Bryan's message was prophetic for this fellowship! Let me challenge you to watch/listen to it again if you were there. If you have not heard this message, and you are concerned for the future of the AG, you really should invest the 30 minutes or so to hear it.
You can click here for a mini-transcript of what he said. Or you can click here to get to the Denver 2005 page. Just look for the Friday night message (audio or video).
Bryan's main points were this:
1. There is a TITANIC DISTRUST between the older generation and the next generation.
- The older generation has a concern that the next generation will not guard the trust they have been given. They do not question the passion or creativity of those younger than them, but they do wonder if they have substance.
- Because of that the older generation is reluctant to pass the baton to the next generation.
- The younger generation has a reluctance to take the baton being passed to them because they are not sure they want the baggage or the conditions that come with it.
- The younger generation has no problem accepting the doctrine. They struggle with the requirement of doing it (methodologically) the way it has always been done before.
- They want to know, 'Will you bless me to do ministry in a way that has never been done before so that I can contextualize the message to reach my generation?'
2. There is a TIMELESS CHALLENGE being given to us all.
- 2 Timothy 1:13 is Paul's challenge to Timothy to 'guard the good deposit entrusted to you with the help of the Holy Spirit.'
- This is the challenge given to the next generation: Will you guard the trust? Will you appreciate your inheritance? Do you have solid doctrine?
- Great quote: We know you know how it feels, but do you know where its found?
3. Finally, there is a TERRIBLE TRAGEDY that we must avoid.
- The next generation is like Esau crying out to Issac in Genesis 27, 'Father will you bless me also?' This generation, maybe more than any other, is crying out for a blessing.
- Will the older generation grant an unconditional blessing on the next generation? Will they release the next generation to do ministry through new and creative methods?
- Great quote: Will you bless what we do even if we wear shorts and a t-shirt, have church in the back of a Barnes and Noble, lead worship with an acoustic guitar, and don't have church on a Sunday night?
Bryan then concluded his message with some warnings.
First he said that the next generation is perceived as rebellious. They are not. They have a reformative anointing on them. They love to reform what is old and create what is new. They don't want to do it the normal way. We will either make room for them or they will leave this fellowship and start something new.
Second he conveyed a warning from an old Methodist pastor who told him that we are at a critical moment. If we don't fan into flames the fires that stoked this movement in the beginning, we will go the way of other denominations and begin to die out.
I am sure I have done a poor job of representing Bryan's message in just a few bullet points. To do it justice, you really need to listen to it again. It is a NOW word for our fellowship.
So let me conclude this post with two questions for your discussion:
What can the next generation do to earn/guard the trust of those who have gone before them?
What can the 'father' generation do to extend an unconditional blessing to those coming after them?
38 comments:
It may be that a third generation exists - people in their 40's (like me) and 50's (like my husband). Maybe we can help be a bridge. We have kids in their 20's and a real 'get-it' factor because of that. Our mentors are now in their 60's and 70's, so we kind of understand their history and perspective also. I hope we can be a true steward and be spiritual moms and dads all at the same time.
What freaks the "older generation" is mixing discussions about methodology with theology.
If they knew that we fully embraced Pentecostalism as articulated in our Fundamental Truths, that would go a long way in building bridges.
There were three issues paramount in the minds of our founders: Pentecost, missions, and women in ministry...these were unusual hallmarks of the movement. Someone used the term DNA (was it Sam Farina? :) You cannot sign on to a denomination and then look to change their distinctive reason for existing...it just lacks integrity. People who can't get on board with initial physical evidence or women...I fully anticipate working with you in my city, fellowshiping with you, etc...but not as part of my denomination.
Just Two Cents :)
yes, this is my generation as well. I am 43. I can emphathize with both the fathers and the grandsons so to speak.
We do have a large role to play.
One of the major concerns/suspicians that "older" Pentecostals pastors have about "emerging/seeker" pastors is NOT about methods. I will stand on my head and wear earrings in a Starbucks in order to have an opportunity to witness to some Goth but we take issue with the dimininishing of the MESSAGE!! If you read the WHOLE sermon Bryan preached you will note the following:
"Some say the youth are rebellious; I say they are revolutionaries. There is a reformatory anointing on this generation. They are the reformation generation. They do not want to be normal. They want to be abnormal. They do not want to be natural; they want to be supernatural.
Nearly 90 years ago, my great-grandmother left her mainstream church to be a part of something distinctive, something different. This Fellowship was planting churches across America — in barns, tents, and storefronts. They believed they were a continuation of the New Testament church. They believed through the power of the Spirit that they were to be a naturally supernatural church. My great-grandmother left what was normal for what was different.
Over the years, the Assemblies of God has moved from barns, tents, and storefronts to better facilities, more educated pastors, and more respectable budgets. Thank God for His blessing. But God forbid that, as we become more accepted in church culture, we make less room for the demonstration of the Spirit’s power. God forbid we lose our distinctives. God forbid we become mainstream — normal.
Former General Superintendent Thomas F. Zimmerman said, “Though we have grown in number, it would be foolish for us to assume that ‘having begun in the spirit’ we could ever substitute mass strength for the power and presence of God in our lives. Our strength is not by might, nor by power, but by my spirit, saith the Lord of hosts.”
