Following up on a comment thread over at Yet Another UU, it seems that my Unitarian congregation is not the only one that has faced challenges welcoming twenty- and thirtysomethings. But we’ve mostly done it, boasting a mailing list of almost 180. Here’s how.

Two autumns ago, my wife and I decided to start an old timey “Sunday School” class for 20/30s that met between services. We saw other 20/30s across the sanctuary every week, but we didn’t seem to have an occasion to meet them. (Our coffee hour could be a bit cold back then.) We tried doing an after-worship lunch a couple of different times, but it didn’t seem to take.

We did the requisite publicity for the class and got a crowd of around ten. To start, we did the “Building Your Own Theology” curriculum. The idea was that it would give the class a hook, make it about more than just meeting other 20/30s. Using the book also gave us a clear structure and direction, encouraging ongoing week-to-week participation.

Once that group had gelled somewhat (we were never quite the same crowd week to week), we started going out to lunch after worship once a month. Then the monthly trip to the pub on Thursday. Then the quarterly social events. And the volunteer days with Hands on Atlanta. And the Chalice Circle. And the sermon discussions. And the impromptu weekly lunch outings. And the times when someone sends out a note inviting folks to go to the movies.

How did all of that happen? Simply put, open leadership. If someone had an idea and had two or three other folks interested, it happened. There were no committees, no standing meetings, no budget. We trusted folks to lead stuff and then got out of the way and let them.

True, we have had periodic planning meetings over Sunday lunch, and we’re probably past due for another one. True, we no longer do the pub crawl, the Sunday School class, or the sermon discussion. Yet we trust that if someone is interested in starting them up again, they will happen again. If half of open leadership is trusting folks to lead, the other half is letting folks quit leading.

None of our programs need to continue. The programs exist to serve us, not the other way around. The risk of burnout drops precipitously.

I should also note that we never asked for permission. I got some advice initially from the associate minister, but we were never “approved” by the board or council or committee. And what would have been the point of that?

Currently, our monthly lunches stand at around twenty people, with a third each being veterans, newbies, and those in between. The crowd is different, yet the same, every time. Seasonal social events seem to get closer to fourty people. Our semi-monthly Chalice Circle has around a dozen folks most weeks, of which a little over half are regulars. Many folks hang out around the edges, dipping their toes in every month or two. We like that. We know people have a landing pad when they want it.

Congregationally, the key effect of our group has been to change the tone of Coffee Hour. Ours can be cliquish. We have gone a long way towards changing this by a very complicated strategy. When we see someone we don’t know, and who looks to be 20/30ish, we walk up, extend our hand, and introduce ourselves. We then chat with them and introduce them to other folks, new and old. Most weeks we have a table set up, and we ask them to sign up for the mailing list. The overall effect has been to make Coffee Hour much friendlier.

We aren’t perfect. I’m sure there are folks who haven’t felt welcomed. There are probably things we should be doing that we’re not. But here we are almost three years later, and our congregation is the better for it.