“Facts are stubborn things, but statistics are pliable.”― Mark Twain
I never imagined that I would one day live in a world where any one person’s experience is assumed to be universal truth. What I believe is badly needed today is more observation before drawing conclusions. So when I read this article that a friend shared on Facebook, I felt compelled to respond. It is in many ways a helpful article but also partly unhelpful. The fact that it is written from the experience of a Millennial is what I believe causes the average reader to take it as broad truth. I am not a millennial… a fact that may lead some to write off my perspective. However, I have been doing ministry with younger generations for a very long time. I started working with Gen X teens and then Millennials as teens for years before working with them as adults. Currently I work with Gen Z teens and Millennial adults. So I offer my perspective as an observer rather than a member of the generation discussed in the article. It may help to read the article before continuing so that you know what I am responding to.
The author makes 12 points, many of which are very valuable. Overall, the alarm bell he is sounding is a very real one. We cannot argue with statistics which tell us that the church in America has a real problem in that it is not reaching younger generations. I have even argued in a presentation to my diocese that the most unreached people group is right in our midst. It is millennials and Generation Z. To express that another way – the church (broadly speaking) is not effectively reaching students and young adults.
The opening statistic in the article is slightly misleading. The Barna study linked within the article states that 59 percent of Millennials who grew up in the Church have dropped out at some point. The question up for debate that Barna points out is the lack of knowledge about what percentage has or will return. While there is a tiny distinction between the statement actually made and the headline of the article in question, it is a way that we so easily use stats to paint a picture. In this case a bleak picture has been painted. My observations stem from the fact that my work leads me to worship at many different churches. In some of those congregations I see a strong millennial presence. In others their absence is notable.
In the churches where I see a significant millennial presence, many of the author’s 12 theses are being met. The others are either personal peeves of the author or observations that are true for too many churches. What follows is what is true about each of the many churches I am personally well acquainted with that have a strong millennial population. Each of them however are very much intergenerational churches. I am aware of church plants that are dominated by young adults and I am not thinking of those as I make the following observations.
- They are churches where young adults are listened to, valued, and included in leadership. A friend of mine pastors a church where many recent college graduates settle into and end up in leadership before they are 35. It struck me at first as an outlier but then I learned that a particular campus ministry (RUF) had ministered to these folks while in college and helped develop them as leaders for the church. So when RUF grads move into town, they seek out this type of church and are welcomed. I know of others who are doing similar college ministry with CCO (Coalition for Christian Outreach) who have the same goal of raising leaders for the church.
2. They have a heart for the poor and are actively serving the community. Each of them have identified ways to serve the poor, the homeless, the hungry, etc in their community and have members actively involved with these ministries. They are doing more than writing checks. They are rolling up their sleeves and making a difference in the kingdom.
3. They are churches who are not blaming the culture. This is an important point the author makes. We can easily rally people around something we collectively oppose but we do so at the exclusion of many. It is better to rally people around a positive alternative than a negative view. Hence it is fair to say the churches I have in mind are gospel centered, meaning they are about good news rather than culture wars. We all know that our culture is very messed up but we need a positive voice to make a difference.
4. They are all churches with a clearly articulated vision. The author perceives that his generation is sick of hearing about mission and values statements. While boomers tend to over play those, younger generation business leaders know they are part of reality for any organization that wants to move forward. I have seen churches that overplay the mission statement and don’t back it up. That is unhelpful. Yet the church without a vision is going nowhere.
5. They are all churches that value good biblical preaching. I get the author’s point about mentoring being a huge need. Yet he believes that his generation does not value preaching. That may be the fault of churches with bad preaching or merely his own experience. It’s not the case with all millennials or even most. Those who grow up in a church that preaches the gospel from the pages of scripture understand that the authority speaking to them ultimately is God through His word. We need to see churches mentoring younger generations without sacrificing solid preaching. We all need to hear the gospel regularly. Let’s do both rather than toss a vital part of biblical worship out the window.
Where these churches probably need to grow most on the 12 theses of the article is the need to address controversial issues and improve public perception. Some of the churches on my mind as I wrote the above points are addressing issues to an extent. Some are engaging the community in a way that is intentionally seeking to improve the public perception. Yet most need to work more on these areas and in ways that are consistent with the values of a gospel centered bible preaching community of faith.
Because of my work with a large number of churches, I should make it clear that I know many that are miserably failing to reach younger generations. It’s an issue that these churches often want to address but don’t know how to. They don’t need to sacrifice their traditions of worship or become something they are not in order to do so. Realistically a congregation whose average age is above 55 is not likely to create a contemporary worship service that is actually contemporary. These congregations need to find ways to engage the community, mentor younger generations, and make their churches more accessible. They don’t need young adult programs, they need to be actively seeking to pass the faith to every generation.
I appreciate Sam’s article for the issues it raises and I know there are many who need to listen to his pleas. Yet I could not leave it without comment that indeed there are churches that are engaging millennials effectively and they don’t need to make all the changes he proposed. I believe we do well to look at the churches that are engaging millennials effectively and learn from them. However, we need to look at churches with a reasonable similarity when doing so. What I mean by that is that the smaller congregation of 150 is not going to be able to emulate the congregation of 1500. The traditional church is not going to become a hipster church. Most of the congregations I have in mind that are engaging millennials well are relatively medium sized churches. Few are larger than 500 on a Sunday. My point is that it can be done in most any size congregation. Ultimately it’s not about programs or worship styles it is about relationally engaging every generation.
Leave a Reply