I love my evangelical brothers. I read their books, attend their conferences, and learn from their models. I am in debt to them for their contribution to the kingdom of God, but we do not need to lose our Pentecostal identity while learning from them. I am evangelical, but I am not just evangelical; I am Pentecostal. We are “people of the Spirit.”
The irony of this is that the evangelical community is attempting to make their services more experiential. To stop young people from leaving their churches, leaders have been told to make their worship more passionate and provide room in their service for people to experience God because this is an experiential generation.
The DNA of this youth culture matches the DNA of this Fellowship. All we need to be is what God called us to be 91 years ago — a church of the Spirit.
The youth in this generation do not want normal. They want what is supernatural. This generation has railroad spikes through their tongues and piercings over the rest of their bodies. Someone speaking in tongues will not scare them away. They will probably say, “Cool. Finally, this is not a normal church.”
In a recent nationwide survey pastors were asked to identify three books that had been most helpful to them as ministry leaders. George Barna made a unique discovery about younger pastors: “One of the most interesting outcomes is the different taste of younger pastors. … They lean toward books and authors that extol adventure, shared experiences, visionary leadership, supernatural guidance, and relational connections. … They seem less obsessed with church size and more interested in an encounter with the living God.”
This finding is in line with the passion and deep spiritual hunger of the youth culture. Those my age and younger are moving away from 21 laws of leadership, 7 ways to break the 1,000 barrier, 10 steps to this, and 45 steps to that. Today’s youth want someone who will lead them into an experience with the God of the Book of Acts.
Churches need to maintain excellence: the yard needs to be manicured; the orchestra needs to be in tune; our sermon needs to be well prepared; and the service needs to be well organized. But if God does not show up and breathe on us, all we have done is put on a nice show."
Many of the leaders of the emergent/seeker churches in the A/G have no use for, don't encourage and don't teach on the baptism of the Holy Spirit, will not allow the manifestations of the Spirit in their Sunday or other weekday services and for all practical purposes have become Evangelical but definitely NOT Pentecostal/Charismatic. Without the Holy Spirit's operation in our churches who are we? This is the major concern of the Older, "traditional" A/G pastors. I for one have never beleived that "church growth" and the move of the Holy Spirit in our meetings are mutually exclusive to each other. Be cutting edge with your methods but be allow room in your meetings for the operation of the Holy Spirit, teach on it, expect it, tell people you beleive it and operate in it and you will see a lot of distrust from your elders disappear.
I believe in Mracles, for Jesus Christ is the SAME yesterday, today and tomorrow! That's what you joined when you received credentials. I f you don't want it or have changed your views, God bless you. But don't stay in the A/G because you are being disingenuous! Blessings!
When methodology is erroneously equated with theology we find ourselves at our current impasse. When our political structure and the function there of is spiritualized to manipulate the direction of our movement (the Holy Spirit can direct us WHO to vote for, but can’t direct us to pass resolution 4 that helps us diversify voices- WHAT?) we find ourselves at our current impasse. When change and innovation are dismissed for the sake of protecting against “competition” (relational districts will destroy our fellowship- WHAT? Does anyone have another answer for those of us pastoring multi-site churches who will plant campuses in other geographical districts than our own) we find ourselves at our current impasse. When a man of God is not taken at his word and yet is gossiped about and slandered by those who do not know his heart (how many of your friends told you the REAL reason someone pulled their name?) we find ourselves at our current impasse.
Let’s not kid ourselves. Bryan is dead on. We are at a critical moment and this GC demonstrated the polarity of our fellowship. The culture of distrust must change, but it cannot without relationship. As long as we allow methodology, manipulation, fear, and our sinful hearts to keep us apart we will flounder as a movement.
“God allow revival to start in every individual minister as we release fear and our need to control so that we can embrace one another with clean hands and a pure heart!”
Randy Freeman
www.LifeFellowship.tv
Friends,
I'm 42, so I suppose that puts me in the 'tweener camp too. And, as I thought about this question, my first two thoughts were 1)how did I learn from my Dad and 2)how do I teach my kids?
I can boil my philosophy down to two words: TEACHABLE SPIRIT. I have preached this to my children, and have tried my best to practice it myself. I think it is a quality that is largely lost our culture, and I pray that we don't succumb in the church as well.
If you think back through the annals of western civilization up to World War II, life was all about generational transfer. It was the pater familius passing on the family estate. Farmers raised their children to work side by side with them, so that one day the children would become the next head of the family. Even after the Industrial Revolution and trends toward urbanization, the mercantile class raised their children to carry on the family business.
All that began to change with the Greatest generation after the war ended. They had become disconnected en masse from their roots because of the call to arms or to homeland support of the war effort. As they returned, they didn't return to the family businesses, but began to carve out their own lives independent of their heritage. And overall, they did a remarkable job.
I apologize for the history lesson, but it's essential to the discussion. My point is that, over the last 60 years, we have almost totally lost the art of generational transfer. That includes transfer of knowledge, transfer of wisdom, transfer of mission, and even transfer of wealth.
