.
At a camp meeting where I spoke at the “Young Adults” venue, I urged young adults not to let other people discourage them, to take leadership in providing for their needs and the needs of others of their generation. After one meeting, a frustrated mother came to me. Her daughter, not long after graduating from college, began attending a small church of largely elderly people. She put together a proposal, which she volunteered to lead, to reach out to other young adults in the community. But the church board replied, “We don’t want young people coming in and disturbing our services. We are an older congregation, and we are happy with our church the way it is.” The rootstock of the congregation simply refuses to consider grafting in any scions, no matter how vigorous or well prepared.
This episode – one of many that I know of — demonstrates that time and again, earnest, devout, thoroughly grounded and trained young adults have run into this problem. Until and unless we address the problem of stagnating congregations resistant to change and unreceptive to seekers of any sort, young adult flight from the church will continue. And our inability to retain our own young people mirrors our difficulty in reaching the broader culture. In that regard, our children are somewhat like the miner’s dying canary — a warning that the environment harbors unseen dangers for everyone.
We have tried strategies that attempts to bypass the rootstock challenge. Separate services for young adults in existing churches, and young adult-oriented church plants have been attempted, and met with some limited success. As already noted, the separate services generally fail to pass the Knott test: “The successful integration of children and youth as fully functioning members of the adult church.” And there are other reasons to question the efficacy of an exclusive emphasis on youth ministries. For one thing, very few of our churches are large enough. As Ed Christian pointed out, we Adventists don’t do Mega-Church very well.[iii] And since a parallel youth service solution is, in effect, a Mega-Church style solution, it runs contrary to what we do well. Even if the Mega-Church idea worked for us, it still condemns small churches to extinction, and abandons vast areas of North America. Recent studies tells us more than 1000 congregations in North America – according to the Adventist Yearbook Online, approximately one out of every five —already have no teenagers or children.[iv] And even where numbers and funding support a separate youth ministry, by its nature such a ministry perpetuates separation, not integration, thus failing the Knott test.
And as for the young adult oriented church plants, in many cases, the sisterhood of churches that makes up a conference has reacted to these alternative style church plants essentially in the same way that rigid congregations react to attempts at innovation – they reject them. Not a few promising pastors have been lost this way, along with their congregations. Once again, the attempt to avoid addressing the central issue results in both failure and unnecessary casualties. Youth ministries have not failed. The Church has failed the youth.
My greatest "crisis" of faith occurred when, soon after I married, we began worshiping in a metropolitan Adventist church near our home. I was now an adult, a college graduate, and in fact working for the denomination, and expected that the retirees and other older leadership would at least make a show of welcoming new talent into their midst. I wore the suit, shined the shoes, arrived on time, spoke up in Sabbath school, and to my knowledge did not make an intellectual or social fool of myself. But the "rootstock" seemed in no hurry to add branches—in fact, the founders were dying off and few came to warm the pews they left vacant.
In the church I cite, the founding members had invested substantial sums of money to create their comfortable little church. This was very clearly "their church" and "for them" and they were taking no chances letting some new flash-in-the-pan jeopardize what they had created by bringing in perhaps schismatic and untested ideas and styles of behavior. Possessiveness has a way of toughening rootstock almost beyond grafting. It may be subconscious, but at least part of it is intentional. To preserve is more important than to bring new blood into the established pecking order.
Our pastors and conference presidents are too focused on maintaining the churches we have. Bob Logan told us at Seeds '96 and again several years later that if we want to plant churches and grow, we need to change the way we train, evaluate, and compensate our churches.
My personal belief is that we currently need two types of pastors. Planting/Equipping pastors who will raise up new congregations, and –I know this will cause me trouble– Hospice pastors who will help the existing churches who are unwilling to change to die with dignity. Right now they're dying, but often with neither dignity nor legacy.
If you are in a large city, there are usually enough young SDAs around to enable current SDA culture to be mainitained for a few more decades. I think we have a number of pastors who are able to maintain those churches, and even help them grow from within the SDA population. So, while I agree we need to have pastors who can raise up new churches, 'hospice' churches are not yet the only other alternative.
The big problem is still that the conferences are comprised primarily of churches who will not accept innovative churches. You get Conference Presidents who can enthuse a conference to move in that direction, but all it takes is one 'failed' experiment or a change in president for things to go back the way they were.
