Featured What if older Christians

Membership tenure doesn't equate to spiritual maturity, it should but it's not a given. I just left a church where the husband and wife longest time members were the grouchiest, most hateful, trouble making pair you'd ever meet. If they were what a "Christian" should look like I want no part of it.

I'm 35, I'll gladly submit to leadership of older brethren if they are modeling Titus 2 and other scriptural commands. But, again just because someone is older doesn't mean they are necessarily more mature spiritually.

A healthy church should reflect its community. An area of Florida comprised of retirement villages would likely have a higher average congregational age. A dying coal town up in VA/WV, where there were limited economic opportunities for the younger generation would likely also have a higher average congregational age. But in a vibrant growing town or city there is no excuse for a church to have an average age of 65+.

A church is not a building, its God's called out ones. They will enjoy each other's fellowship regardless of how much is in the offering plate, regardless of whether or not the carpet is a little dated. They are bound by their commonality in Christ. The world wants to divide, but only Christ can unite. Doesn't matter if its a brick building with a nicely manicured lawn, an old warehouse, or a space in a retail strip center. God's people will want to be together with God's people.

The cause of Christ is the cause of Christ, he will not fail. He is not sitting around wringing his hands in heaven worrying about what the future holds. By his grace and his mercy he has called us to be a part of his work. Any local church young or old that is living for itself (the here and now, nickels and noses) is dead weight.

I enjoy your posts, but for some reason your whole point seems to be coming back around to money. "He who has the Gold Makes the Rules"?

As a young man I desire to be mentored by those older than me who have walked faithfully with Christ for many years, who will teach sound doctrine, and love me enough to tell me when I'm being arrogant or overreacting. Respect is due to this class of older Christian. Its not due to someone just because they've been a long time member or put the most money in the offering plate. I have no stomach for spending my time, talents, or money supporting a social club.

 

It is not ab out age. It is about an unbiblical unwllingness to change methods.

 

I agree.

I think one of the errors we make is that we think, generally speaking, that the call to preach is the call to go pastor established churches.

I think, generally speaking, the call to preach is the call to go and plant new churches.

It appears in Titus and Timothy that the early churches were expected to be deep enough, dedicated enough, etc... to produce their OWN leaders. Not import them from seminaries or other churches.

And these churches run largely by old folks ARE dying. 3,500 close their doors every year.

Rather, though, than a young man trying to resurrect a dying church, he'd be wiser to go and birth a new church.

Let the old folks who will not release the reins have them- and EVERYBODY will be happier.

Because the good news is, accordign to Ed Stetzer, that, though 3,500 churches are closing their doors every year, 4,000 new plants are arising in this country every year.

The way to do away with churches that are in the way of progress is to leave them to themselves. Let them dry up and die. Plant new ones.

 

I was probably reading in too much. My apologies. I think Luke brought up a good point relevant to the intent of your post. Revitalize or Church Plant?

http://www.9marks.org/journal/pros-and-cons-planting-and-revitalizing

 

I had this happen!

But it was just the opposite. My first church was mostly older peoeple ... in fact I did more funerals than weddings while there. Once young people started coming in and proving themselves by arriving early and setting up chairs in the fellowship hall, and stayed late to clean up and the wife's sent the older ladies out to visit while they washed dishes, and they mowed the lawns and fixed the roofs, etc. It came time to vote some of them into minor leadership roles, but the old folks were angry and opposed the new people coming in on the boards and serving as Deacons, because, well ... they were tooooooo young!

This didn't drive the young families off, but it caused a strin between the old, set in their way members and the younger folks. And some of these folks were more than qualified to be in higher positions than what they were up for, and when it came to giving they had the ability to give well, as they were not on Social Security!

So, this happens, and it is a real shame!

I should say, that ten years after that church, I had a similar thing happen in another small, older people church!

There was also the time I was hired, part time, to preach at a seasonal snpwbird church, and on my first Sunday, If I heard it once, I heard it twenty times, "Oh my, you are so young?"

Yes I was 49 years old. But after a few sermons, they saw that younth (LOL) had their good points! :laugh:

 

Yes, I have seen this very thing in many churches myself (churches I have personally pastored, and my friends have pastored or attended and heard about from many others).

There is an arrogance in some old people that drives them to resist young people who they tend to think are beneath them.

They boast about "in my day," but unless they are above 80 years old "their day" was not that great.

Their day gave us hippies and Woodstock and significant increase in STD's, divorce, teen pregnancy, drugs became an epidemic, spit on soldiers returning from war, lost prayer in schools, legalized abortion, etc, etc, etc...

Yet they think young folks in their 20's and 30's come from a tainted generation and they want little to nothing to do with them.

They try to cast the mote out of young people's eyes while their own eyes are bursting with beams.