For example, the Greatest generation has amassed unprecedented wealth. My secular profession is as a financial planner/Chartered Financial Consultant, and I do estate planning for people in that generation. The vast majority of them are skeptical about leaving their estates to their Boomer kids, because they don't believe the kids will steward those resources according to the same core values the parents hold. Time after time, I have worked with over-70 clients who want to structure their estates so that their kids, who are riddled with addictions, broken families, and debt won't blow through an inheritance in a few months that took the parents a lifetime to accumulate.
And the parents are very conflicted about that, because they love their children and want to pass the blessing on to them. I have literally had older moms and dads break down in tears in my office as we discussed their estate because of how grieved they are about the condition of their children.
On the flip side, I have had the 30- and 40-something kids sit in my office and talk about how everything will be much better financially once the inheritance from their parents comes in. They don't see that inheritance as an endowment to be grown larger instead of depleted; they see it as winning the lottery. It is the consumer mentality coupled with a disconnect from any sense of multigenerational continuum.
We must not have the heart of the prodigal son. The prodigal son wanted all the benefits of his inheritance without accepting the responsibilities the inheritance represented. If the prodigal had a teachable spirit, he would have understood that the real value of his inheritance was best realized in relationship with his father, and carrying on the mission of the father.
If the younger generation wants to be heard, it must first listen. The greatest heritage of knowledge and experience we can acquire comes from the generations before us. The older generation would love to share that wisdom, if they really felt like the young generation listened and cared.
For an awesome movie that artfully illustrates this issue, I recommend "A Walk in the Clouds" (1995) with Keanu Reeves, Giancarlo Giannini, and Anthony Quinn (one of his most masterful performances).
Blessings,
David W Barnett
www.pentecostalleader.com
I've been lurking as a "golden oldie," reading with interest the varied comments on this blog. It reminded me of the 47th Gen Council in Indianapolis and an interactive altar time in the last service. I wrote about it at Peggie's Place - "The Gold Connection," - and wanted to share my observations. May God keep His hand on us all - young and old - as we pursue a common goal of reaching a needy world with His love!
Jeff, great questions to us.
Coming from a 33 year old who is a MK, PK, and has 5 cendentialed minisers in the family (my father is 76 so I feel I can bridge pretty well.
"What can the next gen do?"
I think we need to make sure we honor the sacrifices of those that have gone before us. By simply wanting change we send the message that thier way is no good. I know we don't mean that, but it comes across that way. We need to take time to build the relationships with our forerunners, just like we would with those in a community that we are trying to reach. So many of these have a treasure trove of knowledge and insight both into how to pastor and in scripture. They were also disciplined. We get accused of no discipline all the time, and you know what, from their perspective they are right. I like my Saturdays with my family. They came and painted and cleaned up on Saturday. But it was a different time then, but the dicipline they learned made their ministry strong. Guys like Ed Young play hard, but also works hard to. I don't think he ever sleeps :)
We also need to find a way to assure them that we value their continued service in the ministry even if they are not in charge. Remeber that they gave their sweat and blood to this ministry and endured persecution both from the world and from inside evangelicalism. This is their baby. All of us with daughters know the feeling of dread about having to hand our little prescious girls off to that slimey, no good, lazy boy. They feel the same way.
My dad is 76 and wants to preach every Sunday. He has no hobbies, all he knows is ministry. If I take that away from him, what does he have? And you know what is even better, he is good at preaching.
"What can the "fathers" do?
They have to understand that just like children growing up, they need to hand the reigns over for the continuance of the movement. I can't keep my daughter to myself her whole life. I have to entrust her to that "gross little kid" that is waiting for her. They will always be needed. Their continued role is essential. They also have to accept the fact that we will make decisions that are different than theirs. They are not necessarily better or worse, just different. Ministry must reach people where they are at, and yes, we know that the Holy Spirit is the one that ultimately draws them in, but we want to cast the right net to catch the right fish.
Again, don't claim to be the expert, just adding to the conversation.
Charles Crabtree a few years back in a sermon to the Seniors Camp in Northern California said it best..."you had your day now let them have theirs." Until people can understand that the issues are not about right and wrong but about different we will have a divide. As long as the message is not compromised we must remain open to new and different methods. I may not always agree wiht a younger persons way of going about presenting the gospel but I don't have to agree with it or even put my stamp of approval on it. I can appreciate the vigor and passion however with which that method is presented in order to reach a lost soul for Christ. Far be it from me to have an ego that says my way is the only way.
I too am in that "middle age bracket" at 45...
As I stated on another post, what will go a long way to destroying the divide among us is some of the younger guys and gals, need to invite some of the old ones into their churches...and vise versa...let's do more than have another luch and talk...talk is cheap on both sides if I could be so blunt!
But when we deliberately reach across the divide toward each other, God will be honored and glorified, and the fellowship among us will be strengthened!
One way a bridge is burned.......
Michael Kim Snyder you said,
"Many of the leaders of the emergent/seeker churches in the A/G have no use for, don't encourage and don't teach on the baptism of the Holy Spirit, will not allow the manifestations of the Spirit in their Sunday or other weekday services and for all practical purposes have become Evangelical but definitely NOT Pentecostal/Charismatic."
