We’re at a crossroad in youth work; and in order to be effective, we need to change—to turn at this crossroad instead of passing on through, assuming the way we’ve always done things will continue to work. It’s time for Youth Ministry 3.0.
A Short History of Youth Ministry
For each of the three eras of youth ministry, I’ve wrestled with a “driver,” and the first two came to me quite easily. Youth Ministry 1.0 was primarily proclamation-driven. Small groups didn’t really exist yet (not in the way we talk about or use them today). Creative curricula/games, mission trips, and all the rest of what has grown as an industry within the church were not being used in large measure. Youth ministry was primarily about preaching to teenagers.
Revolutionary ideas about connecting with teenagers in real ways got commoditized, and Youth Ministry 2.0 became program-driven. The sense was (and remains) that if we can build the right program with the coolest youth room and hip adult leaders and lots of great stuff to attract kids, then we’ll experience success.
One of the most dangerous cul-de-sacs any organization can drive into is the belief that our current assumptions will continue to be correct, are evergreen and never need to change.
Adolescence, as you likely know, is a fairly recent cultural phenomenon. Adolescence is the period between puberty and adulthood—more accurately—the period of life between puberty and a culture’s expectation of adult-like engagement in culture at large.
Teenagers constantly need to differentiate from the adult world, which drives them to new, “other” ways of connecting, coping and creating. Every time some aspect of youth culture becomes commoditized and mainstream, accepted by adults and culture at large, teenagers tweak it in a new way for themselves or create a whole new category. It’s how they determine where they fit, where they belong and the adult he or she is becoming.
Creating Community
Finding somewhere to belong always has been important to teenagers. However, in the old scenario, at a macro level, kids either did or didn’t belong. In today’s splintered youth culture, it’s simultaneously easier to find a place to belong while the search feels more desperate.
For teenagers desperate to define their identities through affinity, we need to help them experience true community. True community doesn’t mean once-a-week, highly programmed youth group meetings. True community might take place in the context of a small group, but the practice and programming of small groups does not ensure true community. True community is life-on-life, eating together, sharing journeys, working through difficulties and serving side-byside, wrestling with praxis (theology in practice), openness, accountability, safety, cultivating shared passions and holy discontent. True community is not a program, not something people sign up for, not something we force.
“Community” in and of itself doesn’t completely capture Youth Ministry 3.0 thematically. My friend and leading Catholic youth ministry expert D. Scott Miller suggested communion, and I instantly knew the concept captured what I was thinking. Communion is true community with Christ in the mix; it is the essence and the action of a Christ community.
A Profusion of Approaches
Many Youth Ministry 2.0 practitioners would assent to this notion and contend they are, and have been, striving for this theme. For most though, I would disagree. First, communion has been a less-important goal (at best) in most youth ministries. Second, if it’s a program, then it’s not the kind of communion I’m talking about.
If Youth Ministry 1.0 was proclamation-driven and Youth Ministry 2.0 was program-driven, what do we hope for in Youth Ministry 3.0? As I wrote earlier, the “drivers” for Youth Ministry 1.0 and 2.0 came to me quickly, but I really struggled with this third one.
For weeks I was stumped. I had ideas floating around in my head, values, words, notions and vibes; but none of them were right. All of them had the scent of Youth Ministry 2.0-thinking wafting around them.
Then it became clear. Whereas Youth Ministry 1.0 was proclamation-driven and YM 2.0 was program-driven, YM 3.0 needs to be not-driven. The metaphor may work for cattle but not work for a fluid, missional community.
So, what will this change look like? I have to admit, I don’t know. One thing I’m sure of: Tweaking things won’t get us there. Youth Ministry 3.0 isn’t about making a subtle modification in a program or adding the words “communion” or “mission” to your youth ministry’s core values. Real change is messy, but which is better: messy substantive change or useless mini-alterations?
