LIPSCOMB UNIVERSITY FORMING THE PEOPLE OF GOD: A QUALITATIVE STUDY OF THE FORMATIVE IMPACT OF

Transcription

1 LIPSCOMB UNIVERSITY FORMING THE PEOPLE OF GOD: A QUALITATIVE STUDY OF THE FORMATIVE IMPACT OF INTERGENERATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS THROUGH DWELLING IN THE WORD A DISSERTATION SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF THE HAZELIP SCHOOL OF THEOLOGY IN CANDIDACY FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF MINISTRY BY LAWRENCE WILSON MCCOY III NASHVILLE, TN MAY 2016

2 The Doctorate of Ministry project, directed and approved by the candidate s committee, has been accepted by the Hazelip School of Theology of Lipscomb University in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree. FORMING THE PEOPLE OF GOD: A QUALITATIVE STUDY OF THE FORMATIVE IMPACT OF INTERGENERATIONAL RELATIONSHIPS THROUGH DWELLING IN THE WORD By Lawrence Wilson McCoy III for the degree of Doctorate of Ministry Director of Graduate Program Date Doctorate of Ministry Committee Dr. Holly Allen, Chair Dr. John York Dr. Ben Ries ii

3 Copyright 2016 by Lawrence Wilson McCoy III All Rights Reserved iii

4 ABSTRACT This doctorate of ministry project presents a qualitative study of the spiritually formative impact of reading Scripture in an intergenerational environment at the College Hills Church of Christ in Lebanon, TN. Once a week during August and September of 2015 I guided two separate groups, each consisting of five generational cohorts, through a reading practice called Dwelling in the Word. This reading method served as an appropriate exercise due to its emphasis on encountering God and Scripture through a community of participants. During the two months I explored the cross-generational encounters happening within each group. The intent was to discern the spiritual formation impact of these intergenerational experiences. The project proved to be an effective means of cultivating a spiritually formative intergenerational experience at College Hills. Participants reported experiencing robust faith development, deeper understandings of church community, and improved relationships with other generational cohorts. These findings affirmed previous research in the field of intergenerational Christian spiritual formation. In addition, this project contributed new discoveries to this unfolding field. First, Dwelling in the Word is an effective cross-generational spiritual practice. Second, intergenerational experiences are enhanced when there is a common purpose and bond for the various ages involved. Third, expressions of vulnerability between generational cohorts enhance the formative possibilities of intergenerational experiences. Fourth, the specific trait of listening is crucial to effective intergenerational Christian spiritual formation. iv

5 DEDICATION To Jessica, thank you for being my best friend, constant support, and for continuing to show me the steadfast love and faithfulness of God. I m the man who loves you. v

6 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS To Dad and Mom: I am grateful to be able to call you my parents. Thank you for all of your seen and unseen acts of love, support, and sacrifice for me throughout my life. I love you. To Elisha: I am grateful for to be able to call you my big sister. Thank you for your love. To College Hills and the GPS Crew: I am grateful for your encouragement throughout my ministry with you while learning more what it means to be a minister and follower of Jesus. Thank you especially for your support through the completion of this degree. To the Dwelling Groups: I am grateful we were able to journey up the mountain together. Thank you for your commitment to the project as well as you openness to God and each other. To the churches at Madison Street, Pegram, Hillsboro, The Point, and Avenue B: I am grateful that you each provided me opportunities to grow with your community of faith. Thank you for how you embraced me and gave me early glimpses of the power of being intergenerational. To my mentors and teachers through the years: I am grateful for all the ways you helped me to grow, stretch, and become more the person God has called me to be. Thank you for your generosity, kindness, and patience in your teaching and mentoring. To Holly Allen: I am grateful for your deep faith, passion, and constant encouragement through my project. Thank you for being a wonderful advisor and friend to me on this journey. vi

7 QUOTES Above all, trust the slow work of God. ~ Pierre Teilhard de Chardin The LORD said to Moses, Cut two tablets of stone like the former ones, and I will write on the tablets the words that were on the former tablets, which you broke. Be ready in the morning, and come up in the morning to Mount Sinai and present yourself there to me, on the top of the mountain. No one shall come up with you, and do not let anyone be seen throughout all the mountain; and do not let flocks or herds graze in front of that mountain. So Moses cut two tablets of stone like the former ones; and he rose early in the morning and went up on Mount Sinai, as the LORD had commanded him, and took in his hand the two tablets of stone. The LORD descended in the cloud and stood with him there, and proclaimed the name, The LORD. The LORD passed before him, and proclaimed, The LORD, the LORD, a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger, and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness, keeping steadfast love for the thousandth generation, forgiving iniquity and transgression and sin, yet by no means clearing the guilty, but visiting the iniquity of the parents upon the children and the children s children, to the third and the fourth generation. And Moses quickly bowed his head toward the earth, and worshiped. He said, If now I have found favor in your sight, O Lord, I pray, let the Lord go with us. Although this is a stiff-necked people, pardon our iniquity and our sin, and take us for your inheritance. He said: I hereby make a covenant. Before all your people I will perform marvels, such as have not been performed in all the earth or in any nation; and all the people among whom you live shall see the work of the LORD; for it is an awesome thing that I will do with you. ~Exodus 34:1-10, NRSV What kind of church would be formed if everyone got to experience what we have experienced? It would be a church that was stronger, more devoted, and a caring church. As we were discussing this I got to thinking about Paul s statement about neither male nor female, Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, and now we would have to add young or old, because this has enhanced our experience with God to have all of us here. ~BMG1, 1945 vii