I would not say the church has failed the youth. When you atre talking about a large part of the population under 60, I think you need to find a better word than 'youth'. People in their 40s and 50s report difficulty find a church they can fit into and be accepted by.
"If you are in a large city, there are usually enough young SDAs around to enable current SDA culture to be mainitained for a few more decades."
I hear this a lot. But where do those young people at our colleges come from? Did you miss the fact that more than 1000 of our churches have no children or youth already? Seventy percent of our college students do not attend SDA colleges. In my state, there were 13 or 14 church schools 30 years ago. Now there are 3, and they are struggling to stay open. When we lose young adults, we lose their children, their talent, and their tithe. It's a demographic disaster that people in the large centers are ignoring.
It is not that established congregations are against new ideas. They are merely against new ideas that have not stood the test of time. As an elderly relative of mine pointed out, if I came up with new ideas from the inspired pen of Ellen White or the Pioneers, she and her cohorts would be very grateful and very supportive. But anything that does not come from the Bible or Ellen White is not going to be acceptable. Not all members are that extreme, but we are a risk-averse culture, and new ideas always involve risk.
"The big problem is still that the conferences are comprised primarily of churches who will not accept innovative churches." "But anything that does not come from the Bible or Ellen White is not going to be acceptable. Not all members are that extreme . . . ."
There is nothing wrong with innovation, as long as it passes the Isa. 8:20 test.
I don't understand why the philosophy which says that ideas which are not in harmony with the Bible or the SOP are unacceptable, should be considered extreme. That has been our philosophy for years. It's what's kept us from going the way of Willow Creek or the World Wide Church of God.
Youth do not remain so forever. At some point they must become adults. A gradual transition would seem to be more logical than an abrupt, stress-producing change. Conducting parallel church services for youth delays the process of integration into the real world.
Many of our church pioneers were youth when they started leading out. They were also a lot more mature than the youth of today, or even the youth of 40 years ago (when I was a youngster). No adult that I know of wants to keep the youth from full participation in church activities, whether it be leadership roles or whatever. But, they can't be voted into an office based on their ages. They must show a level of maturity that indicates their ability to accept the responsibilities that go along with church leadership. In our small church 2 of our 3 elders are 30 or younger, as are 2 of our adult SS teachers. Only one elder and one teacher comes from the "geezer" generation. Our assistant AV technician is not yet 20. They were put in these positions because they showed a level of maturity and dedication to the truth which gave us confidence that they would faithfully execute those responsibilities.
Maybe I live in a bubble, but my experience has been that those who are willing to help out, and are members in good standing, are welcomed by the church, regardless of their age.
Horace, all this talk of maturity assumes that current leadership in most of our congregations are mature. First, that does not match my experience at all. I imagine if that notion were put out at a minister's retreat, the response would be rueful laughter.
Second, it implies that we're losing the young because they are immature for their age. If that's so, who raised them?
We keep the children largely separate for 18 years, providing a quite different SS experience for them. If we have a 'children's story,' we congratulate ourselves. After telling them for years that the main worship service is not really for them, it's not surprising they leave.
Point well taken. We do have problems when it comes to who is leading out. Could that stem, in part, from the proliferation of "spiritual gifts" seminars? Some, who think they have "discovered" their gift (which in reality may just be a desire or a hope) get put into offices for which they are not qualified.
I did not mean to suggest that we are losing young people because they are immature. It is the result of a combination of factors. Parents are partly to blame, of course. Failure on the part of the parents (and to some extent the schools) to teach kids the principles which undergird our doctrines and standards is another reason. I'm always astounded when I talk to young people and find out that many of our core doctrines were passed over rather lightly or not at all, when they were attending SDA schools.
Our local church may be unique, but we don't keep kids separate from adults for 18 years. Being a small church, and having few kids, they come up with the adults much sooner than in most churches I've attended. Even as young teens they often have insightful comments and relevant questions.
"new ideas that have not stood the test of time."
I can only guess that was facetious.
"new ideas from the inspired pen of Ellen White or the Pioneers, she and her cohorts would be very grateful and very supportive."
Don't know about your friend. Was not true 20 years ago, when homeschooling (yes, strongly supported by Ellen White's writings) was an opportunity for ministry which our churches largely refused to take advantage of.
In all these comments I found not one who questioned a "youth" regarding their feelings about church. What do they think? Why do they not attend?
