In an earlier post, I asked about whether or not you would welcome “outside” teens, that is, teens whose parents were not part of your church. Now, here’s a more specific question along these same lines. In the most recent issue of Interconnections, the newsletter for church leaders put out by the Unitarian Universalist Association, someone writes in to ask:
“A 16-year-old girl whose parents do not attend our church is attending our Exploring Membership class. She assures us that her parents are OK with this, however I am concerned about allowing someone under the age of 18 to sign our membership book without our knowing what the parents think about it. How do other churches handle these situations?”
I won’t include the answer printed in Interconnections — instead, how would you answer this question? And if you immediately say that you would let a 16-year-old girl sign the membership book, how young would you go — if she were ten years old, would that make a difference, and why?
I signed the book at age 15, which was the earliest one could do so at our church. I wouldn’t support signing earlier for anyone, regardless of whether they had been brought up in the church like me or had come into it on their own, as some of my friends in youth group had done. So the ten-year-old is out as far as I am concerned.
Me signing at 15 wasn’t controversial–both my parents were highly active members and I was doing it so I could officially serve as the youth group rep to the board of education. However, in my opinion this would have been too young for someone from an outside family. 17 seems about appropriate in that case for me, and I’d encourage the teenager to consider waiting until she was 18 in order to completely remove any issues with the parents.
There were plenty of teenagers from non-UU families that attended my church, largely because we had such a large and vital youth group. We were happy to have them and they contributed fully. But I wouldn’t really encourage them to become signing members until they were adults. They had voting privileges within the youth group and I think that’s enough, they don’t need to be involves in congregational matters as well. In the case of someone who was really into UUism and wanted to learn as much as possible, I’d say they ought to be admitted to the Exploring Membership class, but in most cases encouraged to wait before seeking to sign the book.
I don’t use a membership book; or rather, my church’s membership book is stored in heaven, and it’s already got your name in it.
But for the purposes of voting rights in an organization, or anything like that, I’d just check with their parents, presuming the organization itself doesn’t have a minimum voting age. If their legal guardians say no, then hey, they’re the parents. Otherwise, no problem.
I chuckle to think that this is just a secular version of the Christian debate over infant baptism. I’ve got no problem with it…kids can always apostatize when they’re older, if they really wanna.
Well… membership requires a financial commitment; members support their congregations.
I look at it this way:
We let a 16 year old drive a ton down the road at high speed, and assume that they’re intelligent and responsible enough to do so. If one of them chooses to join our congregation and goes through the membership process… and makes a financial commitment… I’d let them sign. What’s the fear about? That a parent will throw a fit? That’s an issue for a youth and parent, not us. Heck, our neighbors down the street invited our 12 or 13 year old son to their megachurch’s “fair” which was a thinly disguised effort to catch and convert kids who were friendly with kids in their congregation… and who though going to a “fair” sounded like fun. They’d have hesitated for exactly zero seconds about signing him up as one of the faithful, and probably told us that they’d saved his soul and we ought to be happy.
We, on the other hand, would simply be saying “We accepted your kid as a respected and equal member of our community, which she chose to join without any inducement or effort to persuade her to join. We didn’t try–and don’t, and won’t–to tell her what to believe. Whatever she believes is entirely what she’s decided she believes, because she believes it, not because we told her to, and we support her right to change her mind… and to do so again, if she decides to.”
Our bylaws permit a 17 year old to join like any other adult. A 16 year old would need to have persuaded the minister that she was serious and understood what she was doing… thereby getting the minister to urge the Board to waive the age limit (per the bylaws). So, for this to be “in our case,” I would be looking at a youth who had the minister’s particular support. I’d approve in a heartbeat, and if the parents wanted to read me the riot act later… fine. I can’t see that any harm’s being done, nor that anything done is irremediable.
I don’t use a membership book; or rather, my church’s membership book is stored in heaven, and it’s already got your name in it.
Mormons do this, right?
Well… membership requires a financial commitment; members support their congregations.
For one of the UU organizations I work with, that financial contribution can be as small as a dollar. Probably a penny…we say “a dollar” just to demonstrate that we’re not turning anyone away for their failure to make a financial donation. And even then, I can’t remember the last time anyone checked the membership roles come annual meeting time. If you’re interested enough in our organization to show up for the annual meeting, we let you vote.
Mormons do this, right?
I think I’ve heard of them doing post-mortem baptisms, such that they’re considering a name to be in their book without that person’s worldly consent (but I’m not entirely sure, consult your local Mormon.) I don’t think they consider everyone’s name to be in their books, though, and I’d think that makes the implications pretty significantly different than what I’m doing.
Does having a name in your membership book mean that the person thusly named supports and serve you? Or does it just mean they’re on the list of people you support and serve? I might soon start keeping a list of people who support and serve me, really just so I know who to hit up first for additional donations. But when it comes time to decide how I use the resources I have been given, I’m calling a vote of the people named in that book in heaven.
I admit it’s been some time since I read my church’s bylaws, but I believe 16 is the age at which a minor can sign the book. Our bylaws also have some fairly specific requirements of membership, so I’m sure someone would make sure a 16-year-old understood them before signing. This age seems reasonable. If we trust a 16-year-old behind the wheel of a car, we should trust them to make choices about church. Seems to me I remember my high school Protestant friends being confirmed in their churches at about 14 or 15, at which time they were considered members. One of my son’s friends went through Catholic confirmation at 16 or 17, just a few years ago.
I wish I wish I wish we weren’t stuck on our “legal corporation” model of membership, or that we could somehow revive a distinction between the parish/society (the legal corporation that owns the buildings and assets in trust) and the church (the communicants of the worshiping community). Then we’d have fewer problems with the notion of children, teens, and people with very little money or who are embarrassed about their relative poverty being “members.”
A personal story: I signed the membership book in my UU church when I was 14. They forgot to tell me I was supposed to pledge, and so removed me from membership, without ever having asked me to pledge. Then suddenly one day, after I had started to get very active in the church when I was in my twenties, I somehow became a member again, and out of the blue received a request for money — at a time when I didn’t have two nickels to rub together. It was weird. What I learned from this personal experience — communicate very clearly the expectations of membership.
Philo @ 7 — Your comment cuts right to the chase. Though even then, can you come up with a theological reason for keeping legal minors from becoming members of the legal corporation?
I can’t think of any theological reasons — but no church is making a theological defense of keeping kids from voting membership. It’s all about legal liabilities and the definition of a nonprofit corporation. But the state can’t define a church; only we can do that. So let’s revive the idea of church membership and find good ways to open it to people who find their religious home among us.
I was surprised that the Interconnections response made no mention of bylaws.