BeDeviant.com has a post up (here) about the nature of college ministry today. The author, Justin Wise, reiterates the common discussion points that college kids don’t go for the large church settings of yore, but tend towards smaller worship experiences. He also points out that those kids are the future leaders of the Church, and that we need to adapt to this to try and connect to them. Of course, check out the original article for the full story as my summary doesn’t do it justice (then stop back here:) ).
All of these are of course salient points, and discussed at length every day throughout the Church. We all know kids are the future, and they don’t go for the worship that their parents have participated in their entire lives. In response to this, the universal conclusion seems to be that we need to mold our worship experiences to their expectations. This has led to large multimedia investments, the creation of “contemporary” services, and the attempt to promote web apps like Twitter and Facebook in many churches.
This is beginning to annoy me.
I’m 28. I’m a programmer/analyst with a B.S. degree in IT. I not only understand all that technology, I can and have helped churches implement some of those ideas. It’s not like I don’t GET the technology, or why people believe they need to pursue strategies based on it to appeal to the younger generations. I just think it’s about time someone said something NOT enthusiastically endorsing Twitter to any church that will listen.
We go to worship to praise God, to hear His Word, to recieve the sacraments, and to commune with fellow believers, right? Think that covers it?
WHERE’S THE PART ABOUT HAVING AN ENTERTAINMENT VALUE???
You want to use more “contemporary” songs? Fine; the hymns are meant to be praise, and hymns we “feel” as opposed to just sing would seem to be a way to praise God from a deeper part of us. Same idea for reworking some of our prayers and liturgy (just don’t overdo it – there’s centuries of meaning buried in those words and you don’t change them unless you truly understand them to begin with). You want to have a more informal space, more intimate, where you can feel closer to Him and your fellow worshipers? Have at it. Projection screens? Yeah, if you want to display the song lyrics and liturgy, and possibly some elements of the Pastor’s sermon there to reinforce his point – I get it. Lyrics and liturgy help congregants and visitors follow along without having to keep flipping through their hymnals or bulletins, and video clips or PowerPoint slides help the Pastor better communicate the message he’s trying to relay to us.
Artsy videos with dramatic transitions that show the Lord’s Prayer or something fading in and out, line by line? Ooh, pretty. Doesn’t add crap – the words are just as powerful printed on a sheet of paper, or prayed quietly by us. Theatre-quality lighting and sound arrangements that go for top production value over simply making sure everyone can hear the Pastor? Awesome, we can double as a movie theatre now, we just need a popcorn machine in the lobby.
How is any of that supposed to make kids want to come to worship? They EXPECT the multimedia treatment? They spend hours in front of the TV, playing XBox 360 or PS3, in front of a laptop, on an iPhone, etc., so we’d better make sure we are just as cool so they WANT to go to worship, right? Yeah, that’s sound logic.
Maybe someone ought to just tell them WHY we pray what we pray, or say what we say, or worship how we worship, hmm? Anyone tried that? How authentic is it when we’re trying to put the “Shiny” factor into worship not to make our praise to God more powerful, but because little Jimmy gets bored easily and likes the big projector screens instead of the lame paper bulletin or old green hymnal? Kids ain’t dumb; it doesn’t take much for them to figure out that no matter how cool the worship service is, the leadership in the church still doesn’t see them as anything but a way to get parents in the door. And college kids can tell when a church REALLY welcomes them or simply wants some younger butts in the pew. If you’re offering compelling activities and programs for children, truly welcoming them and giving them real responsibility in the church, and helping them really understand the liturgies we use (minus the Shiny), YOU WILL GET KIDS. Want to make the worship changes I mentioned above, for a better worship experience, fine – all the better to praise Him. But stop pretending it’s the WORSHIP SERVICE that keeps kids away, with its boring songs and lack of video.
