The Juvenilezation of American ChristianitybyThomas E. Bergler, reviewed by Robert Hosack in The Banner
Jun 22, 2012 — In this critical but constructive study of the intersection of Christianity and youth culture, Bergler explores a “quiet revolution in American church life.” Teens and their youth leaders have convinced churches that “the religious beliefs, practices, and developmental characteristics of adolescents” are now “appropriate for adults.” While these changes have breathed life into four major American church traditions over the last 75 years—African American, evangelical, mainline Protestant, and Roman Catholic—white evangelicals have led this revolution, resulting in adults “embracing immature versions of the faith”—with consumerism and self-centeredness popularizing a feel-good, theologically ignorant faith. As Bergler notes, “at least some traits that should be included in Christian maturity have been decoupled from adulthood in post-1960s America, encourag[ing] [a] . . . juvenilization of American Christianity and the emergence of the new immature adulthood [that] have mutually reinforced one another.” In sum, “we’re all adolescents now.” (Eerdmans)
I suggest you either read the book, published by Eerdmans 2012, or perhaps read the most recent Christianity Today where this was the cover story, titled "When Are We Going to Grow Up." The author is professor of ministry and missions at Huntington University . Three individuals were tasked with reviewing the professor's book, and when one drills down beneath what might be their biases based upon their own vocations, one finds they are hard put to disagree.
Albert: your response can only be characterized by what in intro philosophy we learned was one of the weakest of arguments: ad hominem. Attack the messenger when the message cannot be swallowed. But, to answer the attack: my wife and I attend every Sunday--I take it that this website is now presenting what one thought was information gathered for confidential purposes and like many political polls the answers allowed are too limited and confining so one picks what might apply given how one reads the poll. We do not attend CRC churches which is how I understood the question to be posed for statistical purposes. I can write much more on my street cred on this but it would likely be self-serving sounding.
Now: I did not do the research, write the book, or put it in Christianity Today as the cover story. You need to address the author, who apparently has been in the field for quite some time, and address the editors of Christianity Today.
Bill Wald made a point and having just read the article thought that it in some way supported the point he was trying to make before that point was swept away in a tide of homogenous opinion.
George: did you read the recent N.Y. Times editorial (not exactly a regressive news rag). It noted that a Detroit newspaper did an investigative piece of journalism that substantially supports Mark's citation on prosecuting attorneys.
In addition, I would commend for your reading the Atlantic article from a couple of years ago cited in the N.Y Times op-ed piece on the Swiss death clinic. Scary, in my opinion.
I am sure you understand that your comment about prosecuting attorneys constituted what we learned in Philosophy 101 as an ad hominem argument.
You neglected to note that even if prosecuting attorneys are not credible, for Kervorkian to be convicted, someone other than them needed to listen to the arguments and convict him.
My position comes from a Gerontology Social Work class under Dr. Holstege of Calvin College in which he cited the tremendous advances in pallative care that may have escaped your attention. His point: use pallative care pharmeceuticals to relieve pain, if the person passes away under their application be thankful their passing was as painless as possible. This is a far different objective than Kervorkian or the Swiss clinic.
Why cannot the "climate of death" be a significant "determining factor?" Sounds like an a priori argument.
With all due respect I totally disagree with you on the matter of "anonymous communication." Apparently this CRCNA website does as well because they follow the common internet practice of allowing for it.
One presumes that they could use a filter if they wished.
Also, "anonymous communication" that you might receive in the world of a pastor may well be a different world than this one.
Having had decades of experience in the social services field I can say how very, very careful we are about protecting sources--if you had detailed information on a possible case of child abuse in your congregation, I hope that you would not follow your stated practice of "always destroy such."
It appears that you agree that different venues may allow for different rules for attribution and/or anonyminity and therefore do not condemn anonymous comments on the web. (allegations of child abuse being only one example of a venue where anonyminity should not be the primary issue)
In some venues such as that of a pastor receiving allegations etc, knowing the source may have weight but as you say comments should be judged on the merits of their content.
I will agree that, sadly, much of what is posted on the internet under anonymity allows for inferior content but names attached to postings does not always ensure weighty content either, in my opinion.
I am happy to hear that as a mandatory reporter you follow up on allegations of child abuse and do not "always destroy such" just because they happen to be anonymous.
An observation that I borrow from someone long ago: "who told them they were naked" when they worship with their parents?
I was interested to hear a "youth leader" from another denomination emphatically and specifically state that their organization was "intentional" in supporting the worship and congregational life of the parents of the young people they served. One of the Ten Commandments was mentioned.
Do Amish young people have the same need?
Recent articles have popped up about pastors of predominantly under-30 church plants, lamenting that their congregational life is artificially truncated: no funerals, no elderly to be assisted and/or offer guidance.
I am curious how to square this blog with the one on April 25 by Alan Dieters: Extra Grace Required.
Or are they talking about absolutely different situations--it seems to me there will almost certainly be some overlap but the approaches of the two blogs appear to be different.
A conversation between the two bloggers as to how the friend in this blog should be accepted when he shows up in Alan's small group--how would "extra grace" be practiced if he fits into one of the categories listed in Mr. Dieters' blog?
