We are eagerly anticipating the re-opening of our building on Sunday. Much work has been done and we are looking forward to meeting in a building that is more accessible and open to the community around us. There are various things I would love local people to be able to see. But one of the things that I hope will be visible is that this is a church where different generations come together and are united- perhaps in a way that is unusual in our society.

In Ephesians 3 Paul talks about how the union between the Jews and the Gentiles in the church shows the “manifold wisdom of God.” The same is true when different social classes or ethnic groups come together as one people under Christ. And I think you could say that the same is true when people of different generations are united. To use another biblical image, people of a variety of ages having loving relationships really does show the church to be family.

A while ago I read this article from David Green (formerly of Woody Road)- Generational Differences in Church. It is a wide ranging article reflecting on the various cultural changes that have happened in this country over the last half century, meaning that a church that seeks to include within it a variety of generations will have a mingling of different cultures. Sometimes that can produce tension and David seeks to plot some potential ways through this. Essentially, David warns against seeing one culture as superior to others.

I’m not proposing to review the article particularly but, rather, to make some application to our situation at Woody Road. For those who read both pieces, my debt to David will be obvious. I am not writing this because I am aware of particular problems. Indeed, when I speak about the church, the generational diversity of the church is something I tend to celebrate. Although I am about to leave it to start our group thinking about reaching into Kidlington, I have loved being part of a homegroup that is mainly young but is hosted by John and Kath Callow- a retired missionary couple now in their eighties. So, for us, this post is more about preventing a problem from growing and enabling good things to continue than solving an existing difficulty. It might also be worth saying that I am about to generalise like mad and that, in truth, not everybody fits their generational stereotype- we have lots of young hearted older people amongst us and some younger people who would probably have enjoyed being Victorians…

Let me make five points…

1. We need to remember that we bring our culture with us.

It is very easy for us to bring to the church a sense of “Well, obviously it should be done like this.” We simply sense that something must be right. Various things will influence us in this regard- it may well be the values of our generation, it could be linked to our temperament or personality or often we simply accept the cultural values of the church in which we were converted or had our most significant period of Christian growth. None of us can escape this and we each need to recognise that this has a major impact on how we feel about various things. It is true for young and old alike. When we are tempted to get into generational clashes, we need to ask the question “Am I really arguing from biblical conviction or simply a desire to cherish my culture?”

2. We need to learn to critique our own generation’s culture

In his article, David lists a variety of differences between a pre-1960s culture and a post-1960s culture. He notes that each has its own strengths and weaknesses. I appreciate the point that he makes that we need to be careful not simply to talk about a decline in standards in the modern generation. Whilst we would be right to regret the movement in sexual morality away from biblical norms, we should rejoice that, for instance, racism is no longer regarded as acceptable (and certainly should not write this off as political correctness.) Of course it is sad that the argument against racism is not framed in the biblical idea that we are all equally made in the image of God- but nevertheless we should be glad of its decline if not yet its complete demise.

But let me return to the idea of the strengths and weaknesses of each culture and illustrate with a couple of examples. David notes the relative formality of an older generation and the informality of a younger generation. I suppose I would confess to being young in this area- I don’t particularly like formality. And I think that there are dangers with it- the church is to be a family (which I think should warn against too much formality in our relationships) and is to be marked by joy that at some level should be visible. Nevertheless I was struck recently by a comment from another youngish pastor who noted that it can sometimes be hard to be informal and convey the sense that we are serious about God. There are potential pitfalls on either side of that debate and it would be good to recognise that.

Or let me mention another one that I have observed where there is often a generational split. Privacy is something that is highly valued within English culture generally and, I suspect, particularly, amongst an older generation. Can I be candid? I think there are spiritual dangers attached to it and I would regard it as far from a biblical virtue. After all, we are to bear one another’s burdens and even to confess our sins to one another- rather than being isolated in our problems or sins. But there are other dangers for the younger generation- namely those of exhibitionism. As we update our statuses on Facebook, compose our latest tweet or write our latest blog (?!) there is the danger that we have a self-centred approach to the world and end up more interested in our own thoughts than those of others.

