Tag: the church

Starting conversations with young people; 100,000 moments to build community

On By JamesIn Detached youthwork, Mission, Youthwork, Youthwork MethodsLeave a comment

I can think of a few reasons for this; but starting with some of the evidence in local regions. If you were to look at the following websites : Nomis Age structure Data or ONS you will be relatively easily be able to find out how many young people there are in specific areas of the country. Ive just used the drop down area selection on the Nomis page to discover the quantity of people in age bands for the local authority area of Hartlepool. Its possible to locate LA and regional figures.

Every Anglican Diocese has about 300 parish churches, and most areas will have at least 2/3 again non Anglican churches.

Depending on how generous we’re feeling, let say that whether there are paid/voluntary/professional/ecumenical youthworkers in post in some of the churches/towns, that each church maybe works on average with 10 young people.

So if there are 500 churches in a diocese area, 10 children and young people per church – thats about 5,000 young people. How many young people are in your county or region or area again?

How many service for adults, families and the older people occur in churches?

How much money is being spent on and directed towards theological training to maintain these services? – compared to the money invested in thinking, researching and growing ‘working with young people in appropriate contextual ways’?

So what are the reasons for this?

  1. Churches have believed the lie that to work well with young people that you have to be young, aware of ‘you tube’ and be personally relevant to their culture.
  2. Churches have believed the lie that young people are scary, hard work, difficult and challenging. I think if the mirror was held up at PCC meetings….
  3. Churches have believed since 1960’s that evangelism is the key driver for working with young people, and thus relevance (point 1), and fun/relevence to a gospel message,  and church growth as a definable outcome contribute to often poor and unrealistically evaluated approaches being used
  4. If point 2 is to be believed, then the only way young people can be worked with is by an expert. And if there isnt the resource in the church to fund an expert then there might be a reluctance to start.
  5. Maybe that young people all leave town to go to Uni at 18 – so whats the point?  or is it that they are economically not viable in the short term? (ie they dont give money to the church now)

Maybe one of the main reasons churches arent prioritising working with young people, is the thought that they already are, through establishments, like church schools, ceremonies like baptisms, or the groups that do exist in the church cultures such as BB, Guides or the YF. – but how many young people from the local area of the church are these groups actually affecting? what of the young people who dont/arent able to attend these things?

The National church of England has a responsibility to the spiritual life and well being of people in the parishes across the country, and that includes people who are not yet considered adults (but are considered people).

Maybe working with young people isnt a priority because it doesnt know where to start? Or maybe because it knows what the outcome is (ie young people coming to church) and doesnt know how to make this happen? Maybe the more churches be deliberate in achieving the outcome the less likely young people might be to respond anyway.

Here’s an thought. What if by 2020, there have been 100,000 positive informal conversations between young people and adults in the county, that aren’t currently happening now? and that a large % of these might be about faith, about life about young people and their reflections on faith/life and future. Is that not a positive thing enough?  And yes who knows where that might lead, but at least there’s a possibility based on actual knowledge and relationships being created…

What if adults and young people started to have conversations that actively broke down misconceptions about all of 1-5 above… what might that do for society, for faith and for the churches, what if every parish, every town had a team of detached youthworkers, ready to meet young people on the streets, listen, and grow the church from scratch all over again…

the thing about detached is that young people dont care about you (ie how trendy you’re trying to be) they care about how honest, respectful and trustworthy you are to them. They are to be found interesting, not you. It shifts the balance.

No im not saying that detached youthwork is going to solve all of it, but the days of posters, events and invites has so long gone, it went when the steam engines did. Cultures have shifted and the work of the church with young people in local communities has got to start with them, listening to them and in a place where they are more comfortable that we are.

It needs 3 people. 3 people who can walk. 3 people who want to listen to young people.  The street pastors have gathered armies of volunteers to be out at 3am, surely in churches and parishes across the land we can begin to develop moments of conversations on the streets, in public places such as parks, shops and skateparks, moments of sharing life and being with young people and discover a new world of already spiritual young people, of God already at work in the life of communities and opportunities to explore, learn and grow together.

Also, with not much training, its bloody cheap, it builds community and says something about the vulnerability and discipleship to which is professed.

If you’re interested in starting this let me, or FYT/Streetspace know- we would love to help you start this journey…

Why does Youth Ministry play the generationalism game?