The one answer to all such questions is "Why should I?" People ask and answer such questions daily: "Why should I buy this product"? Why should I go to that meeting, event"? If you have a business and people are not buying your product would you wring your hands, hold discussions over the matter or would you ask former customers why they no longer buy your product? Business 101.
Just as we olders question "Why?" and feel no benefit to many activities, youth are no different once they are no longer being told by parents or school what to do. Maybe that is part of the reason: they have too often been told, or taken to church, sent to SDA schools, told what sort of activities to avoid and which were approved, that when they finally must make their own decisions they have little practice in doing so.
Please, please, stop talking around young people and talk to them, but more importantly, be willing to listen. It might be surprising.
Ed,
I think your illustration about the young woman in the church that wanted to stay old really hit the heart of the matter: our youth leave because they are not wanted, even in churches where there are a large number of youth. As them (as I have) and you'll quickly hear there is no expectation on the part of the adults that they will assume positions of responsibility in the church any time before their hair turns grey, so they expect to leave in search of somewhere they are wanted.
Where is it that youth are not wanted? Maybe I've been in the same local church for too long, but that's certainly not the case in our church. We have no age discrimination in our church. Anyone who is willing and able is welcome to take part or lead out, as the case may be, as long as they stay within church guidelines. We started a "Junior Deacon" program years ago (when we had more youth) as a means of training younger members to be deacons or deaconesses. Our problem is usually lack of volunteers rather than unwillingness to allow younger members to assume positions of responsibility.
In some churches, 'church guidelines' mean a lot more rules than just those found in the church manual. That is one reason I have heard for youth refusing to be baptised – their SDA relatives, if not their fellow church memebrs, will expect them to conform to all SDA 'standards' once they get baptised. Some choose not to get baptised, some get baptised at a service at another church that does not insist on church membership. I have found most youth don't see a lot of value in church membership. That could be an attitude they have learnt from their elders.
Other churches have the problem that young people can take part, but will face criticism if they don't 'get it right'. Youth are no different to the rest of us, if they don't feel their effort was appreciated, they don't bother. Many churches facing a dearth of volunteers ask 'what is wrong with these people?' Sometimes there are good reasons why people don't vounteer. I have been lucky to attend churches where everyone is encouraged to get involved. But not all churches are like that. And I have discovered that even in churches that are, you can still have one or two people who appoint themselves as 'critics' for those in their immediate family or circle of friends. They can undo most of the good the wider church is trying to do.
Horace,
In most churches the primary (if not only) duty of a deacon is to take up the offering, which really is meaningless in terms of responsibility or meaningful ministry. So a "junior deacon" program in such a situation is an effort in futility that illustrates a common problem situation: our youth see little or no opportunity for meaningful ministry because there is so little real ministry going on and what is happening is so often dominated by the silver-haired who have been doing it since ages past and don't want to quit.
http://www.kipmckean.org/wp-content/uploads/2007/01/Revolution_through_Restoration_1_2_3.pdf
"Between 1976 and 1979, I spoke in numerous churches around the United States as the
campus ministry in Charleston grew from a few to 300! I was exposed to several different
elements in the Churches of Christ. The spiritual condition of most of the Churches of Christ
ranged from lukewarm to disgusting (Revelation 3:14-19). After almost 200 years since the
inception of the Churches of Christ movement in the United States, the average Church of Christ
was about 100 in membership and less than half attended the midweek services.
The average church had but eight baptisms in a year and six of these were children of the
members. Of those baptized out of the world, less than 10% remained faithful and half of the
members' children who were baptized fell away. The divorce rate was around 33% (about the
same as the world), according to the Institute of Marriage and Family Studies at Abilene Christian
University. Alarms were constantly being sounded about the declining numbers of full time
ministers and missionaries. Reuel Lemmons, in his editorial February 9, 1982, in the Firm
Foundation declared that over 8,000 Churches of Christ had closed their doors in the previous 20
years."
Kip Mckean found out the hard way when he tried to revitalize existing CoC congregations. he met with continuing resistance until he finally started a new church. It became known as the Boston movement. It attracted, in Los Angeles area alone, hundreds of college age and recent graduates, including medical students and residents, attorneys, and various other yuppie types. This in addition to numerous individuals of varying education and abilities.