I am curious what facts do you base this comment on? Do you personally know all of the leaders of emergent A/G churches? What data is this based on? Have you had discussion and dialog with all of them to make this blanket assertion?
Forgive me for being so bold, but I would count myself among those who pastor in an emerging model and I don't believe you have represented me or my theology very well. Nor that of many in my relational circle. If I have ever had a discussion with you in some data collecting research project you have done to qualify this statment I apologize for not recalling it.
It is not my intent to be harsh. You see these kind of blanket "All old people are traditional and stuck in their ways" or "Emergent pastors don't have use for the baptism in the Holy Spirit" or "If traditionally accepted manifestations don't happen on Sunday your not pentecostal" are the problem in my estimation.
Assertions without relationship is dangerous! Knowing a few older ministers doesn't qualify you to speak on their behalf. Knowing a few emerging church pastors doesn't qualify you to throw a blanket over the whole lot.
Well said David Barnett. May every generation have a teachable spirit and seek a healthy multigenerational continuum.
Randy Freeman
www.LifeFellowship.tv
"The younger generation has no problem accepting the doctrine"
Accepting the doctrine is one thing. Preaching and teaching doctrine is another. I refer everyone to Crabtree's plea at GC.
"They struggle with the requirement of doing it (methodologically) the way it has always been done before"
How many possilbe different methods can there be? For example the only guaranteed true method to receive the baptism of the holy Spirit is to tarry for it. All the other "methods" have proven to be mere shenanigans.
Randy,
I think you miss the point. While you may be fully "full Gospel" and allow for and manifest and teach on the Holy Spirit in your services, I can attest to many seeker pastors who are being taught to do the opposite. One of our own General Presbyters, whom I shall not name unless asked to do so, had a dialogue with me in front of the entire district council where he was the guest speaker. His very words , which I shall never forget, when asked in what arena he taught on or encouraged his church members to manifest any of the gifts of the Holy Spirit, "What makes you think that there should be ANY public manifestation of the gifts of the holy Spirit? That is just your old-fashioned, pentecostal mind-set, it is not scriptural." I have heard these same things from Many sseker-driven pastors in our own movement. It is one thing to hear it from Rick Warren or Bill Hybels but when our younger pastors are being taught this by leaders and teachers withn our own movement, it seems one of us is in the wrong place. I embrace using any method that works. There are no sacred cows in methodology but there sure are sacred truths that make up our theology and I do know many and have had dialogue with many who find no place for the Spirit in the emerging culture. I believe that the culture isinterested in the real supernatural. I for one belive that a bridge across generations can be built by being open to new ideas/methods no matter our ages and by using our Penetcostal distinctive and truths to form the basis for that bridge. However, even though I have not been involved in any official "fact-gathering" projects, I have been in this movment for 21 years and been involved in leadership and pastoral ministry and dialogues with many pastors of all ages in that time. I have coached younger pastors and been around the churhc-planting movement for some time as well and I beleive my facts are sure. I want this fellowship to prosper and grow with the fullness that only God can bring. I believe God is not finished with the A/G yet. But if we do not hold fast to what got us here it won't be long before He is through with us. Blessings,
In actuality, there are three different groups worshipping in our churches (all Evangelical churches). “Traditional” evangelicals—linked to the values and methodology of Billy Graham; “Pragmatic” evangelicals—linked to the values and methodology of Bill Hybels/Rick Warren; and “Younger” evangelicals—linked to the methodology of Brian McLaren (Rob Bell, et al.). Most AG churches are still moored in the Traditional camp (both value and methodology); Some are making overtures to the “Pragmatic” camp; A smaller group—toward the “Younger” methodology. (Good discussion in Robert E. Webber, The Younger Evangelicals: Facing the Challenges of the New World, (Grand Rapids: Baker Books, 2002) 16-18)
These groups are vastly different in their everyday values and priorities. Their methodology is born out of the cultural setting of their era. Each has proven successful to reach members of their generational group.
When Zimmerman brought the AG into the Evangelical community—we ceased to be a religious “sect” (countercultural) and we joined the ranks of socially accepted religious institutions in our communities. Unfortunately, we did not adjust our theology (separatist, holiness) or our systems (church polity, voluntary cooperative fellowships) to allow us to function as a full-fledged church.
Unless each group intentionally decides they are going to work toward unity (not uniformity)—each of these groups will frustrate the others, because their values and methodology are so different.
Rick Warren stated in his first book, “It takes all kinds of churches to reach all kinds of people.” While I applaud Brian Jarret’s attempt to shed light on the problems—I believe his assessment is too simplistic.
Different educational levels between the groups, a failure of the “traditional” group to adequately plan for retirement, and modernity’s attempt to insist that all Scripture can be approached literally makes it extremely difficult for these groups to function together. It’s time for a “Vatican II” type council (or Acts 15 Jerusalem Council)to be convened to discuss the issues.
Steve Smallwood
What interesting comments already. I just want to add my own heartfelt "thank you" to the blog's creators.
I'm overwhelmed with many thoughts about both "sides" and what we need to do.