8 TABLE OF CONTENTS I. INTRODUCTION 1 The Title of the Project 2 The Problem in Ministry Context 2 Statement of the Problem.6 Statement of the Purpose.7 Basic Assumptions...8 Definitions 9 Delimitations..10 Conclusion.10 II. LITERATURE REVIEW AND THE PROBLEM IN RESEARCH CONTEXT.11 Introduction 11 Generational Theory Literature Review 11 Intergenerational Christian Spiritual Formation Literature Review..17 Conclusion.21 III. THEOLOGICAL RATIONALE.22 A Vision of Christian Spiritual Formation A Vision of Christian Spiritual Formation and The Project..23 A Brief Sketch of Exodus Theological Rationale 1: Spiritual Formation and The Nature of God.27 Dwelling in the Word and The Nature of God..29 Theological Rationale 2: Spiritual Formation & The Word of God..29 Dwelling in the Word and The Word of God 31 viii

9 Theological Rationale 3: Spiritual Formation and The People of God.32 Dwelling in the Word and The People of God..35 Dwelling in the Word and Intergenerational Faith Formation...36 Conclusion.38 IV. METHODOLOGY..39 Introduction 39 Format of the Project Intervention.39 Description of the Participants...41 An Intergenerational Caveat..43 Description of the Project Sessions Evaluation Methodology 47 Angle 1: The Researcher 48 Angle 2: The Participants...50 Angle 3: The Independent Expert..53 Conclusion.53 V. FINDINGS AND RESULTS Introduction...54 Evaluation of Findings...55 Researcher Angle: Field Notes..55 An Intergenerational Environment 56 Affirming the Value of Intergenerational Experiences..58 The Formative Impact of Intergenerational Experiences...59 Unique Opportunities for Relationship with the Intergenerational Experience.61 ix

10 Scripture and the Intergenerational Dynamic 63 An Intergenerational Challenge.64 Insider Angle: Questionnaires and Focus Group Interview...65 Impact Through Scripture: Intergenerational Conversation and the Bible 66 Impact on Generational Views: Changed Perceptions and New Appreciations 67 Impact on Spiritual Formation: The Individual.69 Impact on Spiritual Formation: The Community...73 Closing Caveat...75 Outsider Angle: Independent Expert.78 Interpretation of Findings..79 Conclusion.81 VI. CONCLUSIONS AND IMPLICATIONS.. 82 Introduction 82 Trustworthiness..82 Applicability and Generalizability.82 Dependability and Credibility 83 Reflexivity..84 Significance and Implications Sustainability.86 Research Significance 87 Personal Significance.90 Ecclesial Significance 92 x

11 Pastoral and Theological Implications..94 Questions for Future Research..96 A Concluding Reflection..99 VII. BIBLIOGRAPHY 100 VIII. APPENDICES 105 xi

12 CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION This project aims to address a need at the College Hills Church of Christ for more intergenerational Christian spiritual formation opportunities. 1 The church currently models a vision of formation implemented primarily through age-based cohorts. The result is a kind of formation inadequate in helping to facilitate robust development into the image of Christ. Therefore, this project desired to create an experience where multiple age groups could interact in a spiritually formative way. Specifically, this project created an experience of reading Scripture through the practice of Dwelling in the Word 2 in an intergenerational environment. Chapter 1 will give a general introduction to the project by placing the ministry problem in context and stating the purpose. The chapter will also provide basic assumptions, definitions, and delimitations that shaped the project. Chapter 2 will place the problem in research context through a literature review focused on generational theory and intergenerational ministry. Chapter 3 will provide theological foundations of the project grounded in Exodus This narrative provided a paradigmatic vision of spiritual formation that also supported the practice of 1 The phrase intergenerational Christian spiritual formation is taken from the work of Holly Allen and Christine Ross. I use this phrase intentionally as a way to distinguish my particular vision of spiritual formation, which I will explain in more detail below. Hereafter I will use a variety of terms that should all be heard under the canopy of this term (e.g., formation, spiritual formation, intergenerational ministry, intergenerational formation). For more on the origin of this particular phrase see Holly Catterton Allen and Christine Lawton Ross, Intergenerational Christian Formation: Bringing the Whole Church Together in Ministry, Community and Worship (Downers Grove: IVP Academic, 2012), 17-24, Pat Taylor Ellison and Patrick Keifert, Dwelling in the Word: A Pocket Handbook (St. Paul: Church Innovations, 2011). Dwelling in the Word is a particular way of reading Scripture that gives emphasis to the whole community of readers. A more thorough description of this way of reading is provided in my methodological chapter. Through this paper I will use Dwelling as a shorthand way of referring to this spiritual practice. See also Appendix A for a summary of this reading method. 1