As to Facebook and Twitter, let’s all stop pretending these are the most effective tools we have at reaching out to the unchurched. You can put verses into your tweets and status updates on Facebook all you want, but few are going to look at that and be affected any more than seeing a bumper sticker reading “John 3:16″ – ESPECIALLY people we have never met or barely know. Want to really communicate with these kids? TRY GATHERING TOGETHER AND HAVING REAL FELLOWSHIP WITH THEM! Kids use Facebook and Twitter to talk to their friends, the friends they usually spend a lot of time with in school, right? IT’S A COROLLARY TO FACE-TO-FACE INTERACTION, not a SUBSTITUTE!
Want authentic and modern? Get a bunch of kids, and go help someone (your shut-in members, somebody in the community, whatever). Add in some prayer and a little meditation, and you’ve got them. Want to coordinate schedules or events or organize carpooling for that trip? Yes, use Facebook, Twitter, some text messages, whatever. But please please please, get the mission stuff right first.
I know there’s good reason for technology to be in the Church, otherwise I would not have started a blog about it. But I hate fake. And fake is what it seems many churches are trying to do: fake kids into thinking that the church is any more relevant to their lives with a Twitter account than it was without. I’m going to focus this blog on ways that technology can help the church with it’s God-given mission, and do so in an authentic way, for the sake of that mission and not for the sake of itself. Feel free to tell me how I’m wrong (or if I’m actually making any sense to you) in the comments below.
Hi Craig
Thanks for quoting the article that I wrote.
I’m not exactly sure, but I’m perceiving a disagreement with what I wrote (or, what you think that I wrote.)
Is this the case?
Hi Justin – Thanks for reading my reply! Yeah, I went on a bit of a rant, so I understand your confusion. I don’t want to say I disagree with your thesis… our college ministries will indeed shape the church of tomorrow. What I might disagree with is your suggestions at the bottom – regarding maybe changing our model to be more group-oriented, or reaching out via tools kids are using today, or communicating via the “digital” language. The disagreement stems from the fact that we seem to be trying to mold the Church to fit the desires of a demographic, rather than because it makes the Church stronger. Would moving to smaller, more intimate services/worship experiences be beneficial? Maybe – but we do it because it’s good for the Church as a whole, not because kids like that better. Using Facebook and Twitter isn’t a bad idea, but it’s talked about so darn often by church leaders today it’s like they don’t truly understand what they’re for. Like I pointed out, they’re communication tools that supplement face-to-face communication, rather than supplant it – and many leaders seem to be focusing a whole lot on this supplemental tool rather than actually supporting missional work that can create relationships in the first place. Your last point about “digital” language I’m not exactly sure about, but I would say that again, we don’t change our church to please a demographic – we change it for the good of the Church. I sort of lumped you in with the guys pushing multimedia in worship, which you obviously said nothing about, but I think they share a lot of your perspective on the things I disagree with. No matter what, though, I very much respect your work on BeDeviant and am very thankful you took the time to read my post and respond, and I’m sure there’s a whole lot more we agree on than disagree. God Bless! – Craig
Craig
Sounds great. Like you said, we can agree to disagree (even though we may agree on more than we disagree!).
I noticed that in your post–your main disagreement doesn’t seem to be with social media but with the “multimedia” folk in general. I think that’s an important distinction to make. I have never believed that social media is a replacement for face-to-face interaction. As a matter of fact, I led a seminar where I stated my philosophy on social media is that it all should lead to face-to-face interaction where possible!
As for the suggestions, those were based off what my missionary friend is already doing. For him, it’s not a question of if things are going to change. Things have changed, period. As such, they’ve had to make significant changes to their ministry. Chronologically speaking, it makes sense that if college ministries are making these changes, the churches that they’ll be going to after graduating will need to make these changes as well.
Good stuff.
Justin
However our positions may differ, I do appreciate your willingness to come and comment on my blog and engage in conversation on this – hope to hear from you again in the future, and I do plan on following your blog as well.