Honestly, is the divide that bad? That deep? That wide? It seems so. I was deeply saddened and somewhat surprised by seeing this at GC. That is because, as I've mentioned in previous comments, I am a 57 y.o. woman pastor, and I simply do not get it. To me it seems painfully obvious that ther is no right way and wrong way to "do" ministry. I'm not saying the divide doesn't exist, but I don't know how we got so far down this road. I prefer Dave Crowder Band to the Couriers (not saying the Couriers should not have been featured). I pastor a church of people who are mostly much younger than my prison chaplain husband and I. There is one couple in the church in their sixties. Other than that, everyone except kids and teens are in 20s, 30s, or 40s. Our worship leader is 34, our youth leaders are aged 24 and 34 and the board members are all younger than I. No one seems to think that their pastor is out of touch. I love them and respect them, and they give love and respect back.
We have some traditional elements, but we are moving quickly towards a more emergent model (whatever that is--LOL) even though we are a small church in a small rural town. I love to talk to the younger people in the congregation. What is my point? I'm trying to consider if we are all that unique, and if so, why?
I don't care HOW you young guys get the message across. Not one bit. I've used Legos, and liturgy and candles and toothpaste and dramatic monologues and a blog--whatever. Do other middle aged to older ministers really care? I am not sure. I AM concerned with the fact, as Rachael brought up, that many seem to be drifting far from our reason to be. If we don't want spiritual gifts in church (what about outside our walls?), and we are not sure about tongues, we can all go be Christian and Missionary Alliance--since we began together and later went our seperate ways over "initial evidence." Their ecclesiastical structure is identical to ours, they have a srong missions emphasis--and until lately the AG half of the old split grew many times more quickly than they did. Why? I see only one reason. The emphasis on the baptism of the Holy Spirit.
Let's stop pigeonholing each other. Young ministers sometimes are humble and articulate and gifted preacher. And sometimes I see pride and an entitlement mentality and sloppy theology. We middle aged and older ones can be rigid, judgemental, and mistrustful--OR we can be thrilled by what we see in the younger generation--creativity, passion, courage. I promise not to say, "You better EARN your stripes, sonny boy." And I promise not to stereotype. You younger ministers, please do not assume that my silver hair means I'm out of touch, don't know how to use a computer or need to sit back while the younger people get the job done. I don't intend to retire and play golf or knit when I'm 65. I hope the young people of the church love me, and that we still laugh together and cry together too. It seems I'm talking relationships. It becomes more difficult to pigeonhole one another if we really get acquainted. SO the question becomes, perhaps, how do we foster genuine relationships? Genuine respect and honor? I did not realize the extent to which we, apparently anyway, do not have these things. How can we better listen to each other?
Okay, I need to stop typing. :-)
I'm asking more questions and not providing much in the way of answers.
Rachael, if I'm anywhere in the vicinity, I'll come to your church when I finally do decide to retire. You are awesome!
We are talking about being pentecostal as if we agreed on the definition. We do not. It seems to me that pentecostal would be defined as, " Of, relating to or being any of various Christian religious congregations who's members seek to be filled with the Holy Spirit in emulation of the Apostles on the day of Pentecost."
If we can agree on the meaning of the word then we can discuss the different methods used to reach the same goal. But most of our interaction is around methodology presented as theology. Can pentecostals be true to the theology using different methods? Of course.
The founders of the AG did just that. And now 100 years later some of us want to turn early twentieth century methods into a litmus test.
We don't meet in brush harbors any longer. Very few of us still hold tent revivals. It is the exception when a meeting last for weeks at a time. All of these methods were popular for a season and they worked. But our movement has accepted these changes for the most part. It's common for our churches to offer multiple services, use modern technology and send out direct mail pieces. But these are still methods. Methods change.
Maybe the breakdown in communication has happened because the progressive churches are altering where people recieve the Baptism in the Holy Spirit. Is it only a legitimate pentecostal experience if it happens on Sunday morning after a 2 hour sermon? That seems like a method to me.
Can you be a real pentecostal without screaming the sermon? I think you can.
I'm 44 years old. I got saved in a tent revival in 1978. I went to JSBC in the early 1980's. I was born between eras. But I am fiercely local to this Fellowship.
Today I pastor a church that we planted in 1996 that is designed to reach unchurched people in a secular society. I'm also committed to the pentecostal message. Though I seldom use the word pentecostal in my messages. Many people in our community associate 'pentecostal' with the strict dress codes in others movements. Then I must spend valuble time explaining what we are not. So we don't use the word very often.
The AG is big enough for both camps . Or is it three camps? I've lost count. Maybe the litmus test should be the Statement of Fundamental Truths. We don't have a statement of fundamental methods. That is a good thing.
Personally I think that alot of the concerns about younger generations not wanting to be "people of the spirit" and anecdotal evidence proving that to be the case is not about the Gen X/PoMo/Emergents, but rather about the seeker sensitive movement (a la Hybels, Warren, et. al.) These are not the under 40 crowd but the Boomer generation (around 42-65 now).
I think the traditionalists need to see that the younger generation, moreso than the tweeners, resonante with the desire for authentic spiritual experience, they don't want to take it off display like perhaps some of the boomers (the pragmatics in the above post) did.
So if you're one of those traditionaloists don't make the mistake of painting the youngest generation with the brush of the seeker sensitives (the GP mentioned above I can almost guarantee is a boomer and not a Gen Xer).