However, rather than spot the problem with another age group each generation needs to be aware of its own potential weaknesses.

3. We need to see the strengths of another generation’s culture

The temptation will always be to see the problems. The young will dismiss the old as being traditional and out of touch whilst the old may critique the young as frivolous and superficial. This is too easy. Again, let me give you a couple of examples. I was encouraged when an older pastor said to me recently that he thought my generation was better at forming open friendships that were better at being intentional in helping each other to combat patterns of sin and spurring each other on to live for Christ. But I have to say that I think my generation has a lot to learn about perseverance from an older generation. I think we are tempted to expect everything to be superficially enjoyable and need to learn from those who have gone before what it means to keep going through tough times without lots of complaining but with a steadfast trust in the Lord.

4. We need to talk to each other

Different generations need to learn from each other- because each will bring its own cultural strengths and weaknesses. In particular, I think we would want to say that the younger generation needs to learn from the one that has gone before. (Just in passing I would notice the cultural trend for our political leaders to get younger- I am not sure this is a good thing…). That can only happen when different generations talk to each other. It is why I am cautious about too many age specific groups within church life and would point blank refuse to run a group for people in their twenties which replaced multi-generational homegroups. But homegroups can only go so far. Can I encourage us to practise (or, as is mostly the case, keep practising) hospitality outside our own generational group? And speak to people with the desire to learn from them.

5. Churches will need to change- cautiously…

Much of David’s article goes on to discuss issues in church life such as music, versions of the Bible used and so on. After all that is where generational differences can often be seen most clearly. When it comes to these issues, I would be keen for us to see that much of our viewpoint comes from our culture rather than biblical conviction and then apply the critique and appreciation method mentioned above.

I want to say that I agree with David’s statement completely- “A church must not reflect the culture of any one generation if it is to reach all.” Now, at one level there is a different discussion to be had as to the role of culture in reaching people and whether it is possible to reach several different cultural groups at the same time. Nevertheless I do want the church to be made up of different generations and that means that it must not slavishly follow any one culture.

That means that churches do need to change over time. I do think it is unhelpful, for instance, for churches to enshrine in stone a pre-1960s musical tradition, expectations about dress and so on. Frankly that would communicate a message that the younger generation were not welcome. In my 14 years here at the church I have seen us change a lot in that regard- and I am convinced that has been right. Being a member of the younger generation, I have seen changes that have made me feel more at home- and I am aware there has probably been something of a cost to the older generation. The challenge for me is that if I am still a pastor in twenty years time I need to be making changes that will probably be uncomfortable for me. This ongoing change is essential if the church is not to become linked to one generation alone.

But that change must be cautious- in two ways. As I say above, the church must not appeal to one generation alone. So whilst a younger generation must be included, the church cannot appeal to that generation alone. As a youngish pastor, I’ve deliberately held back from changes that might have appealed to me personally. It means that whilst an older generation may find some changes hard, the younger generation will probably find the pace of change too slow. All of that is probably an indication of health- if one generation is completely happy it probably indicates that another is being excluded.

Secondly, changes need to be done helpfully. I read one review of David’s article that criticised it because it opened the door to modern music which inevitably meant poor lyrics, musical showmanship, the congregation being drowned out and so on. I want to say that would be to introduce change badly. You don’t introduce rubbish because a younger generation might like it. Rather you change things in a way that is biblically helpful. On the music front, that would mean looking for modern music with helpful lyrics (as well as holding on to older hymns), seek musicians with servant hearts, ensure they act to support rather than dominate a congregation and retain a variety of styles that appeal to a variety of age groups.

Above all though what is required is love and a desire that the church display the wisdom of God rather than appeal to my cultural preferences. It is no surprise that Paul follows his description of the church’s purpose in Ephesians 3 with the call in Ephesians 4 to be “completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love.” If we follow that command we will continue to be a church made up of different generations displaying the wisdom of God.