As I See It

by Fr. Vin

Where We Go from Here – IV

People who study these things talk about two kinds of challenges.  Technical challenges are a matter of doing what the experts can tell us works.  The problem is well-defined, the solution is clear, and making things better is a matter of doing things (however hard) under the guidance of the experts.  Think of going to the doctor to have a broken bone set.

The other kind is adaptive challenge.  Here the problem may not be clear at the outset, there may be no known “best way” to deal with the problematic situation, and any “experts” are at best coaches – one has to do most of the work of meeting the challenge oneself.  Think of trying to lose weight.

Churches face these two kinds of challenges in trying to fulfill our mission from Christ.  For example: People have to be able to hear the Word of God in the church.  So we turn to the experts for advice on what sort of microphones, speakers, and the rest go into making up a suitable amplification system for people’s voices.  There are experts, and they do the work of designing and installing the system.  Then tell us how to use it properly.  If we follow their advice, we’ll get the results we want.  Having people hear the Word of God in this sense is a technical challenge.

But what about having people hear the Word of God not just with their ears, but with their hearts and souls?  What about having people who aren’t in the church building hear the Word of God?  What about having, for example, young people (especially ages about 13 through 30) hear the Word of God in a way that makes sense to them so that they respond to it?  This isn’t a technical challenge: there aren’t any experts, and if there were a guaranteed way to do this well, every church in creation would be doing it.  But even the churches that put the most resources into youth ministry have only meager success.  I saw a study recently that claimed that youth leaders in evangelical churches – ones complete with elaborate youth ministries – anticipated that their “success rate” (which they defined as young people in their programs being committed evangelical Christian believers at age 35 or so) would be – about 3%.  Handing on the faith to the upcoming generation in our new cultural situation is an adaptive challenge in spades.

If that three percent figure is surprising, it may be because we too often confuse activities and outcomes with impacts.  We adults sometimes see or hear of churches that have “a lot going on for youth.”  That’s no bad thing in itself, but it describes only activities which may or may not have any good consequences.  Or we may be satisfied when we see hundreds of people receive a sacrament like Confirmation after a good preparation process.  That’s an outcome, and again it may be no bad thing.  But what difference does it make in the lives of the young people? (An informal survey in our own parish a few years ago showed that the percentage of the recently-confirmed who attended Mass on a given Sunday was – interestingly – 3%.)  Activities and outcomes are only useful if they have the impacts – the long-range results – we want.  Otherwise they’re a waste of time and energy and money.

There’s some good research on what creates desirable impacts for churches in our present situation.  It points to one key factor that is within the power of congregations to affect: member engagement.  (Churches often grow or decline based on factors out of their control, such as demographic or economic or cultural shifts.  It’s useless and frustrating to try to affect the results of those; that’s why it’s so important to focus on what we can control and what holds out the promise of having the impact we want.)  That one thing we can affect, in three words, is deepening member engagement.  That’s why it’s important to get expectations clear – having clear expectations deepens engagement.  We’ll let you know the results of this week’s survey after the summer, and I’ll have more to say about priorities and expectations and engagement then.