Now, of course this is not every old person below 80 (I keep mentioning that because I tend to think that the WWII generation was our finest- at least in the last 100 years). There are plenty of fine old folks in their 60's and 70's.

But, I think it is clear that it is a general rule.

So the solution is to stop trying to work with these people. Stop trying to resurrect their dying churches.

Plant new ones.

New church plants that survive those most perilous first few years are doing quite well in this country.

Churches where the average age is 60 or above are drying up and dying.

Let them. They want to be left alone. Leave them alone. Let them die.

Some new church plant in the community can buy the old building when it is finally up for sale.

Everybody wins.

The stubborn old folks (again, not all old folks- just the ones who fit this bill) get their way and have their churches to themselves. The passionate young folks don't waste their time and energy trying to work with them and they get to get their facilities in a few years.

Everybody wins.

 

Agism is a false accusation based on a need to sensationalize the issue due to a lack of understanding or an unwillingness to deal honestly with the issue.

 

Or it is based on facts.

 

Or not...........

 

The idea that there are not generational ideology and behavioral gaps is absurd.

People in their 60's and 70's tend to think and behave very differently from folks in their 20's and 30's.

They have different life philosophies and worldviews.

Those things permeate the way they "do church."

 

I never said there wasn't. In fact I am convinced there are. But that is not about age it is about personal choices and preferences.

We need to strike a balance in our churches. There is a church in Florida that brought in a new young pastor and the church ended up running off the enitre elderly congregation.

There is a right way to do everything. The problem is those older folks who have been the solid support for years are in fact more often then not holding the church back and killing it.

When we bring in new converts to the church it takes anywhere from 1 to 5 years to get them to become just as solid. And that is if the church is doing all it needs to do in discipleship. In the mean time the older congregation is dying off. If their departure is faster than what we are bringing in then the church dies and puts the building up for sale.


We all need to be able to adjust and change for the Kingdoms sake. The younger generation is not going to come churches that are doing things the way so much of our older generation wants it to remain.

This issue is not about age. It is about an unwillingness to be Kingdom minded and flexible as Paul was:

1Co_9:22 To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak: I am made all things to all men, that I might by all means save some.

Our older generations have become stale and stagnet and are holding our churches back. Age is not the issue.

But it does not surprise me that you support a sensationalistic idea like this. It is your MO

It is unusual for nodak

 

And what generation is writing the checks?

 

That is right they are writing the checks now. But unless we reproduce ourselves and prepare to bring in the next generation they will be the ones who are writing the checks right up to the point the church doors close.

Anyone who thinks the services should be all about one generation or another is only selfish. We need to strike a balance in a way the provides for the future of the church as well as what is going on right now.

 

I agree.

.. except for the sensationalist thing.

What is sensational about what I said?

 

What is sensationalistic is the accusation of agism.

 

No one said that.

Again no one said that. More sensationalism.

That is not what was said either, it is not the only ones but all of that are stuck in the "old ways" are all dying and will die. Nothing myth about that.

 

I'm not sure if I am one of the people to whom you are responding with this post, but, if you are, please note that I acknowledged that the new church plants doing well in this country are the ones who make it out of those first few most perilous years.

Most church plants do close up shop within the first few years and that is perfectly ok. There is absolutely nothing wrong with that.

Planting a new church is an ambitious endeavor and it is always a long shot. That somebody tried to do so, if their motives were right, is highly commendable. He knew beforehand the likelihood of the endeavor being a success was small. Yet, he tried anyway.

The only way to fill the country with new churches is to have an extraordinary number of new church plants fail.

But if we can plant, say 4,000, and 1,500 of those become vibrant churches- EXCELLENT! The cost of the 2,500 "failures" is a small price to pay.

I agree, but the best we can do here is speak in generalities.

A subject like this is not going to allow for monolithic claims.

There are going to be many exceptions.

The best we can do is speak to the general rule.

I think the general rule is that churches with the average age of 60 or higher are dying and not open to the needed changes to revive them.

There is a need to address all of these issues and plant churches to minister to every demographic.

Inside the church that is exactly all we should focus on. But our outreach has to take into consideration these other things.

I don't think any of us do not listen to them. But when the church is, and has been for quite a while, dying on their watch and they are not willing to change- we can't just acquiesce to their every whim.

And I had an EXTRAORDINARY relationship with my grandparents. I had, it is probably not an overstatement, an inordinate love for my grandparents.

But, they were from that great WWII generation that I think excels every other generation in the past 100 years.

The struggles we are having today are with the children of that generation.

Well, in a church like ours, it was not these folks who built it. They inherited it from their parents or grandparents whose sweat, blood and tears built it.

On their watch, it has been in decline.