Second generation strategies that don’t work
You may have heard the term ‘first-generation ministry’ and ‘second-generation ministry’. These terms are used to describe what migrant churches are like. First-generation ministries are those that encompass those who grew up overseas and migrated to their host country. And second-generation ministries are those that encompass the children of those migrants (and often those who were mostly raised in the host country).
And so English ministry in Chinese churches (in places like Australia, the United States and the United Kingdom) have historically been second-generation ministries.
And very significant for the development of second-generation ministries is the nature of its relationship to first-generation ministries.
While we like to do second-generation ministry, the reality is that the wider environment in which ministry is done can have an effect on ministry. The expectations and decisions of leaders of other congregations, the comments and actions of parents in other congregations, can all have a significant impact.
Sometimes it has a positive impact: such as funding and providing resources for a ministry that will not be self-supporting for many years. But it can also have a negative impact: unreasonable demands and constraints, leading to frustration and burnout in second-generation leaders.
Over the years different second-generation ministry leaders that we have known have tried different approaches towards the leaders and gatekeepers of first-generation congregations. Here are five of them:
| Stay and submit | do second gen ministry the way first gen leaders want it done | fails to understand second gen culture, fails to reach and minister to them |
| Communicate | second gen leaders hinting to first gen leaders that theirs is not the right way to do second gen ministry | falls on deaf ears, not taken seriously |
| Fight for change | get labelled as trouble makers for disrupting ‘harmony’ | suggestions deliberately ignored, people blacklisted as punishment |
| Leave for another church | get dismissed as disloyal | nothing changes |
| Buffer | second gen pastor bears the brunt of criticism and opposition from first gen leaders and congregation | second gen pastor burns out from lack of support |
You can see that some approaches may have the appearance that all is well – because conflicts may be minimised (eg. in ‘stay and submit’). Or they push the point of conflict to where it is not so noticeable (eg. ‘buffer’).
Other approaches embrace conflict (eg. ‘fight for change’, or ‘leave for another church’), but for this very reason fails to build bridges with first-generation leadership.
And still others fail to appreciate the dynamics of majority/minority culture (eg. ‘communicate’).
If the approach your second-gen ministry is current taking is leading to frustration – be wary of quickly adopting another approach which might have its own set of hidden limitations…
Can’t agree more – but what then is “the” right approach? Actually, “the” assumes there is only one – but I’m sure there are more. So I should probably use “a” instead.