Thanks, Starbucks!
I’m grateful in a lot of ways for Starbucks. No, one is not the coffee. I go there often, but I’m not a coffee drinker. I’ve been a tea drinker ever since high school when a former Brethren missionary from India taught me to drink tea “the British way”. I do like the teas at Starbucks, but that’s not why I’m posting. I also like the culture, the ability to meet friends, to hang-out and make new friends, as well as to have a place to work when I need to get out of the office.
Another thing I’m grateful for is the writings on their cups; The Way I See It series. Recently, I got a cup with #254 of the series. It is written by Terry Kellogg, executive director of 1% for the Planet, a network of companies that donate a portion of sales to environmental causes. He writes, “I have spent a lot of time living where two bioregions intersect. There’s often amazing diversity in these zones, as species native to one region seem to thrive in the presence of those from another. . .“Â Terry goes one to write about how there can be a beneficial relationship between business and the environment.
What grabbed me from the quote above was the thought of how two different types of plant species can co-exist at the same time and place. Yet, if you go very far in one direction or the other, you lose the unique mix. This thought reminds me of what Dan Kimball and Brian McLaren have been teaching for years, that we are living in that inbetween, transition time between the modern and postmodern times.
From conversations I’ve had, some of us can’t wait for postmodern culture to develop more fully and want to jetison modernity ASAP. But like the mixture of species thrive together where environmental zones meet to create a unique mix, can we find and blend the best of modernity into the ways we want to see church move forward into? What do you appreciate about Modernity that you feel is beneficial to the church? How can we create a unique blend between the two so that we can bring with us the older Brethren, while reachin those who are outside the church? Is this possible in your mind?
I’d love to hear your thoughts!
Peace!
Jeff Glass
17 Jul 2007 Jeff Glass
I spent much of my education learning the ways in which generational groups relate with each other. And even though I would love to waste space here and highlight the stereotypical differences and annoyances amongst the Greatest Generation, the Baby Boomers, GenX and GenNext, I will instead keep it short and say, in the same way that in grandparents and grandchildren respect and cherish each other, so also has the Greatest Generation, and Generation X found a special place in one another’s hearts. One of the primary reasons that these two groups tend to like each other so much, is their characteristic willingness to enjoy each others company, without either forcing the other to embody their style or their practices.
I believe that the freedom and respect that these two groups by and large offer each other points us toward an unusual but happy and organic alliance. However, it is likely for some time that GenX and GenNext will participate in the life of CoB on a parallel, but independent track from that of the historic church. There many reasons for this being the case, but said simply, freedom and independence is what the emerging generations value most, and offering it to them costs us nearly nothing.
Christians have long believed that God enters into covenant relationships with culturally specific groups. I think that conviction is biblical. However, these groups are no longer only defined by ethnicity, language or national boundaries, but nowadays also by differences in generational culture. How a generation expresses itself, and the degree to which a church is willing to accommodate it, will determine the success or failure of every church in any future context.
Thanks, Mike, for describing the generational framework well. Like you, Mike, I’ve spent a good deal of time studying the various ways we understand what’s going on in our world.
The modern/post-modern framework is important, but I am concerned that we only think in dichotomy. I think it still remains to be seen what a ‘postmodern’ world will look like. In fact I think it’s quite possible that the ‘postmodern’ description will prove only to identify a tumultuous transition, and not a definitive worldview as many assume. That being said, I do not underestimate the power of a postmodern movement.
I don’t think that modernity and postmodernity describe all of the dynamics that are at play. I believe there are three competing and/or intersecting worldviews at play in our churches and communities, not just the two commonly cited.
It seems that large portions of Christendom, the church, and Brethren, never really made it to modernity with their faith. I refer to these folks as ‘traditional.’ For instance, when we describe how faith understanding is articulated, the traditional world view will do so matter-of-factly (assumes God, doesn’t question). Know any Brethren like that? The modern view wants to see logical proof (apologetics), and the post-modern will tell you a story (narrative, self-referent). Think about the current debates of the church; I posit that they’re not just modern vs. postmodern, but are deeply impacted by a traditionalist worldview as well.
My thoughts are of course not new, nor are they mine alone (Peter Ward in the book “Liquid Church” discusses what he calls the pre-modern, solid-modern and liquid modern), but I did collect some of my thoughts on this topic and the broader topic of diversity in my dissertation. You can check out what I wrote at http://sem.earlham.edu/~shivejo/Jonathan/writing/Writings.html. In section one on page 51 there is a chart that describes the three worldviews and how their perspectives differ in relationship to such things as truth, identity, formation, morality, faith, and a host of other categories.