13 2 Dwelling in the Word. Chapter 4 will provide the methodology of the project giving attention to the participants, project sessions, and choices of data evaluation. Chapter 5 will give the results of the reading experience. Chapter 6 will give concluding reflections on the completed project. Title of the Project The title of this project is Forming the People of God: A Qualitative Study of the Formative Impact of Intergenerational Relationships Through Dwelling in the Word. The emphasis of this description intends to draw attention to the spiritual formation of those participating in the experience. Central to this view is an appreciation of the role of a community and Scripture in the process of transformation. Specifically, the title highlights the ways in which the presence of diverse generations provides unique opportunities for spiritual transformation. The Problem in Ministry Context College Hills Church of Christ is a large congregation of about nine hundred located in Lebanon, Tennessee. The church is best classified as a multigenerational church. This classification describes a congregation where multiple generations exist alongside one another in the life of the community. This multigenerational category is often held in contrast to that of intergenerational churches. This latter category is used to describe a church that intentionally cultivates meaningful interaction between generations. 3 Multigenerational environments involve casual and infrequent interaction between generations whereas intergenerational churches are those who give priority to creating experiences where genuine mutuality occurs between the 3 Ibid., Allen and Ross describe three key terms used in conversations about intergenerational ministry: Multigenerational, transgenerational, and intergenerational. Multigenerational churches will most likely provide ministries for children, youth, young adults, middle adults, and older adults while offering few opportunities for cross-generational contact. Transgenerational churches are those that indicate their awareness of many generations in the body of Christ, though they note this awareness does not necessarily mean there are intentional cross-generational experiences.

14 3 generations. 4 These churches make cross-generational experiences a defining feature within the life of their church. 5 College Hills does not have such experiences as a defining feature within the life and rhythm of the church. Two key influences support this multigenerational classification. First concerns interviews and correspondence with ministers and members at this congregation. In an interview with Carol Locke, the Children s Minister of College Hills for over thirty years, she struggled to describe regular intergenerational experiences during her tenure. She mentioned an intentional intergenerational Bible Study on Wednesday nights nearly twenty years ago that she taught with her husband. 6 She also referenced a few service opportunities that happen through a typical year in the life of the church. She even mentioned that once a year the children would be incorporated into the Sunday morning worship assembly as active participants. Other examples mentioned were peripheral and accidental. 7 They did not contain the key factor of mutuality that 4 Allan G. Harkness, Intergenerationality: Biblical and Theological Foundations, Christian Education Journal 9, no. 1 (Spring 2012): 122. This sense of mutuality is a key indicator in distinguishing intergenerational activities and communities. He states, It is more about collaborative involvement with others, rather than simply ministry to others. These threads of sharing and collaboration are essential to creating intergenerational experiences. 5 John Roberto, Our Future is Intergenerational, Christian Education Journal 9, no. 1 (Spring 2012): 105. He gives a more robust vision of an intergenerational community. He states, They make their intergenerational character a defining feature of their community life, ministries, and programming being intergenerational is a way of life. It is an integral element of their culture. It is who they are. The difference between these two types of churches is one of intentionality. An intergenerational church is one that intentionally creates regular rhythms in the life of a community that allow for cross-generational exchanges. 6 Carol Locke, interview by author, March 19, She spoke fondly of the experience, but issues of class preparation and getting pulled by other commitments prevented further, similar studies. She also indicated that the church welcomed the experience, but there was mixed reaction from the parents who had children. They indicated they wanted their own experience during the Bible class hour that was separate from their kids. 7 Ibid. For example, she referenced how during some Wednesday evening meals kids would end up sitting with older adults. She also referenced the occasional times when older adults would end up in the children s wing and would engage kids in conversation.