On By JamesIn Mission, Youth ministry, Youthwork, Youthwork Methods2 Comments

“Libeau and Chisholm (1993) suggested that “European Youth” (in the same way American, British or Asian) do not exist. Their point being that nationally framed cultures and economies follow their own courses, young people in the different countries and regions that make up Europe negotiate very different circumstances to one another. They are shaped by the material ‘objective’ aspects of the cultures and societies and by the ways in which they interpret these circumstances. ”  Wyn and White (1997)

From this short extract in the opening chapters of ‘Rethinking Youth’ it would and could be inferred that there is something to be said about the uniqueness of every young person, that a generalisation of stating that ‘European Youth’ does not exist, in that same way that ‘British Youth’ or American Youth might not for the same reasons. It would be difficult to suggest that a young person growing up in Peterlee was the same as a young person growing up in Hartlepool, let alone Barnard Castle. Their experiences, their economies, their cultures and the way they interpret them are all vastly different. So it would unfair to try and say that a ‘British young person is like X or Y or even Z’

So why do we do it? or more particularly why does youth ministry in particular make generalisations about young people, and why does it seem that the church is a key adopter of these generalisations?

When I was doing my gap year in Hartlepool with Oasis Trust, one of the sociological constructs that we as a team in the training began to explore was the sociological generalisations broadly married to birth dates such as Baby Boomer and Generation X, it shows how long ago it was because there was only two to talk about, and most of us at that time, fresh faced 18 year olds in 1996 were said to be in the tail-end of Generation X. Along with this there were aspects of identity that would show how we fitted into that ‘generation’ as well as the typical TV programmes that were gen-X – such as ‘Shooting stars’ or ‘The Simpson’s.  Image result for generation x After Generation X (which we were the emerging leaders) there would be Generation Y who would be the young people who we would be youth minister to, and so it would be really insightful sociologically to understand their nature, from these generalisations so we could act in an appropriate way. To our credit we tried to, and even excusing their behaviour at times because they were only acting in accordance subconsciously with the sociological construct with which their age would determine – ie its ok they’re just being gen-Y…

So, back in the early days of academically thought work with young people, these Sociological generational generalisations were coming to be prominent. In 1997 Rick Bartlett wrote a paper for YFC in which he described how the future trends of youth ministry would need to adapt to the changes in young people due to their next generational traits, and how ministries and resources should adopt likewise.

The question is; why has the world of Christian youth ministry/ Christian youth work adopted quite as readily what are essentially sociological generational generalisations?

I have a few thoughts; firstly they give the capacity for large national organisations to plan into what might be predicted on a national scale what might work ie for resourcing or selling ministries

Firstly they give the capacity for large national organisations to plan into what might be predicted on a national scale what might work ie for resourcing or selling ministries

Secondly by wrapping up resources in the traits as described in the sociological construct it gives a perceived validity/strength of the resource

Thirdly, its far easier to provide as resource on a national scale and hope it works for some young people, and sometimes go as far as to suggest that its the young persons fault if they cant comply/participate, than provide the tools to equip contextual work in the regions.

Fourthly – does it appeal to a broader suggestion that its far easier to make judgements of a generalisation of people outside the church – ie common to the pulpit notions of ‘the world’, and so instead of interacting with the world and understandings its reality, far easier to buy into generalised often judgemental notions.

How helpful, or useful, or needed are these generational generalisations?

In reality any youthworker is only going to work with groups of young people in their specific context. Their context, their church, their school, their community. Yet these generational generalisations could do more harm than good if it they stop good working youth work practice, or stop adults from interacting in the reality of young peoples lives, or for seeing young people as unique – something we should be theologically doing anyway. Uniqueness should be something we should focus on, not universalisms and generalisations. Unique needs and gifts, specific adaptions to situation, understanding of identity. But all of this requires effort, specific of approach and time. What significance might the year of someones birth to be in one age category, have more influence over the school they go to , town they live in, family situation and technology.

After all it would be difficult to find a young person who is fully the typical Generation X, or Y, or whatever the latest one is. As a result there will only ever be parts of a whole, no one person is going to be the ideal type. Image result for generation z

These things may be useful sociologically, they might be useful for the consumer, food or entertainment industries in their market research, or predicting trends in habits and behaviours – but are they needed to be adopted in the church? in youth ministry & youthwork? and if not how easy might it be to say so…?

If a young person in any generation requires something different that adults who are genuine, authentic and provide long term support. Im sure thats what Rick Bartlett said in 1997. And has been the kind of thing people have needed since the dawn of time. No amount of sociological research will prove otherwise.

Maybe youth ministry plays the generationalism game because then its easy just to put items on the conveyor belt of practice. Maybe it should be playing the ‘intergeneration/family game instead’.

Subsequent to this post. Generation Z is the thing. A post on that latest research and youth work is here . It does feel like people are labelled in generations before we’ve even tried actually talking to them and building faith communities with them, instead of just trying to analyse the world from a distance.

 

Detached Youthwork – The Elisha way

On By JamesIn Detached youthwork1 Comment

Something this week made me smile, but then gave me reason to think a little sadly about the following passage relating to the Old Testament Prophet Elisha: (taken from 2 Kings 2:23-24)

 23Elisha left Jericho and went up to Bethel. As he was walking along the road, a group of boys from the town began mocking and making fun of him. “Go away, baldy!” they chanted. “Go away, baldy!”24 Elisha turned around and looked at them, and he cursed them in the name of the Lord. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of them.

