It's only a partial solution that will eventually not resolve age, racial or any kind of separation. It is merely a tweak, with little or no transformational value. The gathering is still clergy\laity segregated driven by one-way communication and other style oriented performance elements. The point of non-segregation is for cross-barrier relationships that involve mutuality. Sitting in the same room together facing a pulpit does not constitute mutual relationship. Teenagers are quick to assume relationship based on proximity. "He's close to me, he must like me." The church assumes the same thing when they line up in pews fully expecting only one person to offer any personal expression to benefit them. They claim they have love for each other but any expression of mutual love is almost completely absent from the plan or modeling of the leaders.

There is a much deeper problem yet unconsidered. When Tchividjian says "In a traditional worship service, the church inadvertently communicates that God only speaks to His people through the hired staff or a few selected volunteers, with no need for active participation by all. But a church must communicate God's "design for His church as a body, a family, living stones being built together," then there will be a basis for integration of age and race at Coral Ridge.

Age and racial segregation is only a symptom of deeper false traditions and habits that contradict identity and specific NT instructions.

Age segmentation is not the same thing as racial discrimination. Church attenders choose which service they want to attend in churches where services are designed to appeal to millennials, Gen Xers, Boomers, or others. The decision of which to attend is the choice of the participant.

In racial segregation, those in the minority have no choice. It is not an option for them to choose to attend or not, because barriers to their attendance have been erected. I would hope that Tully would choose his analogies more carefully in the future because this one is not appropriate.

The other question for Coral Ridge, which I presume to be predominantly white, is "Are you next going to address the inculturated racial segregation?" Of course, that's a good question for many of our churches, mine included.

But, no, age-segmentation is no at all similar to racial segregation. Despite my disagreeing with Tully's analogy, I am sympathetic to his decision.

I am also sympathetic but one of the reasons that age segregation exists is because there are real cultural and informational differences that exist between generations. I know some of this exists between racial groups too, but if you are communicating the gospel to a two year old and a forty year old you must segment the teaching, or else the gospel is not being communicated to one or the other. I am not saying there should not be some joint worship, but if joint worship is all there is then something will be missing.

Chuck,

Except for the possibility of a few outlying cases of actual racial screening, most "white" and "black" churches allow anyone to come in the door and worship, regardless of color--but they don't, because church goers are generally self-segregating. And that's the same thing that happens with age-targeted services as well.

There's a big problem in the premise pf bundling a bunch of things like instrumentation, music selection, formality, a certain order of service and calling that "traditional" or "contemporary." But setting that problem aside for the moment...

Most of the all-age services I've seen or have been a part of have embraced neither truly "old" aesthetics nor truly "young" ones. On the one hand, I'd like to see churches more intentional about celebrating the diversity of preferences and cultures in different age groups.

On the other hand, I'd like to see churches cultivate and emphasize a cultural fluency among members, particularly older ones (which I am fast becoming), so that the idea of churches "appealing to older people" would become a curious relic from the late 20th century. And similarly, I'd like to see churches stop trying to catch the latest style in order to attract young people, and focus more on cultivating discipling relationships and a sacrificial love of another.

Anyone can put on a rockin' show for the kids. Only the church gathers in the name of Jesus.

Adam,
I'm responding to the words quoted from The Christian Post, "The megachurch pastor also said he doesn't view separate worship services by style or age as any different from racial segregation, except that it's more subtle."

Racial segregation is a far different situation than age-segmentation. Racial segregation is an intentional exclusion based solely on race, not a benign or random organization. I think the article, and Tully if they are quoting him, should be more precise in their language. Other than that, I agree with you. -Chuck

Having come out of the Evangelical "worship war" traditions and become Eastern Orthodox and encountering a historic Liturgy that has been largely unchanged since before the end of the first millenium AD, it is interesting to observe first-hand what goes on (both around me and within my own heart). As an Evangelical, I assumed that the alternatives discussed above were the only relevant options for modern Christians. I was wrong. It has been interesting to put what I have experienced in corporate worship settings (much of which I enjoyed, both traditional and contemporary) in the wider context of the Church's ancient liturgical traditions found in the Orthodox Church. Perhaps it would be worth a mention here.

At my parish, the entire congregation is the "choir" (which was originally the case historically, too, though many Orthodox Churches have choirs, usually quite small, who sing most of the laity's portions today), and virtually the entire service is a prayer to God (actually a series of prayers of which most are chanted or sung, traditionally a cappella) in antiphon between those who serve as leaders (bishops, priests, and deacons) and the people. Liturgy literally means "the work of the people," (of whom the clergy are only one, small part), and everyone participates from beginning to end (even the baptized babies take communion and the little children make the sign of the Cross, kiss icons, and help to light candles. Everyone participates according to their own willingness and ability. My visually-oriented autistic daughter really responds to the iconography found throughout the Orthodox worship space, which, properly understood, "does with color, what the Scriptures do with words." Either way, the calling on the participant is to participate as they are able regardless of age. To me it is truly a liturgical picture of the Church as the family of God in its wholeness.