15 4 is essential to an intergenerational church. 8 Overall, Carol indicated a desire and willingness for more intergenerational experiences, but she noted the challenges. 9 A retired elder with whom I exchanged s echoed a similar tone. One was telling. In 40 years at College Hills, I don't know that we have really seriously tackled connecting younger and older. We tried a Wednesday night study for a month with all ages about three years ago, but it was a bit too loosely set up and may have needed intentional groupings to make it stronger. 10 This man did go on to list a couple of experiments he tried with his wife as well as a few ideas for how our church might intermingle generations. However, he indicated reservations that the eldership would fully support these ideas because they would require major Sunday morning structural changes. Both of these exchanges carried similar tones the interviewees liked the idea of intergenerational ministry and saw occasional traces of it in the life of our church, but there was no firm belief that we are an intergenerational church. The second factor in determining the classification of College Hills as a multigenerational church concerns my experiences over the last five years serving in the role of Associate Minister. In that time my experiences confirm the above noted conversations about the sporadic nature of intergenerational opportunities. 11 My hiring in order to work specifically with the young adult 8 Ibid. Many examples she gave were only one-way encounters. The child was giving a craft to an adult. An adult was giving a gift to the child. These examples lacked mutual sharing and learning from one another that is essential for a true intergenerational experience. 9 Ibid. There were two significant challenges noted. First, limited time at the church building causes us to prioritize age-based activities over intergenerational ones. Second, Lebanon is a small town with many families and often the intergenerational experiences occur within those families and not within one s church family. 10 Ken Beck, message to author, March 16, My observation is that the mission and practices of College Hills reveal a church that primarily carries out the work of Christian spiritual formation by focusing on given generational cohorts. On a given Sunday morning there is a time of worship where differing generations coexist, but there is little intentional mutual interaction. The Bible classes that follow this time of worship are largely segregated based upon age and life stage. There are occasional opportunities for intergenerational ministry in the life of the church (e.g., Wednesday Bible study or Labor Day Church), but these instances are the exception and not the rule at College Hills.

16 5 demographic at College Hills further reveals a particular multigenerational mindset predominant at our church. This age-based hire is a logical one within churches having a multigenerational mindset for spiritual formation. Over the last five years much of my work has involved the formation of this particular generational cohort. 12 Most telling of what is normative for our church is the vision we hold as a congregation. Out of the five priorities listed for our church there is not one line about meaningful interaction between generations. 13 This assessment is not meant to serve as an indictment of College Hills. Instead, this evaluation is intended to describe our current practices and priorities at this phase of our life together. We did not arrive here by accident. My contention is that College Hills adopted this multigenerational way of being for two key reasons. The first is a pragmatic issue of size. The possibility of our large church creating meaningful interaction between generations is difficult. Concerns of space, time limits in worship, and a legitimate need for peer-to-peer interaction take priority. These challenges are often found in churches of our size. 14 A second reason for our multigenerational status concerns cultural forces impacting America over the last century. 15 Influences such as the rise of individualism, focus-group marketing, and the idolization of youth impact church cultures. One tangible result of the 12 Interestingly, though, a desire for cross-generational opportunities is a priority for this age group. In recent years our young adult leadership team continues to voice a desire to interact with more groups in our church that are of a different age group. We have had some experiences outside of our generational cohort by combining Sunday morning Bible classes, but these are not a part of our regular rhythm of life as a group. This refrain serves as further indication that our congregation is primarily operating out of a multigenerational mindset 13 The only hint of cross-generational priorities concerns that of parents with children. However, this priority is still a one-way experience in which the parents give something to children. There is no language about mutuality among the generations. 14 Allen and Ross, Ibid., See Allen and Ross for a helpful survey of the various factors impacting this movement towards more multigenerational ways of being. See also Robert W. Pazmiño, Generational Fragmentations and Christians Education, Christian Education Journal 8, no. 2 (Fall 2011):

17 6 convergence of these factors is an increasing number of churches transitioning to age-specialized environments. While this strategy is developmentally appropriate in some respects, many churches do not consider the unintended result of increased generational fragmentation within their assemblies. 16 This separation is now considered the new normal in churches like College Hills instead of being acknowledged as a recent historical development. Statement of the Problem The problem this project addresses is a lack of intergenerational opportunities for Christian spiritual formation at the College Hills Church of Christ. The absence of crossgenerational encounters creates a malnourished model of formation impacting both young and old. Those younger need the content and depth of their faith to be formed by those who are older. 17 Those further along in life need opportunities to articulate their faith by sharing it with the next generation. 18 Both of these perspectives must be kept in view because they highlight an important principle of intergenerational ministry: all generations have something to offer, and conversely, every generation has something to lose when they are separated from one another. 16 Darwin Glassford and Lynn Barger-Elliot, Toward Intergenerational Ministry in a Post-Christian Era, Christian Education Journal 8, no. 2 (Fall 2011): 368. They state, By building a ministry based upon age-specific developmental needs and emphasizing the uniqueness of the present generation, we have isolated the generations within our churches from each other and from the wisdom of those who have gone before them. In efforts to target individual needs and to market those ministries towards the church consumer, our churches are now finding themselves with multiple silos of ministry that are generationally fragmented and disconnected from the church family. The lack of community, which can be observed in our neighborhoods, has now imported itself into the church walls. See also Pazmiño, Generational, Kendra Creasy Dean, Almost Christian: What the Faith of Our Teenagers is Telling the American Church (Oxford: University, 2010). 18 Glassford and Barger-Elliot, Intergenerational, 375. Glassford and Barger-Elliot are helpful in further clarifying the benefit to adults. They state, The benefits may include increased clarity about what they believe and value, an enhanced ability to articulate what they believe and values, and a renewed interest in critically examining their own beliefs and the beliefs of others. There is also the experience of joy that comes from passing down something that is meaningful and vital in their lives.