Naturally, the Boston movement was denounced as cultic, fanatical, manipulative, and dangerous. So was Millerism and the SDA church. A lot of people were blessed by the church. Kip was a fantastic speaker who spoke anointed sermons that had transformative impact on people's lives.
Adventists will hold a meeting, talk about it, write some articles, and so forth. Unless they decide to put new wine into new skins, things aren't going to happen. The church will continue dying until it becomes an irrelevant shell
Ghansen,
You've put your finger on why new church plants succeed an dwhy older churches often die. As you wrote: "Unless they decide to put new wine into new wine skins, things aren't going to happen." The new wine is the Holy Spirit. Unfortunately, Adventism has largely reduced the concept of the Holy Spirit to an invisible divine force that comes at the start of an evangelistic crusade and sticks around long enough to push people into the baptistry before disappearing again. That is so wrong! The Holy Spirit is God with us, IN US, guiding us and empowering us to do great things for Him. It will only be when we embrace the indwelling Holy Spirit that we see real change in the church and more of our youth staying.
"Unless they decide to put new wine into new skins, things aren't going to happen. The church will continue dying until it becomes an irrelevant shell."
Those who remain will be the ones who have been members; but young people are not attracted to the same thing that may have worked for parents and grandparents.
Has anyone answered the question: "Why join a church?" If there are no positive benefits for becoming a member, it is a useless exercise." It is the same question asked of anyone, but the social needs of some may not correspond to youth. One can attend church whenever she chooses, can contribute and work with many charitable community organizations but unless there is something of worth to be gained from church membership why join? Frankly, belonging to any church organzation is decreasing every year.
Maybe trying to pump life into any organization that is slowly dying is not worth the effort.
Ask yourself the question: How many of your work associates and neighborhood friends would you invite to your church and want them to become members?
Elaine,
There is far more to joining a church than just beliefs. Most decisions people make while shopping for groceries, buying a car or joining a church are actually controlled by emotional factors. You like the flavor of that fruit or cereal. You like the color of the car. You are loved first while you learn. A church that appeals to the heart by having an accepting and loving social community in which people are made welcome while they still struggle to accept all the doctrines it will grow much faster and be spiritually stronger than if a person is expected to declare allegiance to a list of doctrines before being accepted.
William,
I heartily agree: love, acceptance and welcoming must come first. The church has got it bass-ackwards in presenting all the doctrines, often to strangers, then try to get them to accept a lot of strange beliefs (to them), baptize them BECAUSE they assent to those beliefs, then they may find themselves in a church that really doesn't accept them because they haven't fully adopted all the behaviors associated with Adventists. Wrong!
The church has turned upside down the early church's method: present them Jesus, and very few doctrines, behaviors were also few. None would be admitted today with the 28 FBs that must be adopted.
I recently moved to a new city. It has two adventist churches, and is situated in an area where many of the surrounding towns and cities also have adventist churches. One of the churches has mostly older members, two families with children and one family with youth. There are also a few younger couples. Anyone who has been going regularely to adventist churches would be instantly familiar with the service, and even though I am not fluent in the language spoken, I always know exactly what is going on.
The other church has the opposite demography. Almost everyone is a university student, with a few older members. Because of the flow of student life, the total amount of participants is large while any particular sabbath will show about the same number of persons as in the first church. Many of the members of this church have had any background in adventism, nor in many cases with christianity. This church also has a very different liturgical style. The service usually starts and ends with singing as in the average adventist church, but the message part in the middle is quite varying and thus far with a quite unpredictable style.
This second church is based on serving its community and was founded around the pathfinder club. Now it also has other projects as well. After comming 5 or 6 times, I too was asked to join one of the activities. You would think that the other adventist churches in the area would be happy for the successful outreach to the student population in this church. But as I have had opportunity to visit a few other churches in the area, the attitude towards this church has ranged between "they wont change and be like us so that we could work together", to "they are not really adventist". No doubt what I have written here will be enough for some to concur with the later apprical of this church.