In fact in terms of Ethos the youngest Pentecostals probably far more resemble the earliest AG forlks than the generations in between. As do, in fact that target group in the Gen X generation outside the church.
I'm 40 and I've got at least two stories of Gen Xers coming to Christ not in spite of but because of Tongues and interpretation in a public worship service.
P.S. I love the dialogue here, but the format is getting tiring. We need a real forum with closer to real time interaction.
Can we do that? With Dr. Wood's openness to dialogue I'd even be game for something on ag.org limited to ministers.
I've had some really good experiences with the older generation and maybe thats why I'm so disappointed with the majority since then. Maybe my expectations are to big. But to answer the questions.
The root of the problem is a lack of relationship. We don't trust the older generations and don't vote for them because we don't know them. The older generations don't trust us with the "baton" and don't move over and let us in because they don't know us.
No matter the age or generation, the best thing we can do is to stop being offended so easily and be intentional in building relationships with those that aren't normally seen riding in the same golf cart with us.
This may sound crazy but this last spring the Gaithers did some shows in our state. How far would it go to spend a few dollars and one evening to treat an older pastor to a night with the Gaithers? Its not my kind of music but so what? How far do you think it would go if a pastor from an older generation would invite one of us to play 18 holes with him and his buddies some saturday?
This kind of idea doesn't have to be limited to just those in different generations. A few weeks ago, we took a group of students (we're Chi Alpha) to a church in a neighboring community for a work weekend. We built a stage in the youth room, textured walls, painted and did a number of other things that the building was needing.
Why are people blogging here instead of going to sectional meetings and district councils?
It is meeting a need. It is a place to be heard, to ask questions, to look for answers, to gain understanding of issues and get a feel for what is being said and felt at a critical point in our movement. Here, there is time and space for open discussion.
Building relationships will do a lot to tear down generational barriers. Meetings don’t build relationships. Relationship is intentional. Being together in community provides opportunity for those relationships to begin to develop. Can you imagine having an open forum in a physical meeting, like the one we’re having here?
Thinking about the forums that have been held for our AG leadership to hear and see the heart of young pastors, I wondered why not invite older pastors into these meetings, instead of just leadership. There could be a mutual seeing, hearing, and sharing of hearts. Then I realized that there is already a structure in place, in the form of sectional meetings and district councils.
The interchange of dialogue on this blog in just a few weeks has been amazing. Yeah, it looks messy at times and may feel unsettling, uneasy, and uncomfortable. But we have to get all the pieces and parts out there to begin to experience each other, develop understanding and to build something that looks like who we are and want to be.
Trust is an outgrowth of security and safety. Security and safety in relationship is formed through openness, honesty, acceptance, and unconditional love. This happens through time spent together and communication. It is built on a mutual respect for the other. Coming together for short business meetings with agendas to finish, votes to take, banquets to attend and information to absorb really can’t do it.
Could the structures that exist be reworked with a different format and focus? This idea doesn’t seem new and may have already been tried. But, given the desire of people to want to reach across generational, gender, and cultural divides and the sense of urgency to stop the bleeding out and to make the AG more relevant, I’m just trying to think of practical steps that we can take.
And, thinking about what Steve Smallwood said about having a “Vatican II” type council to discuss issues, we started having the prayer summits and the women in ministry meetings yearly to address needs. Next year is an off year for council, what about some kind of global meeting? There would be time for districts to make place in their schedules for discussion leading up to it.
I guess this could just sound like another meeting that would waste money and time. And maybe I’m overreacting. Maybe discussing things in this type of forum would work as well, if not better. More people could be involved and there would be no expense. So, I’ll probably self delete this comment…unless the electric goes off or I get lost in my coffee…
--just some thoughts from another one of the tweener generation. Geez, this feels so familiar…the middle generation worrying about the kids and the parents…
"Can pentecostals be true to the theology using different methods? Of course. The founders of the AG did just that."
What are the different methods for receiving the baptism of the Holy Spirit? I also keep hearing about the founders experimenting with different methods. What were they? My great grandparents in law were founders of the A/G, the stories I hear don't emphasize that. The early churches they formed were holiness Pentecostal churches.
Wes you use a key word in your first paragraph..."expectations". What are peoples expectations of Springfield? Does anyone really expect what happens in Springfield to impact your daily ministry and effectiveness in your community? Does what the GP, EP or GS decides change the way you approach reaching the lost and hurting? I operate under the belief to expect nothing from Springfield or my district and then I'm never disapointed and therefore I'm not. As one pastor said to Evrett Stenhouse years ago "If the earth opened up and swalled Springfield whole it would not change what happens in my church one bit."
I am feeling so tired with this continued argument. I am feeling so tired defending my "pentecostalism". I can't believe that more than a century later we are still debating pentecost...meanwhile we are losing not just a generation, but a nation. Just for the record, I'm 31 and am "Lead Pastoring" my first church.
Charles Crabtree also talked about our absolute ineptness at discipling...the difference between our reported conversions and our reported weekend attendance is staggering. He also talked about "the club" for tongue talkers, but we as leaders are not teaching what to do with it...having power to be a witness which I believe points back to the Great Commission-disciple making.
