I know, I know...

... I promised to update earlier.  Time just sort of slipped by too fast.  What with the craziness of Senior year and all I suspect you all will forgive me just this once.

I don't have a lot to say just a quick observation.  I stayed home from school today, because I was/am sick with some sort of fever-virus thing. The beauty of the Internet though, is that my virus is incommunicable!  Anyway. Back to my quick observation.

In my indisposed state I was browsing around the umc.org website, and noticed the 'State of the United Methodist Church survey (Connectional Table)' link at the bottom of the page.  I thought, "cool."  "I bet they'll gather some interesting data."

I decided to help them out and take the survey.

Like one might expect, there were the general questions like, "How would you describe yourself, your stand on the official Social Principles, etc."  About half way through the survey, the questions turned to, "How important is it to you and your church to attract youth and young adults, what would you be willing to change to get them involved, etc."  Some of the question's wording bothered me. It didn't bother me too terribly badly.  But, it bothered me.

Here's the kicker, though.  At the very end of the survey the question "What age group do you fall into?"  was posed. The age group options only began at 18.   So, apparently while I am being discussed in this  survey I am not included in participating.  And I thought I was a member of the UMC?  Wasn't I confirmed as a "full and responsible member of Christ's Holy church"?  Didn't I pledge to "be loyal to the United Methodist Church..."?

Those of us who are members of the UMC and under the age of 18 aren't included in our denomination's survey to gather 'State of the church' statistics.  And folks wonder why we young people aren't "present" ...  I think this sort of illustrates a larger point:  Young people won't (always) be involved in the church if there isn't a place for them.  They'll find that place somewhere else.

Now.  Don't even get me started on the much larger conundrum of how the Candidacy process does young people no favors...

Comments

[David]

Amen!

[Chris]

Have you taken the opportunity to let the UMC know your thoughts on this?

[natalie]

Chris -- I'm in the process (I asked our Conference office) of getting contact info/ an email address for the general Connectional Table...

[beth]

Natalie - That's hilarious (and sad) isn't it? that they don't even have your age category as an option?
I took the survey too - I thought the questions were pretty unhelpful and off-topic if they really want to figure out the state of the church. I didn't see how what they were asking would help them figure out for real how the church is doing. I wondered how they decided on the questions.
I do hope you get a response from them.

[gavin]

the irony of it all is that an online test should be directed by the youth and young adult demographic... honestly, how many 80 year olds are taking online surveys?

[Melissa]

I haven't checked out the survey, but it seems like this is indicative of the general attitude the UMC has toward youth (and to some extent, young adults as well). They look nice in our churches, but can't contribute to the life of the larger church. I can remember being on AC committees as a youth-type, and I wasn't taken seriously because of my age. (And transportation was a problem...hrm, this might be a post for later for me...).

The thing I find slightly entertaining (and annoying) is the fact that the UMC hosts the exploration event for high school/college age youth and yet, as you mention, the process is so cumbersome and very anti-first-career pastors/youth.

[Laura]

I just took this survey, and they have corrected the error - there is now a spot for the 12-17 age demographic.

[natalie]

Thanks for the update -- I had noticed that they changed it while reading a comment left in Beth Quick's blog. Not that I'm trying to be overboard or anything, but 12-17 still isn't correct. Many people are confirmed as 11 year olds. I was one of them...

[DogBlogger]

You've gotten the attention of some Connectional Table members, Natalie (no, I'm not one, I just know one). I'm glad you've shared your observations!