It is a typical reaction to any church that is different. Most long-time SDAs are so used to what they do, and so comfortable with it, that they can't imagine that other people aren't. I have had quite a few conversations with older, conservative family members, and they just cannot understand that some people may not be comfortable with, or enjoy, the conservative Adventism that they have enjoyed for their whole life. They often do not understand the Adventism of their own children or grandchildren. They really do not see any reason why the Adventism they have known and loved for their whole life should change. It is their life, and losing it would be like losing a life partner. That is something many of them are going through now, and while I am worried about the loss of younger people (those under 60) from their churches, I find it hard to say that it should be taken away from them. There is a place for 'hospice churches'. Even though I prefer innovative churches, I would find the offer of looking after a 'hospice church' tempting – far more than the regular SDA church. There is something appealing about a church that does not change, and does not want to change. Perhaps that is my AS speaking rather than my brain 🙂
Not sure if it is coincidence or what, but I am listening to random music while reading/writing, and Chris Rae's "Road to Hell" started just as I began replying. Sometimes having a somewhat Anglican approach to life throws you some strange things to ponder 🙂
What is needed is a transformational change in focus from "worship" to "discipleship." (Jesus actually talks little about church worship.) The best way to achieve this is through activist small groups–what is called Sabbath School.
When Young Adults start their own discipleship Sabbath Schools, they find their space in church, and they find Jesus in their space.
Let's start aiming them in this direction rather than trying to restock all the aisles in the old country store.
Chris,
Right on! The challenge in discipleship is discovering real ministry that is empowered and directed by the Holy Spirit instead of just doing the same old thing in the same old way and hoping for different results. Both discipleship and ministry are things where tradition abounds so few have any real experience or are allowed to grow.
As a 'young professonal' can I just ask, 'how important is it to the rentention of young people that they find a fellow-Adventist partner?' Because in my own personal (and not very scientific) observation, that seems to be the most important factor as to whether they stay in the Church – more than the type of service, more than how entertaining it is, more than how involved they get to be, and controversaliy more than their Bible knowledge or apparent relationship with God! Even nominal, backsliding Adventists often return to Church when they have kids if they at least marry abother nominal, backsliding Advenitst.
Youth programmes are in effect about getting Adventist people together with other Adventist young people. If they get together, if they do leave, they are much more likely to come back when they have kids. If the Church wants to retain its young people, it should consider giving serious support and resources to match-making as the Jews (and many other ancient cultures) do – I am not joking.
I know it sounds like a silly point to make, but there is real wisdom in the counsel about not being unequally yoked. That is just my observation.
Stephen,
Good observation. I agree.
Stephen, I don't think your point is in the least silly. Although I think it would help if we could assist young professionals to find an Adventist mate, I personally know of a number of young Adventist couples/families who would be glad to be part of an Adventist congregation, but cannot find one where they feel comfortable. As it happens, most are also in large Adventist centers.
I think it would be very helpful to implement your suggestion, but not enough. We need to make "passing the baton" one of our highest priorities. After all, relay teams spend more time practicing the exchange than anything else. But youth ministry remains separate from the main church most of the time, and the senior congreagations don't make it a focus at all. If deeds and resources demonstrate priorities, then the Adventist church as an institution basically cares almost not at all.
"there is real wisdom in the counsel about not being unequally yoked."
Much wisdom. So how is it that we can't seem to get that concept across to more of our young people? Those contemplating marrying someone outside of our faith are still trying to justify it with the same tired, invalid arguments that have always been used–and with the same results. Unfortunately this problem is not confined to young people. I've seen people who have lost a spouse do the same thing–and with the same results.
Yes, much wisdom. But not as easy to implement as it might seem.
I know of a young man raised in an SDA home, attended SDA schools, went to SDA college, where he met a nice young SDA woman.They got married. Now he's a self-described atheist. No doubt his young wife thought she was marrying a strong SDA, judging by his parents, his life, his education. By far the majority of people in the church he grew up in would say he had the best of upbringing. His parents are long time church officers, very devout.
It's not always simple.
In my personal development as a Christian, the youth ministries of my church had a huge impact in my life. Through an active youth group, youth choir, youth council, spiritual retreats, evangelism efforts on our part to our community, and much more – my young faith in God became more than theory – it was also tangible. Experiencing relationship with Christ is so vital. Entering into college, I encountered so many ideas of pluralism and atheism, and I can see how easy it would have been to think myself out of my faith; except, I cannot deny my experience with Christ. To me, this is the most important element for new believers – once you've met, felt, and experienced God, faith becomes logical.