The Orthodox Church has been infected, too, with the disease of "clericalism," but it is very clear to me also that this is not inherent either in the Orthodox Liturgy or in its traditional understanding of the Christian faith and roles of the laity and the clergy, which I believe are profoundly biblical. Some see Orthodox liturgy as hopelessly bound to something ancient and decrepit and without meaning for modern people, but I have not found that to be true in my own experience. Rather, like the Scriptures from which it is drawn, it is rooted in something completely outside the limits of history and time--in something Eternal and Ageless.

I don't think it is wrong, necessarily, to provide some experiences within the Church that are age-specific, like a Sunday school program, but that is a step away and certainly not a substitute for how the faith (properly understood as a way of life) has been passed on historically and liturgically in the Church throughout its history.

I believe that worship services designed to ages is not the right answer for a growing church. There is a lot to be said for the diversity, relationships, and perspectives of people of various ages attending the same worship service. I believe that a small group is the place in which age barriers may be drawn. It is in small groups where people of similar age may share in life together. While this type of sharing may be beneficial, it is also true that we can learn alot about the church and God through relationships and listening to people of various ages within the church (especially older members). Honestly, I am not a fan of multiple services at all, let alone creating services based on age. I highly value relationships, therefore, I would do everything that I could in order to eliminate the need to split the church into multiple services.

Granted, age segmentation is a poor model. But the idea that the Church is one counter-cultural non-culture is pure fantasy. Coral Gables reflects a certain cultural style. There is no such thing as cultural neutrality. And cultural forms of worship are a good thing. Nothing wrong with people seeking indigenous forms of worship and nothing wrong with variety. No form of Christianity is truly counter-cultural. It reflects some allegiances to cultural norms, and it should.

@Derek Leman:

Hear, hear.

The church split Coral Ridge went through was largely about culture and perceptions over what was important in the culture.

Churches are inescapably shaped by the culture around them.

@ Derek and nathan

I think this is a extension of the homogeneous questions posed in previous Ur posts - should our churches pull us toward cultural segregation (racially, generationally, etc) or should the church call on those in cultural frame works to go beyond their comfort zone?

What a courageous step and a powerful public communication of distinctly kingdom values.

There is certainly a profound lack of any sort of segregation in the early church, which, as Paul notes in Galatians 3:28, is a theological matter. If it is Christ is in us, that makes us a “church” and we cannot exclude one another on the basis of anything else.

That said, there’s room to shore up the logic here a bit. By comparing age segregation to racial segregation, we run the risk of cheapening the significance of racism. There’s a significant difference between joining with others in your own age group for community and contextualized teaching – from which you could leave to join others from a different age group any time you want – and a person of one race being forbidden to enter certain establishments or use particular water fountains because they are considered less human.

One is rooted in what may very well be misguided attempts at community; the other is rooted in hate. They are not the same.

This is a tough situation to tackle but absolutely thought provoking. I believe that Tchividjian makes a great point about the need for unity in the Church. There is no doubt that our churches need more unification among the families instead of separating into separate "programs" but I do disagree in part with some of the concepts here. Though this may be a necessary move for Coral Ridge to bring about unification in the body, I dont believe that this is a necessary move that most be reproduced by every church. Just as there are benefits to being together in one service, there are great benefits from dividing God's people for a period of time in order to minister to their specific needs and where they are at in their stage of life. I'm not completely sure here where the separation at Coral Ridge is just for a period of time before the service or whether it is the entire service (this depends on how worship is defined by the church). I believe for instance that there is great value in speaking directly to youth and engaging with them separate from adults and their families as well. As I mentioned from the beginning, this is a tough topic to tackle, a very sensitive one as well I would think, but definitely food for thought for any church leader.

For anyone that has been through the "worship wars" in evangelical churches, the "racism" analogy isn't as much a stretch as it might seem on the surface. There have been several times over the years where a clean old fashioned hate and a total disregard and devaluing of other Christians has taken place in my experience over the type of worship -music in particular but even where the offering was placed in the order of worship. A minor change has generated anonymous letters and major changes have almost gotten me fired and split people off from church.

I applaud what he's calling for. Remember this is the Sunday morning gathering he's speaking of and separate age-graded or generational meetings would still take place in other venues and times.