• Generation Self

    There’s a fascinating piece in the Guardian this morning about Generation Self – that’s the name being given to those who are around the age of 20 at the moment.

    It seems to some pollsters that as they enquire about the values that people who are that age hold they are being surprised at how much more right wing they seem to be than previous generations.

    It seems to me that there may be something in the analysis. I’m the generation that doesn’t really know his neighbours. Those younger than me seem to be those who really don’t want to know their physical neighbours. I can’t imagine voting for a party who say they want to crack down on welfare spending in order to give me tax cuts but it now seems to be a respectable thing to say and something which seemingly “respectable” people advocate. Activism has become signing an on-line petition rather than joining with other people to get other people to help change the world.

    I remember being shocked at the last election by the number of young gay men I know who said that they were voting Tory and who seemed to think it was obvious that they should do so.

    “But, but, but… Section 28, Mrs T, solidarity!” I cried to no avail.

    If there is something in this Generation Self thing then it needs a lot of thought. Apart from everything else, the views and peccadilloes of the twenty-somethings of every age somehow seem to define who the rest of us are. They set the direction.

    And so, the churches that are going to benefit are going to be the churches which speak right into the experience of those values being lived. Who will succeed? Who will fail.

    All I can see on the horizon is success for those churches which give a clear identity message and doom for those churches which are based on a parish/district model of attracting people simply because they are in the locality.

    I can see a future for confident evangelical churches – probably getting bigger again as they offer something directly to a generation who seem to be in the “What’s in it for me?” mentality. What’s in it for you, sunshine? Oh, eternal life, salvation, big things. All for you. I also think that there is a possibility that such churches will increasingly be promoting social justice issues though probably single-issue things like the environment.

    And I can see a future for confident expression of a more catholic counterculture to the zeitgeist. I can’t see much of a future for conservative catholicism in any denomination. I can see churches providing spaces and places for those who dream of a connected world, a world where neighbourhood is defined by values not locality and a world where the sacramental refreshes through sign and symbol a bunch of people who are pretty much out of sorts with the prevailing winds of opinion.

    “Come to us because we are here in your neighbourhood” just isn’t going to cut it.

    Heaven knows, it hasn’t been cutting it (with the possible exception of a few very leafy locales) for quite a while.

    if you are not one of them, what do you make of Generation Self? Do you like them? Do they care? What can be done to open the possibility of church as a life enhancing opportunity to them?

    If you are a twenty-something, does the description Generation Self feel right?

8 responses to “A Christian Country?”

  1. Tim Avatar

    Reality is pluralist; a secular basis is good to level the playing-field.

    I think Cameron is not so much failing to live in `now’ but hell-bent on dragging the country back to the 50s (mostly the 1850s).

    One of Blair’s very few positives was “we don’t do God”, or at least postponing doing God until mostly after he was out of Number 10.

  2. Fr Steve Avatar

    Very good analysis. In Australia I still find I get prickly when people tell me I belong to the C of E! (It has not been formally such since the the 70s)
    It is good not to see ourselves in the light of another nation…England…but it is good to recognise to recognise our heritage …Anglican.
    I spent part of last year in Hawaii as a locum…..when asked last week by the Mothers’ Union..”What was the difference?” I was a bit glib…but could confidential say “Nothing at all!” Given the fact that 1/3 of the congregation were Filipinos it is an interesting reflection.
    Don’t think we should overstate it, but being Anglican is a great thing. But there is much about it that needs a good kick up the backside too!

  3. Mark Avatar

    Though we ought to, maybe proudly, remember that the SEC is not a daughter Church of the Church of England. I’m afraid Cameron isn’t doing himself any favours with the way he’s made these statements, and as far as Scotland goes there’s a large part that has been disenfranchised by any statements that Cameron or any English person says, because they view them as ‘english propaganda’. Sadly, I don’t view the Scottish Government with much love either, having used their position to unfairly tout their party’s stance. Between two opposite poles, both backed by Government, how is one to hear a balanced view, instead of that great love of Blair’s Government, spin.

  4. Eamonn Avatar

    ‘I do however have a big problem with starting up a new country and writing Christianity into the constitutional definition of what that country is.’ I agree totally. I lived for 26 years in a country where the constitution, in respect of family matters, reflected the views both of the majority RC church and the Church of Ireland. For example, in order to make divorce possible, an amendment to the constitution had to be passed by a majority voting in a nation-wide referendum. This was only achieved in 1995, and only by a margin of 50.28% to 49.72%. Constitutional definition of religious matters always leads to discrimination.

  5. Robin Avatar
    Robin

    > ‘I do however have a big problem with starting up a new country’

    I have a big problem with seeing Scottish independence (if it were to be re-established following a YES vote in the referendum) as ‘starting up a new country’ . . .

  6. Alan McManus Avatar

    I loathe the smug fortress mentality of many of my co-religionists in RC schools while noting that these schools perform at least as well as non-denominational. I loathe the cowardice of the Reformed churches in failing to speak out against the violence and prejudice associated with a certain group of charitable organisations every July and the complicity of local authorities who DO NOT assure the safety of citizens and of international visitors unused to the historical hatreds of the Scottish central belt. While the latter is true, I continue to support the former and look to Canada as a model of multicultural accommodation than to the aggressive laïcité of France.

  7. Allan Ronald Avatar
    Allan Ronald

    Given the choice between the venomous and literally murderous hatreds of Central Belt sectarianism and ‘aggressive laicité’ I’ll take the latter any day.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Posts

  • May Day

    Yes, thank you for asking, I did wash my face in the dew this morning, can you not tell?

  • Sermon – 1 May 2005

    To an unknown God The God whom we worship is both known and unknown. Out of such a paradox, Christianity was forged and hurled around the known civilized world of its day. Paul?s sermon on the hill known as the Areopagus in Athens is itself a little Pentecost ? a little of the Holy Spirit…

  • Cat Fury

    Tilly’s fury at the election knows no bounds. She has taken to hissing at all visitors to the house. This started with her hissing at known Liberal Democrats, but I fear that it has now progressed to voters from all parties. She will be glad when things quieten down a bit next week. Meanwhile, people…

  • Sermon – 24 April 2005

    Jesus says, ?I am the Way, the Truth and the Life, no-one comes to the Father except through me?. Very directly then, I want to address the question of what this verse might mean. There are after all, a number of very ugly interpretations of this verse. You do not need to go very far…