I travel a lot in the U.S. and Europe. I can predict what I'll find in the Adventist Church I'm visiting before I step inside. We use a cookie-cutter approach filled with cultural traditions, and the simple problem with it is that each congregation is gifted with different talents. The truth is that one-size fit all shirts don't actually fit everyone well…and the same is true for worship, ministry, and community. We also lack leadership. Other denominations/non-denominations invest in ministers of music, youth, education, and more. These ministers (often ordained) are educated in their specialized fields of expertise – God given talent. We lack a diversity of leadership that would encourage our stuck congregations to 'make room' for youth and young adult involvement in the ministries of the congregation.
I had to laugh about the idea that we don't do mega-church well. What most SDA congregations/members consider a 'huge' church is really the starting threshhold of a very-small, but sustainable Southern Baptist congregation (about 200 regular members).
Doug, you raise excellent points. I didn't grow up Adventist and have thought about the 'youth group' conundrum. In essence, most of the local churches cannot have a youth group because they ship off to an academy. But there are always the straggler families who remain locally, and what are their youth to be a part of? On the flip side, those attending the academies are exposed to an unrealistic reality. I had presumed that students would branch out more at the university level, but perhaps that assumption is false.
Solid youth ministries are a major attraction point for young families. Parents are often looking for help with raising their teens in a 'safer' environment. This could be another issue that keeps families with teens from accepting our church communities as their own.
The results do not differ much where boarding academies don't exist. Australia has only one, and only one institution beyond high school, which most SDA youth do not attend, yet most of our youth still leave the church. There is a tendency for youth to congregate wherever ther eis a good youth progam. But even in smaller churches, there is a reluctance on teh part of the youth to integrate. Most of the youth I grew up with who stayed in the local church still meet together as the 'senior youth'. Some are now grandparents, so it does look a littel odd, but they stil don't feel comfortable with the older members. But at least they are still attending. I believe we do need to take seriously the need to integrate the youth with adults. The obvious absence of many people aged 16-60 in many churches shows it is a long term issue.
I recently visited a creative church in Zurich. There, they separate into three groups: children, teens, adults. The teens/youth church includes studies and worship that are focused on the needs of the youth. When they reach a certain age, they must leave and go to the adult church. But…there is not a big difference in the style of worship experience between the two…maybe the focus of the message shifts.
In my travels in the U.S. and Germany, I've observed that most SDA congregations accept the concept that 'youth worship music' and 'adult worship music' are totally different things. This, of course, makes integration difficult.
Chuck,
I have made similar observations. If you want a predictor of whether or not our children will transition into "adult" services and remain in the church, just look at how many times the parent of that small child down the pew admonishes them to sit still and be quiet when what they want most to do is go outside, play and be noisy. If church isn't attractive to children they will leave as soon as they become old enough to exert their wishes above the desires of their parents.
I am a young person and it is interesting to see that most of the comments are actually coming from people who are not so young. I remebmber how many of you crushed GYC a ssuccesful youth ministry. I think youth are leaving the Church because The church is not following the counsels of E G white concerning Youth ministry. There are people who want this church to stand for anything and everything and that puts young people off
Tapiwa, please elaborate. Specifically, which counsels do you believe would help? Serious question…not a trap.
I believe the core issue is coming into real real relationship with Christ. I've heard about various studies revealing that, for some time, our youth have been more certain about doctrinal and cultural things than they are on salvation through Christ. This is backwards. It is about a priority of focus.
I agree with your point that "people want this church to stand for anything and everything, and that puts young people off." I'd say that it confuses and sidetracks them. First things first…we all need to surrender to Jesus. I believe Ellen White would have agreed with this simple idea.
Please, have patience with young people, remember God is not through with them or with any of us. Young people need to begin becoming independent; stretching their own wings outside of the cocoon. They have been restricted from "worldly" things and need to learn to make their own judgments, not of those who have made decisions for them. All things in the world are not evil; discernment cannot be taught but must be learned.
I have seen many young people who seemed to walk away, disinterested in the church until they become parents. It is then they must decide what they want their children to be taught. If there memories are good, they will bring their children back; if they were discouraged and felt too restricted, they may never return.
Whenever youth ministry is being considered, this must be remembered (from today's WaPo):
"A recent poll by the Public Religion Research Institute and the Berkley Center at Georgetown University found millennials to be less religiously affiliated than their parents. A majority thinks that government “is getting too involved in the issue of morality.” While accepting that Christianity “has good values and principles,” millennials often describe it as “judgmental,” “hypocritical” and “anti-gay.”
