u no who u r

The sound guys - and everybody else connected with leading worship at the last congregation I served as pastor - used to get together after the Saturday night worship service and debrief. Nothing was sacred. We critiqued the amount of reverb in the room, the tempo of the music, the flow of the liturgy, the content and tone of the sermon. (i.e., "Hey Kelly that story you told about how the guy was eating nachos at the game - it didn't work for me - I think you should say 'hot dogs' - more people eat hot dogs.") It was all up for grabs because we were all committed to making sure nothing got in the way of Jesus coming to people. It also helped create a level playing field. Jesus was Lord in that congregation, at least back then. Not the pastor or the sound guy or the crabbiest person in the room. But even I never imagined the kind of immediate, broad based feedback that has become possible now that everybody knows how to send text messages.

Earl Creps is a seminary prof and pastor interested in the emerging church conversation. He's got an interesting article at Monday Morning Insight about "preaching with real time feedback" in which he describes speaking to a group he has invited to text message him while he's doing his thing. Fascinating idea in all kinds of ways. Talk about participative processes!

But what got my attention in his article is what he says he learned about "millennials" (kids my kids' ages) from reading the messages he received:

1. It’s all about the fashion. This group of millennials sees culture and message as inseparable. There were more mentions of my new hipster glasses than of Jesus, more references to my shoes (Skechers) than to the Scripture. (I bought the former to avoid losing unused medical reimbursement funds, and the latter because they were really cheap.) This perspective does not make young adults nonspiritual or superficial. Issues of “loook and feel” are as naturally a part of their language as bulleted lists are of mine. I got the sense that they actually cannot see me apart from my L & F profile, almost as if they were processing me like a video, rather than listening to a live talk (which raises some interesting possibilities of its own--do I really need to show up in person? What if I did, but showed a video of myself anyway?).

2. Humor can have no victim but me. Self-deprecation is the way to go, especially if it reverses any sense of entitlement based on age or position. My favorite text message was, “The glasses should stay. It takes the focus off your bald spot.”

3. The optimal large group communication genre is stand-up comedy. My critic was exactly right. The style of the talk (which was on the missional church) definitely derived from stand up. I’m thinking through this for the first time, but it seems like the value here is that humor is by definition a part of the genre, as is irony and that sort of coy word play that under-25’s seem to enjoy as I do (provided it includes multiple references to TV and film). As one texter put it, “The humor commands attention.” Most of the positive messages, in fact, contained references to the talk being funny.

4. The highest value is authenticity. The “A” word is used so much now as to be almost inauthentic. What I mean by it here is a visceral commitment to the message that invites the listener/texter to look over the precipice with you into something that could rock their whole word. Bible autopsies don’t cut it, so to speak. This kind of A.... seems to require a high level of spontaneity, is helped by using either no notes or a manuscript (for word control), and feels like a roller coaster ride when you’re in the middle of it. What it lacks in polish is made up for in energy, sincerity, and personal commitment. Or as one messenger put it, “You were real.”

5. We are peers, not speaker and audience. A very strong sense came through the cryptic texts that the students regarded me as a peer, not chronologically or culturally, but positionally. In other words, the fact that I was on the platform only raised me above them in terms of architecture. One text put it this way: “Hey, Earl. I have funky glasses too. That means we’re both fabulous.” Speaking with a group of these young adults, then, resembles the internet where all communication is lateral. I can say anything to them (even be extremely confrontational) so long as I never do so to elevate my own position.

6. I have to make the first move. When I am outside the country I do what I can to learn even a few words of the local language or some of the customs that are natural for the area. People who live wherever I am visiting seem to respect even awkward attempts at communicating with them. My NCU experience would say the same thing. On message said, “It’s very cool you text.” Another expressed support for my use of a Coldplay mp3 ("Clocks") during the talk. The point here is not the technology, but the symbolic value of making even a clumsy effort at using the native symbol system. My instinct is that if I take the first chance, they will respond by taking a chance on me.

I hope you go read Earl's article yourself. But I just want to say, the stuff he learned about millennials I learned about PEOPLE a long time ago:

1. They'll trust you more if you LOOK like them.
2. They don't like jerks who take themselves too seriously.
3. They like to laugh.
4. They want you to be REAL.
5. They want to know that you know you're the same as them.
6. They need to know you care enough to try to communicate with them in a language they can understand.

This isn't a list that describes just my KIDS. This list describes ME. And most people I know who spend most of their time out in the real world (rather than inside the four walls of "a church"). It also describes a whole lot of regular old church people I know.

This is something for pastor-types, especially, to think about as we try to connect with a culture that isn't sure we've got anything they need. But it's also something for everybody else out there who shows up "at church" expecting their pastor to look or sound or act a certain (uptight, serious, straight-laced, poker-faced) way. You know who you are.

P.S. "Hot dogs" did work better in the story.

-------------------------------------------------------------

POSSIBLY RELATED POSTS:

When Should You Use A Participative Process

The Golden Nugget

The Expert In The Room

Six Timeless Keys To Church Renewal

Looks Like Catholics May Lead The Next Reformation Too

Now She's Meddling

Comments

[Greg Meyer]

Thanks for the link to Earl's stuff. This is helpful!

[Brian Beckstrom]

Thanks for the link Kelly. That was great stuff. We tried the text messaging thing last weekend and it worked really well.

[LauraM]

1. They'll trust you more if you LOOK like them.
2. They don't like jerks who take themselves too seriously.
3. They like to laugh.
4. They want you to be REAL.
5. They want to know that you know you're the same as them.
6. They need to know you care enough to try to communicate with them in a language they can understand.

Kelly... that is so basic.. so simple... and... damned if we don't lose sight of that so easily.. as a person, let alone a pastor... thanks for putting it out there.. frankly at my age I need to be reminded...

We did an amazing sermon series based on Sarah Cunningham's book, Dear Church. It put the 20-somethings obstacles to church.. such as hyporcrisy, judgementalism, exclusivity squarely in the pews... great conversations...debates, some ruffled feathers... and all God.

Keeping it real-esque in Charlottesville :)