The splintering of youth culture has created a huge methodological quagmire for youth workers, especially those steeped in “the right program is the answer” thinking. You choose a band (or CD) for a big youth event, and at least half of the teenagers will think it’s lame. Some will love messy games and goofy icebreakers because the actions and weirdness associated with them fit within the acceptable boundaries of their sub-cultural norms. Others will hate them, and forcing kids to participate is usually more about us than them. Some kids would love a discipleship process that encourages them to dig into a meaty study, using various online and printed resources, and have feisty discussions about what it means to follow Jesus. Others would find this approach a total disconnect.
Some of you are thinking, “Well, that’s the way it’s always been. All kids love games and icebreakers if you can get past their tough exteriors. And all real disciples should learn to master Bible study techniques like those.”
Says who? The point isn’t just that my small group of white, suburban, eighth-grade boys needs a different approach to youth ministry than the middle schoolers in my friend’s inner-city group in Kansas City. That much is obvious and has been for a long time.
The point is my group of white, suburban, eighth-grade boys needs a different approach to youth ministry than your group of white, suburban, eighth-grade boys! They need a different youth ministry than any other group of six kids, even if they look the same on the outside. Youth culture has splintered, so our approaches to youth ministry need to splinter.
Putting Principles Into Practice
So how do we do this? I believe there are three options, which your communional, missional group needs to discern together. You know your students; you know your community. Dream and discern with them to create a localized ministry that brings the gospel to the real kids you see every week.
One youth ministry likely will reach only one kind of kid, one subculture. Multiple youth ministries within the same church have the opportunity to establish contextualized, present (not-driven) ministries of communion and mission in multiple youth culture contexts.
I’m not talking about merely having different affinity-based small groups (though that’s not a bad idea) but separate youth groups. There still would be one team with leaders and students from the various groups meeting together regularly for prayer and discernment; but the youth groups would function somewhat autonomously with their own unique methods, approaches, meeting times, rules, styles, calendars and shared leadership.
Some might still love lock-ins and ski trips; but others likely would develop a highly relational social network online with a swarm approach to meetings—no calendars posted on refrigerators, just the natural lines of connection that exist in teenagers’ lives. One group might best accomplish discipleship while meeting weekly to hand out sandwiches to homeless people; another group might approach this in a closed room in the church with Bibles in hand and minds of inquiry.
No great effort would be made to collate all the activities of all of these youth ministries on one centralized calendar. Anything centralized is anathema to this approach. Instead, teenagers find their ways to these different groups just as they do in their real, everyday, underground lives: through social networking.
Students may choose to participate actively or partially in more than one of these youth ministries. Those few adults and students who have a macro-level view of the whole thing could assist teenagers who don’t know how or where to engage.
This collection of youth ministries doesn’t try to be all things to all teenagers. It might not be limited to one church even. (Wouldn’t that be cool?) Instead, those willing to participate in the process of discernment will decide together which youth ministries to birth.
From Berea to You
Remember, the church at Berea was different than the church at Corinth. In the “glocal” culture in which we live today, simple geography matters less than affinity and social network.
Let’s be honest about youth ministry: It’s absolutely never, ever done. There always will be more teenagers who need you, but adding more gets you nowhere. The road forward must first go through the valley of doing less. Admittedly, this is counterintuitive. Doing less feels like shying away from needs, turning away from change. Society has enculturated us to believe change comes from doing more, more, more. But even Jesus, the Christ—who certainly, as God incarnate, should have been able to do more stuff than you and I do—stepped aside for prayer and rest and intimate dialogue. And He often did so when the to-do list was at its most substantial and critical.
Strip down your programming so you have space to spend time with teenagers and God and consider rebuilding something new and fresh.
Let me say it plainly: Large is part of the value system of Youth Ministry 2.0; small is a cornerstone to Youth Ministry 3.0. Communion necessitates small. Contextualization begs for small. Discernment requires small. Mission is lived out in small.
Smallness values community in which teenagers can be truly known and know others rather than being one of the crowd. Smallness champions clusters of relationships. Smallness waits on the still, small voice of God, rather than assuming what God wants to say and broadcasting it through the best sound system money can buy. Smallness prioritizes relationships over numbers, social networks over programs, uniqueness over homogeneity, and listening to God over speaking for God.