18 7 College Hills needs to keep these perspectives in mind as they assess their multigenerational status. If there is any hope to help our church incorporate an intergenerational rhythm within her life then understanding the variety within each of these generations is essential. Yes, there are times and places where it is developmentally appropriate for separation of groups within a church. However, there is a need for balance. 19 Leaders need to find ways where these two approaches can complement each other and not compete. 20 A church that never prioritizes regular, meaningful interaction between generations misses out on opportunities for unique transformation. They also miss out on the opportunity to create faithful expressions of the gospel through meaningful interaction of diverse generational cultures within their church. Statement of the Purpose The purpose of this project is to conduct a phenomenological study exploring the formative impact of reading Scripture in an intergenerational environment. Specifically, I want to create a space where multiple generational cohorts can read Scripture together in a way that attends to God and each other. 21 Such an experience is contextually appropriate due to the high view of Scripture within Church of Christ heritage. Moreover, and central to my theological assumptions, I believe among the best practices that make Christian spiritual formation distinctively Christian are those that keep Scripture central. Implementing a practice that holds Scripture in high regard increases the likelihood of retaining a particular Christian dimension to 19 Harkness, Intergenerationality, Allan G. Harkness, Intergenerational and Homogeneous-Age Education: Mutually Exclusive Strategies for Faith Communities? Religious Education 95, no. 1 (Winter 2000): This attention to the other is of particular importance for my project. Too many practices of reading Scripture keep focus on the individual and their personal relationship with God (e.g., Lectio Divina). While that dimension of formation matters for the Christian journey there is still a need for communal formation. Finding a reading approach with this communal emphasis is crucial for creating a genuine intergenerational experience.

19 8 this experience. Therefore, a Scripture reading practice both serves the context of College Hills as well as my particular view of Christian spiritual formation. In order to accomplish this purpose I carried out the following project. Over a two-month period I met with two small reading groups of twelve and fourteen people. They represented five generational units within the life of College Hills. 22 We spent about an hour each week reading Scripture together through the practice of Dwelling in the Word. In order to assess the experience of the participants two surveys were offered and the project culminated with a focus group interview. The hope of the project was to explore the potential of intergenerational ministry and create a larger appetite for more of these experiences at College Hills. Basic Assumptions This project is built upon the following assumptions. Intergenerational spiritual formation is a kind of spiritual formation. There are other ways in which to facilitate spiritual growth (e.g., age-focused formation). Nevertheless, intergenerational formation provides unique, spiritually formative qualities. Generational cohorts have porous boundaries. The age-divisions used in this project are one way to divide generations, but they are not the only way. The cohort breakdowns named below were a helpful way to bring some organization to the various ages within a congregation. College Hills is a multigenerational church and not an intentionally intergenerational one. This labeling is merely descriptive and is not intended to value or devalue this congregation. We function according to a model that is typical of churches this size. 22 John H. Westerhoff III, Will Our Children Have Faith? (New York: Seabury, 1976), 53. Westerhoff argues that the presence of three generations is necessary for true community within the gathering of faith. His recommendation influences my choice for the presence of at least three generations in the reading group.

20 9 Scripture is a key resource for distinctly Christian spiritual formation. Usage of this resource increases the likelihood of keeping this experience distinctively Christian. Definitions This project is built upon the following definitions. Multigenerational: consisting of more than one generation. Multigenerational Church: a community containing more than one generation who exist alongside one another in casual and haphazard ways. Intergenerational Church: a community containing more than one generation who intentionally interact in meaningful ways of mutuality and sharing. Generational Cohort: a demographic covering a period of about twenty years that share some common values and characteristics due to unique life experiences and dominant cultural values of their time period. GI Generation: the generational cohort born between Silent Generation: the generational cohort born between Boomer Generation: the generational cohort born between Generation X: the generational cohort born between Millennial Generation: the generational cohort born between Generation Z: the generational cohort born between 2004-present. Dwelling in the Word: a particular way of reading Scripture together in community. Christian spiritual formation: a particular kind of spiritual formation that aims towards transformation into the image of Christ by the power of God through the Holy Spirit. Christian spiritual discipline: a particular kind of spiritual discipline that aims towards transformation into the image of Christ.

21 10 Intergenerativity: an emerging term reflecting the quality of cross-generational interaction and mutuality. Delimitations This project is limited to two intergenerational reading groups and will focus on phenomenon occurring within them. Developing a broader theory for intergenerational spiritual formation is beyond the scope of my project. This project utilizes Dwelling in the Word as a way of reading Scripture together. There are other possible reading practices, but this discipline serves as an ideal method for cross-generational expression due to its emphasis on mutuality and community. The focus of evaluation gives priority to intergenerational dynamics within the groups. Other dimensions of the experience that are described are beyond the scope of this project. Conclusion College Hills operates with a model of spiritual formation that is typical for a church of her size. Large churches often give priority to age-based formation due to pragmatic concerns. This priority is developmentally appropriate. There needs to be times for people of a similar age to interact in meaningful ways with one another. However, there also needs to be opportunities for meaningful interaction between diverse generations. These experiences hold unique formative potential for everyone involved. This project seeks to explore one expression of this kind of formation in order to discern the qualitative benefits of intergenerational Christian spiritual formation.