Elaine…it is true that young people have to 'stretch their wings' and become independent, but it would be great if our churches provided an environment that included them all along the way. The cycle of returning Adventist parents is something I've also witnessed, but wouldn't the church be more complete if they had remained active as young adults?
The article you quote is one of many such sources. The Barna Group has done a couple of big studies revealing that young Christians are torn between believing much of the message but simultaneously recognizing hypocrisy and judgmentalism on the part of their church members.
We once did a simple exercise in NYC…inviting three random people walking by on the sidewalk to come in an honestly answer questions about church, religion, God, SDA, etc. Even though the three were literally walking in front of an SDA Church, none were aware of us. The three people were of different ages, occupations, religious pasts, and were strangers to each other. But there were some unifying themes in their answers. For example, each of them believed they were 'good' people who were attempting to do 'good' in their lives, the lives of others, and in causes that impacted society and the world. Each of them felt that organized religion was only interested in promoting it's 'club'. While there were good things about what Jesus said, the ulterior motive of most organized church events seemed to be self-centered instead of being simply focused on doing good (examples: marching in rallies for equality, participating in trying to save endangered species or the plantet, etc.) They also talked about feeling judged by most religious people…religious people feeling superior.
This is one area where the Holy Spirit is of such great importance. When the Spirit judges, convicts and transforms our lives, we know it is from a place of pure love and justice.
In 2001, I had the pleasure of worshiping for many weeks at the Central SDA Church in San Francisco. They had a very interesting ministry for the gay community. In short, the church welcomed all people to come and meet Christ. If someone identified his/herself as 'gay', then the particular ministry went to extra lengths to find a job within the church for that person. The idea was simple: give them a place to belong, a place to worship in a community of faith, something to take ownership of, and let God work in their lives.
I feel that churches (not just SDA) often make the mistake of seeking out those who we view as 'less fortunate' with our ministries. Go with me for a second…I know Jesus instructed us to do serve the needy. Anyway, in doing this, we begin the interaction with the notion that we are more fortunate than those we are ministering to, and it can be challenging to avoid the trap of spiritual pride. But something else happens…we look around our community and miss the reality that each of us is suffering from various struggles and life issues. We are all needy…we all need a place to belong where the Spirit can work on us.
Chuck,
You have presented some of the problems in youth ministry. We may forget our younger years, but one thing going for them: they can sense hypocrisy and "bait" in a flash. Any ministry to young people that has its end goal as bringing in members to the church is, in truth, "bait."
Regularly, the local news where I live, and many other parts of the country and picked up by TV are stories of young people achieving great things with their exuberance and especially, a sense of fairness and justice. When the church is seen as not concerned in these areas why would an active young person want to be involved?
The ideas in San Franciso are probably unique for that particular cosmpopolitan character. But if it could be imitated elsewhere what might be the results?
When the church is seen as not concerned in these areas why would an active young person want to be involved?
Elaine…I think the obvious answer to your question is – God. Our church members and organizations do need to be more proactive in their communities. That's a given…and growing congregations trend in that direction. But ultimately, churches are the Body of Christ, and the whole world needs Him even if it doesn't realize it.
Sharing the gospel is not 'bait', unless our motivation for doing it is getting our membership numbers up. Helping lead young people into real relationship with Christ is not 'bait' unless we are simply worried about paying the church's electric bill in the next generation. Maybe it is a fine line. A huge congregation in Zurich has taken the bold move of not having membership. They did this in response to the fact that so many had left the Catholic and Lutheran churches partly because they didn't like the sense of being owned. So, they have no membership, but approximately 10,000 attending each week and plenty of offerings to pay the cost of ministry.
The primary purpose of a church is not social action on various current issues…but sharing the love and truth of God. As valuable an organization as it may be, I don't personally know anyone who has come to know God through membership and action in an organization like Greenpeace. That doesn't make Greenpeace bad, or mean that Christians shouldn't participate in it, but it has a different function.
Nowhere in the Bible does it describe having a relationship with God asw having ultimate importance. But service to others is: Matt. 25, is a prime example of Christ praising those who knew the doctrines and taught them—not; but in feeding hungry, clothing naked, a stranger taken in and welcomed, sick and visited. phrase. Now put those words into action.