Color Your World with NCD

Klemens

You said "I have found that especially younger people (i.e. younger than 50) may tend to be more eclectic and less small-minded, and that some of them do not at all like to be "coined" into any of all those colors." And... "As for me and my generation, "belonging" was a big thing. I do think that the need to belong somewhere is part of the cause for this colour approach we are discussing, and maybe your suspicion is right and reveals that maybe in the "Generation X" or for younger Christians, this is a minor priority as they find their community not via institutions and rules and traditions but over the very core of things."

My husband is reading the book "Generations" by Strauss and Howe. I read it five to ten years ago. We are discussing it as he reads through it. This book goes beyond the concept that there is a Baby Boomer generation and extends it to a cycle of four generational archtypes. Each of these archtypes tends to occur within a backdrop of either a secular crisis or spiritual awakening which defines the characteristics of that generation according to the book . Since there is a progression of four archtypes through the canvas of big events or turning points, history tends to rhyme (as Mark Twain actually stated it). The book does go all the way back to the Reformation in profiling the generations, so it does cover a good number of major and minor spiritual crisis cycles.

The older generations (Civic and Adaptive are the re-occuring archetype names) did focus on "belonging". They focused on creating many of the structures that we today know as "church" including the heavy emphasis on denominations and the committee style governance of churches. The Baby Boomers were the Idealistic generation archetype according to the authors. In social terms we have often referred to them as the "Me" generation. There was a sense of belonging but it was more of a sense of how things belonged to "me" or around my view of things. That has led to significant church shopping. The Boomer churches (ie churches founded and led by Boomers and following Boomer characteristics) tend to be "non-denominational" or on the edge of denominational and often fall into the mega church realm. These people led worship towards "contemporary" with praise bands and the like.

There are two even younger generations. They do start below 50 (actually below about 49 by the official metrics in the Generations book). The older of the two generations have the archetype label "Reactives". This generation is actually largely absent from churches in the pews but more so in the leadership. This is an important point because the younger of these two generations cycles back around to be the next Civic generation in line. However, the Civic generations tend to build church structures based upon the experimentation and the discovery of "what works" from their Reactive elders. If the Reactives are largely absent from churches, we risk not having a foundation for our next Civic generation to build upon.

The sad part about this is that when you look at the previous generational cycles, the Idealists (what we call Boomers) shook up the mindset of what was church and for many years of their peak generational years they were considered to be pushing the envelope. And yet when the next Reactive generation did come to later adult years (30-60's) the previous Reactive generations tended to change things far beyond even the imaginings of the Idealists. So if today we dare to call the first of the changing generations "eclectic", I have to ask what we might call the rise of the next generation of Reactives.

Imagine a church where your pastor is in another city and the sermon is "broadcast" to the various campuses. Imagine a church where the garage band (not the "modern" but still melodious music that you may hear on K-Love today) is the worship music. Imagine a church where the Bible is on everyone's iPhone and everyone can annotate and comment on both the pastor's interpretation and each other's comments, much like a Wiki. Imagine a church where the call to get real, go deep, and re-write communion, the Body and community as an scuba dive immersion into the psyche where AA resembles this next generation as much as the Mustang convertible resembles the Conestoga covered wagon... Now imagine that this is only scratching the surface of what church is evolving into.... What will be eclectic?

What do you think?

Mary

Klemens

I had heard that butter over too much bread comment with Bilbo Baggins (Lord of the Rings). Interesting how the world goes around. However, I'm quite likely to spread that butter even farther... If you need smaller bites, please say so.

First, I'm not going to fit easily in the conventional categories. I am on the cusp between a Baby Boomer and the next younger generation. However, my parents grew up during the Great Depression. My mother did fit the Builder stereotype, but my father actually could have been a "Lost Generation" person. If you aren't familiar with the "Generations" stuff, I can give some more background. In summary, there are some who say that the characteristics of a generation are repeated every 4th generation. So we have the "Lost" generation in the 19-teens-20's, the "Builders" were Depression era. The Boomers were post-WWII to the early-mid 60's. Gen X came next and Gen Y after that. So Lost would be similar to Gen Y. I relate fairly well to both the Gen X and Gen Y folks despite the fact that the big 50 is peaking over the horizon for me.

As for the colors stuff, let me see if I can articulate the Ascetic/Sensory thing split here. When I was young, my parents fought quite a bit. I would go outside and climb a tree. The tree did support me but it was very supple, not aged and firm. There were times when the wind would come up strong - especially in the evenings in the summer. To me, God met me there and rocked me in that tree when I was distraught about my parents. My prayers at that time were much like the groanings of the Holy Spirit than just words. The wind would moan low and mornfully. I felt that God was being with me in my pain, both in the sound and feel. There are times when I have looked up at the vast night sky and realized how enormous God really is. There are times when music cannot be "too loud". I long to feel it in my bones. This works really well when your praise team is a teen-aged garage band :-)

On the other hand, I have sat in Quaker meetings. The old style meeting that can best be described as "communal silence". To sit, with others, quietly, waiting on God, is an awesome experience. The few words that come in the sea of silence have power. There is plenty of time to reflect on each utterance, without worrying if you are going to miss the next point if you don't pay attention to the stream of words of some pastor. I am someone that registers as an Extrovert on the Myers-Briggs, and yet I need a good chunk of alone time to recharge and can be as cranky as a child without a nap if I don't get that alone time.

Each of these ways of touching and hearing God are things I need. I cannot imagine one without the other as they give me different connections with God. So to me, what seems paradoxical to some is natural, normal, and needed. What I'm struggling to understand is how people can be so immersed in one mode that they find the opposite alien and in some cases hard to conceive of at all.

Let me ask you this. What if there was someone who had a deep Zen Buddhist experience and then came to Christianity? Zen speaks much of "no-mind" and the simplicity that we would see as Ascetic. And yet those same folks create magnificent tea gardens to experience nature and art work that speaks to their deep sense of the storm, mountains and wildlife. That culture is both Ascetic and Sensory at the same time. (and rather rigidly Doctrinal of a sort if you look at their Tea Ceremony...)

Comments?

Mary