22 CHAPTER 2 LITERATURE REVIEW AND THE PROBLEM IN RESEARCH CONTEXT Introduction The age-based model of formation at College Hills reflects a problem facing other churches similar to her size. Meaningful interaction between generations is not happening unless a church decides to make this interaction a priority. For many churches this choice is intentional. They place other concerns over cross-generational expressions. For others, though, the absence is not intentional. Many are not aware of the formative possibilities found in this model of spiritual formation. They do not know a conversation about generational interaction is underway among church leaders. In this chapter I will explore the contours of that conversation through a literature review of two fields. First, generational theory is the foundation upon which intergenerational ministry stands. Any account of cross-generational formation must recognize the influence of this social theory. In that brief review I will point to influencers of the theory whose work most impacts intergenerational conversations. I will also give their insights concerning differences between generational units. Following that review I will focus greater attention on the emerging field of intergenerational ministry. I will explore the development of this arena of research over the last few decades. To conclude I will demonstrate the need for my project within this larger field. Generational Theory Literature Review Generational theory is a way of describing differences between age groups born into specific historical contexts. The seminal work of Karl Mannheim is credited as an early catalyst to this field of study. The Sociological Problem of Generations became his initial attempt to describe an overarching framework within which to understand generations from a sociological 11

23 12 perspective. 23 His work acknowledges unique perspectives are contained within a group based upon things like year of birth and the historical location of existence. 24 He admits great complexity is still contained within generational groups. 25 Nevertheless, his work is a significant starting point for conversations about diversity among generational cohorts. Building upon this work is William Strauss and Neil Howe s Generations: The History of America s Future, 1584 to Their influential text furthers the work of Mannheim by identifying the presence of diverse generations in America. They breakdown generational cohorts as follows: the GI Generation ( ), the Silent Generation ( ), the Boomer Generation ( ), Generation X ( ), the Millennial Generation ( ), and the generation born after 2004 who are still developing a name and characteristics. 27 They also attempt to give these cohorts characteristics and identifiable cycles, which they divide into four broad categories. Their primary thesis is that each generation follows a somewhat predictable cycle of traits and trends. While the predictability of these cycles in America can be debated, Strauss and Howe s publication raised new questions for church leaders concerning the presence of multiple generations within local communities of faith. How do diverse generational cohorts impact a given faith community? Over the last few decades, faith leaders attempted to answer this 23 Karl Mannheim, The Problem of Generations, in Essays on the Sociology of Knowledge by Karl Mannheim, ed. P. Kecskemeti (New York: Routledge & Kegan Paul, 1952), Ibid.,167, For example, Mannheim argues that no generation stands in isolation. Rather, there is constant interaction between generations. Each generation is continually discovering itself through conversation with the past and future. 26 William Strauss and Neil Howe, Generations: The History of America s Future, 1584 to 2069 (New York: Quill, 1991). 27 Ibid., 36. For the purposes of this project I will use their template for generational boundaries. In addition, for the sake of a naming label, I will call the most current generation Generation Z.

24 13 question building upon the insights of these generational theorists. 28 They acknowledge these categories and descriptions of age groups contain porous boundaries. 29 Nevertheless, their work helps to name the age diversity present within a congregation. The following is a brief sketch of the insights generational theory provides to each generation. Also highlighted are insights of church leaders regarding the ways in which cohorts differ in matters of faith. The GI Generation ( ) is a fading generation in America. This cohort, sometimes labeled The Greatest Generation, lived through seminal events of the twentieth century including both World Wars and the Great Depression. World War II is noted as an especially formative event in the life of this generation. 30 Such events produced values like an ethic of hard work, patriotism, a sense of social responsibility, and a high view of family and marriage. 31 Others note the frugality, loyalty, self-discipline, and sacrifice of this cohort. 32 Their spirituality is often private, conservative, and embedded in a modern worldview. Commitment to church reflects their larger commitment to institutions. Faith values like church membership, 28 For helpful survey of the last three decades see Allen and Ross. See also Jonathan Camp, Bridging the Generation Gap at the Church of Christ at White Station (DMin Thesis, Abilene Christian University, 2007); Jackson W. Carroll and Wade Clark Roof, Bridging Divided Worlds: Generational Cultures in Congregations (San Francisco: Josey-Bass, 2002); Terry Dittmer, Ministry Among the Generations: Challenges and Opportunities, Issues in Christian Education 41, no.2 (Fall 2007): 10-13; Carl G. Eeman, Generations of Faith: A Congregational Atlas (Herndon, VA: The Alban Institute, 2002); James L. Knapp, Understanding the Generations (San Diego: Aventine, 2005); James V. Gambone, All Are Welcome: A Primer for Intentional Intergenerational Ministry and Dialogue (Crystal Bay: Elder Eye Press, 2015); Gary L. McIntosh, One Church, Four Generations: Understanding and Reaching All Ages in Your Church (Grand Rapids: Baker, 2002); Peter Menconi, The Intergenerational Church: Understanding Congregations from WWII to (Littleton: Mt. Sage, 2010); Gil Rendle, Multigenerational Congregations: Meeting the Leadership Challenge (Herndon, VA: The Alban Institute, 2001). 29 Menconi, xvi. For example, Menconi uses the term cuspers when talking about generational differences in a church. A cusper is an individual who finds him or herself on the edge of a given generational divide and shares traits with the next closest generation. This term is a helpful way to acknowledge that any breakdown of a congregation into categories must be done with humility and respect for the diversity of individuals. 30 Ibid., Ibid., McIntosh, 37-42