Of course there’s also a fourth view, and that would be God’s view.
Certainly we are dealing with more than just semantics! There are real differences here, and they surface in all kinds of strange, perplexing and wonderful ways. May God continue to grant us understanding.
Hi Jonathan,
Thank you for the response, but I was rather surprised by your comments. My observations grow out of the belief that generational culture is as much a barrier to social commonality as is race or ethnicity. The ideas I espouse are (to some degree) rooted to Strauss & Howe; but the study of cycling recurrent generations is not really the modern/postmodern dialogue.
You seem to be responding to another conversation that you’ve overlaid onto my observations. That said, with regard to your response, a few thoughts:
The western world, for the most part, perceives the church as irrelevant… and for the most part it is. As a result, the Brethren, along with the whole of the denominational church, have been in decline for 50+ years. That, combined with the pooling of talent, time and treasure in mega churches (both mini-mega and meta-mega), have resulted in the demographic realignment that we experience as decline. Oh yeah, the foot washing didn’t help either.
Furthermore, traditionalist ideas, and those that hold them, are so close to mortality (at least amongst Europeans and their decedents), that in my opinion, this is a worldview that is best left to die a respectable, natural death. My Ipod listening, Birkenstock wearing, latte drinking students of astrophysics and biochemistry just don’t think like my 80somethings. I don’t expect they should. What’s important to me is that they love each other and are willing to let each be themselves without one trying to change the other… and for the most part they do. But that’s a matter of power against mortality, and though straight to my original point, not really what you were talking about.
Lastly, I think you have far too heavily reduced the traditional/modern/postmodern dichotomy. Proof texts, apologetics, and personal narrative are in no way sufficient to describe or understand what it means to do ministry in a traditional, modern or postmodern framework. The lynchpin of the postmodern experience is permanent perpetual change; where all things true at the same time and arguably so. How to talk about Truth within such a context, now that’s a conversation that I think the church needs to work on.
But to learn to do that we need to keep our minds on that issue, and never instantly pivot to a easier pet opinion. Excellence in ministry demands that we listen to what’s being said, as well as know what we are talking about.
Blessings,
~m
Wow, Mike! Apparently I struck a nerve with you. Actually I was not attempting to respond directly to you, so if I’ve breached protocol for these discussions, my apologies. In fact, I appreciated what you said and did not see any reason to restate the generational perspective and sensitivity that you offer.
I was instead offering further commentary on Jeff’s original post which did indeed raise the paradigms of modernity and postmodernity, and asked us to reflect on whether we are moving too quickly to jettison even the best qualities of modernity.
A careful reading of my post will reveal that my primary response was directed toward the two-dimensional description of organic relationships which Jeff offered. I simply am suggesting that in church life and in culture in general, describing intercultural dynamics through any singular paradigm, especially a dualistic paradigm, is limiting. Perhaps, as you suggest, modernity has become “irrelevant,†and it may well be that “traditionalist ideas†are close to mortality, but for the Church of the Brethren these are very present paradigms which directly impact our ability to move into new ways of following Jesus. So too with our ability and willingness to understand generational differences.
Apparently for you the generational differences hold the most insight for ministering in our days of perpetual, chaotic change. May that insight continue to empower your ministry.
For others I work with and relate to, it is often the traditional/modern/postmodern framework, for others ethnic descriptors, for still others socio-economic understanding. It’s my point of view that these varieties of understanding contribute to the whole of our movement into the fullness of God’s reign.
That’s what I was attempting to say….
blessings to you as well.
Jonathan
Jonathan,
First off I really need to apologize; Jeff emailed me saying that he liked ‘your response to my reply’… and suggested that I read it. It had been so long since I read his original blog entry that I had totally forgotten what it was about. Instead I keyed on what Jeff had written, “your response to my reply” and boom, I was off to the races.
A minute after I clicked submit, I reread the original post and realized that the bulk of your comments weren’t directed at my entry, but rather at the original topic. All the intellectual sloppiness was mine. I would have corrected myself sooner, but traffic and the Hollywood / Pasadena commute took priority . I had hoped to get to this before you read my response, but I forgot about the time differential.
But you’re right, there is a nerve there, that’s the why of the over reaction. The generational piece is close to my heart and in my experience, almost always back-burnered or dismissed. Truth be told, that’s likely my pet opinion… GenX/Boomer power relations. But that’s another topic and the commute is calling my name again.
Sorry for the barb there brother, it was truly my mistake. For better or worse, I’m a much better activist than a pacific.
Peace,
~m