We are not modeling Christ as leaders, so why do we think our culture, cities and nation will? We have two primary chapters discussing the Spiritual/Supernatural gifts...I doubt any one of us needs reminded of what is stuck right in the middle..."And yet I will show you THE MOST EXCELLENT WAY...but the greatest of these is love." Have we forgotten that we are supposed to be serving one another in love? Have we forgotten that the only thing that matters is faith expressing itself through love? Have we forgotten the fruits of the spirit are love...against such things there is no law?
If I am serving the grandfathers generation in love then I am going to respect them, their sacrifice, their message...everything they've done to get us here. If the grandfathers generation is serving me in love then they will respect me, my sacrifice, my message and methods.
I hope one day we can move past defending pentecostalism to putting the same passion and intense energy into making a difference in our cities...I said on an earlier post, we have had 100 + years of pentecostal influence in America and we are now the third largest unchurched nation in the world. I want to get past the rhetoric and join arms with other brothers AND sisters in leadership and make a difference.
I too was very disappointed with our fellowship voting down Res. 4. I've been asked what am I going to do now? The only thing I can do...go back to my local church and give my life to making a difference in people's lives. Maybe I can find out the resolution process for my district and start presenting resolution upon resolution hoping some will pass...perhaps we can start making change on a grass roots level. But I will dare to say, a resolution has never saved a soul. We must be in people's lives like Christ, we must meet their physical needs like Christ did which awakens them to their deeper spiritual need, we must serve one another in love like Christ.
Ryan
ALERT!
George Wood has already briged the generation gap!
On ag.org they have posted George Woods' picture on the website...it was on my MAC and one of the kids in our church thought that it was the evil emperor from Star Wars, wanted me to click on it so he could watch the movie...generation gap with 5 year olds bridged!
It is a good picture, but...just a lot of light...and at that angle I've got to say...
Anyway...back to serious discussion.
I also share the desire to be a bridge-builder in our fellowship. As a 47 year old A/G Pastor who has been pastoring for 25 years, I have watched, spoke out, cried out and wept over "us" not coming together and talking about the real issues. My grandparents were here in the beginning of our fellowship, my parents have been here seince the 50's and I was raised here - like many of you I really wonder what direction we are heading in at times. Is there room for our emerging leaders?
One thing I am confiden of: this change can only comes from within. (our own leaders and ministers must work at bringing about the necessary changes in our fellowship. I do not know if we will accept the words from others outside.)
I'm here for the long-haul. Let's keep working to bring us back to 1st Century Church! Thanks for the people who put this together. You are a breath of fresh air to our fellowship.
anonymous,
I'm really not that worried about Springfield, to tell you the truth. They do a good job of keeping my paycheck coming (what little I've raised) and our Chi Alpha office does a great job of putting together things like the World Missions Summit. The rest, I just don't think about most of the time.
I've been in my district for two years now and have noticed what I consider a disturbing trend. Its the complete and total lack of fellowship. I've been itinerating this whole time so I've had the opportunity to meet a lot of pastors and there really are some great guys and a couple of girls out there, but they don't even know the other guys in their section beyond their name and face! Now I know I haven't been in this that long compared to most on here but I know I can't do it alone. I honestly don't think that any of us can. We desperately need things like this blog and time spent with our sections outside of business meetings but it simply isn't happening. And it is way to easy to think badly of someone we don't know. In most cases, the fears about someone's methodology goes away when you see their heart and intent behind it. The vast majority of ministers that I've met who are credentialed with the Assemblies are in complete accordance with the 16 fundamentals and unashamedly teach them. So, in my experience, our fears about doctrine within our credentialed ministers are unfounded. But, we fear and don't trust those we don't know.
All that to say, its not up to Springfield to deal with the root of the problem. Its up to us.
Anonymous-
I find it interesting that Crabtree said at the seniors camp..."you had your day now let them have theirs."... When he let his name stand for the GS spot.
What would have happened if the top EP spots filled by people over 65 would have pulled there names out. What would have happened if the top Executive leadership team would have pulled there name out if they were over 60? I think that would have sent ripples through the room and spoke a word of confidence into the younger leaders ears.
Tory, I'm right there with you re: the incumbent EPs leaving their names in, and I think I mentioned it on another thread. But to have real effect they would have to announce their intent to withdraw specifically for the purpose of allowing younger/female leadership.
The more I reflect the less I'm convinced the top job is the place for that to happen now (though Zimmerman is a good counter-example, hard as it is to believe he was young when first elected). But what a statement it would have made if the EPs would have done it. Far, Far more than their resolutions to ADD room for the young/women, had they MADE room for them, wow, what that would've said to young and old alike.
Tory, I agree with you. It would have sent major ripples, and I bet those spots would be filled with 59 1/2 year olds. The problem is not with the EP and GP exclusively. It is with our body. People are skeptical of larger churches and younger pastors.
Here is the one question I do not think anyone answered:
Why did the under 40 GP vote miss from passing by only 100 some odd votes, and then when Randy Valimont moved for the reconsideration of the vote, did it lose by over 50%? Did people lose their nerve? Did we not understand the vote?