25 14 predictable worship, and foreign missions often fuel the zeal of this generation. 33 Some have also noted their enjoyment of Bible study, dutiful faith, and worshiping in a spirit of reverence. 34 The Silent generation ( ) also known as an adaptive 35 generation is often called such because of their location between the greatness of the previous generation and the boom of the succeeding generation. Some of their primary generational values include adaptability, low risk-taking, peacemaking, and loyalty. 36 Their spirituality reflects the traditional, private, and church-commitment values of the GI Generation. 37 However, this cohort is also known for their willingness to help through both active volunteerism and through the wealth they have built over long, faithful careers. In addition, they place a high value on impacting the faith of their grandchildren. 38 The Boomer generation ( ) also known as an idealist 39 generation are largely the children of the men and women who returned home from World War II ready to begin families and start a new life. As these children grew up in the 1950s and 1960s, they formed a cohort who experienced events ranging from the assassination of John F. Kennedy to the Civil Rights movement to Woodstock. 40 The values of this generation include a desire to 33 Menconi, McIntosh, Strauss and Howe, Menconi, McIntosh, 27-29, McIntosh includes the GI Generation and Silent generations under a larger category he calls the Builder wave. He sees the 1920s, 30s, and 40s all shaping these two groups in very similar ways including religious characteristics. 38 Menconi, Strauss and Howe, McIntosh, In fact, this great range of events cause some to classify a sub-generation within this Boomer Generation. Often called Generation Jones this group is typically placed within 1954/5-1964/5. Gary McIntosh notes of this latter Boomer generation that the national energy crisis and the resignation of President

26 15 change the world, a competitive spirit, customization of products, and lifelong learning. 41 They are an independent group who rally behind causes, prioritize health, and often question authority. 42 The religious commitments of this generation are quite different from the previous two generations. Some of the more noteworthy differences include a greater diversity of religious belief and a greater tendency to approach church as a consumer. 43 The desire for community and a more experiential faith are also indicative of this group. 44 Generation X ( ) also known as a reactive 45 generation is a group impacted by events such as the Roe vs. Wade trial, the Iran hostage crisis, AIDS awareness, and the Challenger explosion. One of the most formative life events for this group concerns the dramatic increase in divorce rates and the redefinition of family. 46 Such redefinition is a crucial factor in producing values like a desire for real community, new attitudes on family and marriage, greater openness to diversity, and suspicion of authority. 47 Some also note feelings of neglect, postponement of marriage, and a desire for freedom from many of the values that defined Boomers before them. 48 In regard to faith, some of the dominant trends in this generation are: lack of institutional church commitment, aversion to absolute truth, openness to mystery and Nixon were two key, formative events for this group. The earlier half of the generation, he believes, was more greatly shaped by the activism and optimism of the 1960s. Another dividing factors that some note concerns the advent of the television in most homes in Menconi, McIntosh, Menconi, McIntosh, Strauss and Howe, Menconi, Ibid., McIntosh, 157.

27 16 diversity, and a desire for a participatory religion. 49 Others note a push toward local causes, desire for options, family commitment, and a needs-based faith. 50 The Millennial generation ( ) also known as a civic 51 generation receives their name due to their entrance into a new millennium during some of their most formative years. On the way into this new era they experienced such shifts as the pervasive dominance of technology, the emergence of globalization, and new realities like the war on terror. However, other factors in their worldview include an acceptance of paradox, high tolerance for diversity, and valuing of pragmatism. 52 Others include values like being tech savvy, interactive, and simultaneously connected yet fragmented. 53 The religious views of this generation have developed in an increasingly post-christian world. This reality gives shape to a greater acceptance of pluralism and significant reshaping of morality. 54 Others have noted the desire for interactive faith, real relationships, and authenticity. 55 Many studies are emerging in an effort to better understand this specific cohort. One of the more popular studies in recent years 56 takes an 49 Menconi, McIntosh, Strauss and Howe, McIntosh, Ibid., Menconi, McIntosh, Dean, 14. Dean calls this theological construct Moral Therapeutic Deism. The summary of this theology is as follow: A creator God exists. This God wants people to be good and nice to each other. The goal of life is to be happy. God is involved when I have a problem, but not any other time. Good people go to heaven when they die. Dean questions whether or not this theological construct of the next generation could really be considered orthodox within most Christian circles.