Whats slightly disturbing about this also is that the Modern day writers of the Bible, put this story under the heading of “Elisha’s First Miracles” .

So Elisha, when walking along the road is confronted by a large group of boys – at least forty two- who start being offensive about Elisha follicle deficiencies, and because Elisha is impinging on the territory of the boys they tell him to go away. If we think honestly, without a suitable law and enforcement agency, CCTV, street lighting, and a very remote desert road, then Elisha might well have been very scared. Did the boys prevent Elisha heading to Bethel? Yet he was able to call on God to remove the offensive obstacle of these boys.

Nevertheless these are side points to the more disturbing reality that at the call of God, bears emerge from the wilderness to devour forty two of the boys. Given the level of panic that one bear may have caused ( ie the boys would have fled) you’d think that this means that at least 42 bears emerged, and were hungry ( or protective over territory). So God is happy to take responsibility for the death of 42 boys? or should i say, the Jewish/Christian tradition is happy to include this narrative in its sacred text, and attribute God to this kind of action in the grand narrative of the Miracles and Story of Elisha?  What does this say about God i wonder? or Elisha?  and why didnt the Bears attack Elisha too ( maybe that was the miracle) .

Maybe i read too much into this, but clearly there are links between this story and the relatively recent (1870’s +) practice of detached youthwork, by churches and state youth services. Worryingly the essence of Elisha’s attitude to the boys, is one replicated the nation over.

I remember growing up in a leafy part of Leicestershire  going along to an ‘open’ youth night held in a church, this attracted up to 30-40 young people from the local estate, but as soon as the difficulties, such as broken windows, smoking etc became regular, the youth club closed, or at least, changed – to work with the ‘Christian’ young people – which i was one.  Some years later i asked one of the leaders why they left at that point, it was said at the time that “there’s no point working with those kids, you get nothing for alot of hard work” and so maybe at that point when the youth club changed ,  bears came out of the wilderness and devoured the young people, and the church thought nothing of them.

However, the Elisha story referred me to some recent examples, that are hopeful, a represent a change in attitude of churches toward the ‘wilderness boys’ in our communities.

On an early occasion in a Perth Community, i was doing detached youthwork with a volunteer (who had a role in the church), it was probably one of his first evenings out, and i hadn’t much experience of detached work in this particular community. From what i remember it was getting dark, probably about 9.30pm and was a warm early autumn evening. We were walking behind a block of shops near to an open space and a bus stop, where there was a group of 3-4 young people, at least 2 boys. We didn’t intend to walk towards them, just through the space and onwards, however, one of them shouted a couple of offensive insults towards us (i remember not what what exactly said).  Safe to say we didn’t react like Elisha, and used their offensive insult as a signal that they wanted us to come over and chat. Which we did. Maybe out of stupidity, or bravado, or as someone said to me recently, “sometimes you just need to discern between what is offensive and what is aggressive” – on those few occasions when offence is provoked by the presence of adults in the territory of young adults. So we walked to this group in the bus stop, explained who we were, and enjoyed a 20-30 minute conversation with them, in which meaningful issues were explored regarding their family backgrounds and future ambition. I think they even apologised for being rude, halfway through the conversation.

Could we have ignored this group? if we did, why would the church position itself to be ‘in the community’ if it did?  For some churches its just not possible to be out in the community in this way, for others it would be too much of a challenge, for others, it’ll be too hard work.

Do i know what has happened to the young people i met when i started out doing youth and community work in Hartlepool in 1996? or all the groups in Perth between 2004-2012? Does that matter? is it not just important to be with them in that opportunity, rather than not with them at all. Of course i would wish that opportunities in youth work would allow the longevity of support with so called ‘wilderness boys’, but thats not always possible.

I was reminded that one of the boys that Bob Holman encountered in his work in Southdown (1976-86) was a young Dave Wiles. He was one of three people who kept in touch with Bob subsequently, but at the time he was described as “a former delinquent, who experienced a Christian conversion” (Holman B, 2000).  Dave recently left his role as Chief Exec of FYT, but is well thought and known for his work in Christian youthwork.  What would have happened to him, if the church in Southdown had left him to the bears?  There’s no doubt he benefitted from having Bob Holman present in his life and community for 10 years.

Churches could take the Elisha route, be scared of the young people, or see them providing a roadblock to the churches perceived plans, and wish that the bears would remove them. Alternatively churches could be amongst the young people, and prevent the bears from attacking, protect the young people from the dangers they themselves face, rather than the dangers they perceive the young people to be. They will be gifting, vision and leaders in our communities, but without being there, we will never know.