Finally, Tory, I think it would be interesting to have see who out of this group attended GC. Simple question for the poll: Did you (the reader, not Tory because I saw you there) attend GC this year?
We have no voice when we do not show up. I am encouraging all of our staff to get licensed if they are not...I encourage everyone to do the same.
The Sections and Districts need to invite the younger leaders to their meetings and the younger leaders need to GO and make it "cool" to go! (bring along a younger pastor friend or associate-this includes youth pastors too!)
Several years ago, the district I was formerly involved in...asked me to be part of something new...start a Women's Ministries group for the younger generation in my section. I felt honored to be asked and more honored they would trust me with such a task...I heard everything from "WMs is not a real ministry" to "you can't possibly know what you are doing at your age" etc. However, when you have the call of God on your life...you must go!!!! So I went and started and for the most part it was successful...we had 300 women at our first event and even more were turned away due to unforeseen circumstances (it's a long story of craziness and the enemy's attack!)
Districts and Sections: All that to say...ask us to come, let us be part, don't look at us as if our ideas are crazy...AND YOUNGER Peeps: GO and make it cool to go...meet at Starbucks, (or MC Ds)...it will take a bit of work (a few phone calls, energy for making new friends, networking, etc), but it's worth it in the end to know that you have friends in your section and district!!!!
Maybe Headquarters could ask for pictures of groups meeting around the globe and post them on the web or newsletter or whatever they could do to spice it up a bit...
(Dr. Wood: Are you listening?!)
NOW, I'm working on my license and I'll be meeting with you soon ;)
Tory:
I'm not sure that EPs over 65 resigning would have the desired effect. Some of the older guys are pretty progressive, and some of the younger guys who would be candidates for those jobs are not.
George
It is obvious there is much animosity between generations in the AG. But that could be the case in other groups as well. I agree with others compromise is needed in terms of methodology from both sides though not with the Theology or in particular - the issue of Spirit Baptism.
As to intergenerational ministry I like the idea of mentoring - more older ministers need to read Earl Creps' chapter on reverse mentoring in his latest book Off Road Disciplines (Josey-Bass). At the same time younger ministers need to be open to mentoring from the older folk as well.
The problem is, as I understand it is "what is mentoring?" and what does it look like? I am not convinced that too many people know what mentoring is and how it works. I think if this issue is handled rightly and promoted well - it could be one part of the solution to bridging the gap in inter generational ministry?
What say you?
Brian Fulthorp
Glendale, AZ
I would have to say that the "older generation" is not "freaked out" by mixing discussions of methodology with theology - what concerns them (and many in the younger gen. as well) is there has been cavalier questioning from some of foundational core doctrines of Christianity, i.e.the Virgin Birth, the existence of Hell, the Substitutionary Atonement, etc., ...embracing Pentecost doesn't mean much if these doctrines are being doubted.
You can untuck your shirt, dim the lights, crank up the i-beams all you want - that's great - the message is what's in question.
I agree with George P - why would it be right or fair to essentially force out those who are 65 and above? Why must we pigeon hole everyone who has white hair into the camp that they are "non-progressive"?
That is simply untrue and unfair.
My comments on Pentecostal.
If the pastor stands sunday after sunday and each week ends the service and there are no
2 Cor 12:12 Truly the signs of an apostle were wrought among you in all patience, in signs, and wonders, and mighty deeds.
Then I call it controvasal.
You could also add Mark 16:17
I seriously think there are a lot of controvasal pastors out there. Including me.
I am doing everything possible to change that with me.
fredore 60+
love this site. Glory!
Pastor E,
You begin with "the older generation is not freaked out by mixing discussions of methodology with theology" in reference to my comment and then you go on to make the exact point I was making.
I simply did not sight the doctrines of Virgin Birth, Substatutionary Atonement, etc...because I have never heard them questioned in my circles. I have heard the A/G distinctive doctrine on the Holy Spirit questioned, which is why I used that example.
You say, "You can untuck your shirt, dim the lights, crank up the i-beams all you want - that's great - the message is what's in question."
That is exactly my point. For bridge building purposes, discussion about Methodology and Theology need to be seperated...because the mix obviously freaks you out as well as many others (myself included :).
LOL
Tony...I have to disagree with the thought that those over 65 should have pulled their names out. I am 29-and in the younger generation...but I don't think dismissing the older generation would have been the answer.
I am excited about the leadership of George Wood-I think he is a progressive thinker, is highly educated, and has years of experience and wisdom to back him up. I think he was probably the most qualified of the nominees at General Council.
I want to be clear. I am hopefully for our next generation of leaders. But I am concerned as the age of our ministers increases if we will have healthy generational mantle passing. Or will the next in line take the position because of the dream they have had of holding on to that place.
I don't know that all of our elders resigning would have been the best. But I don't know that it would have been the worst either. At what age do we want leaders to step down?
70? 80? 90? 100+
Talk to Len Sweet and you will hear him say that our ages are growing and that we will have people live well into the 100's. With there no expiration on voting limits will our age get the best of us?
Just posing some questions. I know when I am 70 Ill be grasping for security and significance as well. But my experience has proved that that 65-75 age is a nice age to transition to coach instead of leader.
Post a Comment