28 17 in-depth look at the content of the Christian faith emerging in this group and questions to what extent this generation s faith deserves to be called Christian. 57 Intergenerational Christian Spiritual Formation Literature Review Connected to generational theory literature is the topic of intergenerational Christian spiritual formation. 58 This term is a more recent expression that emerges out of a decades-old conversation about the importance of intergenerativity within congregational life. 59 The source considered as the foundation of this field is James White s Intergenerational Religious Education. 60 His book is one of the earliest attempts to propose an actual model of church that emphasizes intergenerational learning. In his work he draws upon theological resources, social scientists, developmental theory, and religious educators to make a case for the effectiveness of intergenerational ways of being within faith communities The subsequent generation is the young men and women born after They are still a becoming generation; therefore thorough assessments of their traits and characteristics are pending. According the work of Strauss and Howe the generational cohorts follow a four-year cycle. Therefore, they would contend that the traits of the Silent (adaptive) generation would likely describe what this next generation will look like. 58 I intentionally use this expression for two reasons. First, I believe that the language of spiritual formation retains a more holistic vision of the process of becoming as a person of faith. This stands in contrast to a term like intergenerational education, which can too easily be construed as an intellectual focused enterprise. Second, I use the term Christian as a means to keep the particularity of focus of the transformation. This prevents a generic kind of transformation and keeps the focus on transformation into the image of Jesus. I will use the shorthand of ICSF in this review to indicate intergenerational Christian spiritual formation. 59 For a list of the publications and major works that contributed to this emerging field in the latter half of the 20 th century see Allan G. Harkness, Intergenerational Education for and Intergenerational Church? Religious Education 93, no. 4 (Fall 1998): His article title and survey reveals that the dominant terminology describing this field was primarily in terms of education. Over the last decade, however, the language of spiritual formation has emerged within intergenerational conversations. I prefer this formative terminology due to the way in which such language retains a more holistic vision of the process of becoming as a person of faith. For a description of the emergence and evolution of this terminology with the field of intergenerational ministry over the last thirty years see Allen and Ross, James W. White, Intergenerational Religious Education: Models, Theory, and Prescription for Interage Life and Learning in the Faith Community (Birmingham: Religious Education Press, 1988). 61 He makes clear in his work that he is not the first to argue for an intergenerational model of ministry. However, his work is a holistic attempt to bring together diverse resources into both a compelling justification and

29 18 White s book served as a foundation point for nearly a decade when new voices emerged with similar intergenerational intentions. 62 These voices arise from a variety of Christian perspectives (e.g. Reformed, Catholic, and Lutheran). 63 They also address various aspects of the formation process (e.g., worship, dialogue, and catechesis). Still, their unity is held together by a two key traits. First is a concern that the work of formation through age-based cohorts contains downsides and unintended consequences to the work of formation. Second is the conviction that intergenerational ministry offers unique benefits to the individual and communal faith journey. 64 This conviction about intergenerational ministry is shared for a number of reasons. Some writers and pastors point to popular wisdom of why intergenerational ministry will enhance the life of a local church 65 and the broader world. 66 Some make the case based upon particular theological rationales. 67 Others make a case for intentional cross-generational experiences based proposal for a community of faith. For this reason he is an ideal starting place in a conversation about intergenerational ministry. 62 For a helpful survey of some of the influential writing on intergenerational ministry in the 21 st century see Faye E. Chechowich, Intergenerational Ministry: A Review of Selected Publications since 2001, Christian Education Journal 9, no. 1 (Spring 2012): For a Catholic perspective see Mariette Martineau, Joan Weber, and Leif Kehrwalkd, Intergenerational Faith Formation: All Ages Learning Together (New London: Twenty-Third, 2008). For a Lutheran perspective see Gambone, Welcome. For a Reformed perspective see Howard Vanderwell, ed., The Church of All Ages: Generations Worshipping Together (Herndon: Alban, 2008). 64 For a survey of some of the benefits of intergenerational ministry see Allen and Ross, See also Roberto, Future, 106-7, Menconi, Harkness, Intergenerational Education, For some theological rationales for this form of ministry see Allen & Ross, See also Harkness, Intergenerational Education, ; Harkness, Intergenerationality, ; Michael Middendorf, What Unites the Generations: Biblical Perspectives, Issues in Christian Education 41, no. 2 (Fall 2007): 16-23; Pazmiño, Generational, ; Howard Vanderwell, Biblical Values to Shape the Congregation, in The Church of All Ages: Generations Worshipping Together, ed. Howard Vanderwell (Herdon: Alban, 2008),