• 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?

10 responses to “So, let me get this right…”

  1. Andrew Page Avatar

    I think you have understood if correctly (or at least as fully as it can be understood).

    This just shows how confused the church has become, or how keen it is to tie itself into the proverbial knots to appease both progressives and traditionalists.

    Either way, this position is both absurd and intellectually unsustainable.

  2. Kirstin Avatar

    Kelvin can I ask what submissions you are referring to, is there a new one?

  3. Joan H Craig Avatar
    Joan H Craig

    I think that, once marriage law is passed, current civil partnerships can convert to marriage by filling form, etc. Don’t think they said what happens if the couple want a religious marriage – or did I miss that?
    If our churches persist in saying no to marriage, wouldn’t it be better to do the blessing after they’ve converted their civil status – as in some countries where every marriage is a civil ceremony, and any religious service is done afterwards
    I hope everyone has completed the most recent consultation paper

  4. Rhea Avatar
    Rhea

    I think that the church wants to have its cake and eat it too. It wants everyone to be happy, and this is probably the best way that it knows to do this.

    Is it ridiculous? Of course.

  5. Kelvin Holdsworth Avatar

    There is to be a new one. I’ve not seen it. I understand that the position that the Faith and Order Board is holding to is that “church teaching” is what Canon 31 says – that and nothing else and therefore we are doctrinally against change.

    Is that not the case?

    1. kelvin Avatar

      So far as I understand it, the SEC has not moved in its position since the first response at all.

      The first response included this:
      Question 10: Do you agree that the law in Scotland should be changed to allow same sex marriage?
      The Canons of the Scottish Episcopal Church (Canon 31) state that the doctrine of the Church is that marriage is ‘a physical, spiritual and mystical union of one man and one woman created by their mutual consent of heart, mind and will thereto, and as a holy and lifelong estate instituted of God’. In the light of that Canon, there is no current basis for agreeing that the law should be changed to view marriage as possible between two people of the same sex.

    2. Kirstin Avatar

      The SEC’s last response was in line with what the current law was, indeed still is, this consultation asks a very different question. To which the answer ‘well it isn’t legal, so we can’t say’, (I paraphrase) can’t be the answer this time, can it?
      Of course Canon 31 also states it is a “lifelong estate” but had clause 4 added at a later date to allow for divorce and remarriage.

  6. Rev David Coleman Avatar
    Rev David Coleman

    I was watching the evidence to the Westminster parliamentary committees the other day. In all these things, even from churches which are prepared to be tentatively in favour, or declining to be opposed, what is missing from all the evidence is the human experience of joy and delight that actually characterises a true and good wedding, of any combination of partners. How can we get across the compelling and converting happiness when processes take the form they do?

  7. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
    Rosemary Hannah

    Is there any way of getting hold of the board – of ordinary church members getting hold of it and making it listen?? I mean I know my approach tends to lack in subtlety what it makes up for in directness, but then, well, it is very direct.

  8. Kimberly Avatar

    Rosemary, of all the many beautiful sentences you have written, that is the very very best.

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…