I am curious how Dan and Michael would address a situation which most certainly will arise: that of someone in their twenties, thirties, forties, fifties, sixties...(?) who has never made profession of faith and now feels that they can partake in communion.
Not a problem? How could they be denied under the circumstances proposed?
Thanks for the response--your reservations on the "classification" issue were mine somewhat though I have been involved in enough small groups to know that the "classification" process can apply equally to the small group leader, as a gesture of modesty or humility. That is what I felt the article lacked. A little bit of "we are the people and wisdom will die with us."
You are accurate on the danger of assumptions and much more could be said about that.
Your observations for the most part, very much appreciated.
George:
"Doesn’t requiring anything more than a majority vote institute rule by minority? "
In my opinion while the above statement seems to make superficial sense, it fails to analyze the matter at the proper depth, by ignoring the weight of tradition as part of that "rule."
Citing one anecdote does not really prove much except perhaps the "rule of the minority" evidence: one or two anecdotes.
To clarify if possible: while a systemic observation is presented regarding slim majorities in critical situations perhaps representing cases where angels would fear to tread, you counter with one anecdote (a "tyranny of the minority"). I know "enough anecdotes can constitue a Phd. research project" but countering a systemic observation with one seems to me to expect the "tyranny of the minority" to prevail.
One would have hoped for more substantial data demonstrating what happens in the majority of situations such as were presented. (I know of one particular case, where I could mention names, where it turned out disastrously.)
Posted in: Congregational Worship and its Effect on Youth Groups
The Juvenilezation of American ChristianitybyThomas E. Bergler, reviewed by Robert Hosack in The Banner
Jun 22, 2012 — In this critical but constructive study of the intersection of Christianity and youth culture, Bergler explores a “quiet revolution in American church life.” Teens and their youth leaders have convinced churches that “the religious beliefs, practices, and developmental characteristics of adolescents” are now “appropriate for adults.” While these changes have breathed life into four major American church traditions over the last 75 years—African American, evangelical, mainline Protestant, and Roman Catholic—white evangelicals have led this revolution, resulting in adults “embracing immature versions of the faith”—with consumerism and self-centeredness popularizing a feel-good, theologically ignorant faith. As Bergler notes, “at least some traits that should be included in Christian maturity have been decoupled from adulthood in post-1960s America, encourag[ing] [a] . . . juvenilization of American Christianity and the emergence of the new immature adulthood [that] have mutually reinforced one another.” In sum, “we’re all adolescents now.” (Eerdmans)
Posted in: Congregational Worship and its Effect on Youth Groups
I suggest you either read the book, published by Eerdmans 2012, or perhaps read the most recent Christianity Today where this was the cover story, titled "When Are We Going to Grow Up." The author is professor of ministry and missions at Huntington University . Three individuals were tasked with reviewing the professor's book, and when one drills down beneath what might be their biases based upon their own vocations, one finds they are hard put to disagree.
Posted in: Congregational Worship and its Effect on Youth Groups
Albert: your response can only be characterized by what in intro philosophy we learned was one of the weakest of arguments: ad hominem. Attack the messenger when the message cannot be swallowed. But, to answer the attack: my wife and I attend every Sunday--I take it that this website is now presenting what one thought was information gathered for confidential purposes and like many political polls the answers allowed are too limited and confining so one picks what might apply given how one reads the poll. We do not attend CRC churches which is how I understood the question to be posed for statistical purposes. I can write much more on my street cred on this but it would likely be self-serving sounding.
Now: I did not do the research, write the book, or put it in Christianity Today as the cover story. You need to address the author, who apparently has been in the field for quite some time, and address the editors of Christianity Today.
Bill Wald made a point and having just read the article thought that it in some way supported the point he was trying to make before that point was swept away in a tide of homogenous opinion.
Posted in: Reflections on the Death of Dr. Jack Kevorkian
George: did you read the recent N.Y. Times editorial (not exactly a regressive news rag). It noted that a Detroit newspaper did an investigative piece of journalism that substantially supports Mark's citation on prosecuting attorneys.
In addition, I would commend for your reading the Atlantic article from a couple of years ago cited in the N.Y Times op-ed piece on the Swiss death clinic. Scary, in my opinion.
I am sure you understand that your comment about prosecuting attorneys constituted what we learned in Philosophy 101 as an ad hominem argument.
You neglected to note that even if prosecuting attorneys are not credible, for Kervorkian to be convicted, someone other than them needed to listen to the arguments and convict him.
My position comes from a Gerontology Social Work class under Dr. Holstege of Calvin College in which he cited the tremendous advances in pallative care that may have escaped your attention. His point: use pallative care pharmeceuticals to relieve pain, if the person passes away under their application be thankful their passing was as painless as possible. This is a far different objective than Kervorkian or the Swiss clinic.
Why cannot the "climate of death" be a significant "determining factor?" Sounds like an a priori argument.
Posted in: Our Attitudes Toward Our Leaders
Bill:
With all due respect I totally disagree with you on the matter of "anonymous communication." Apparently this CRCNA website does as well because they follow the common internet practice of allowing for it.
One presumes that they could use a filter if they wished.
Also, "anonymous communication" that you might receive in the world of a pastor may well be a different world than this one.
Having had decades of experience in the social services field I can say how very, very careful we are about protecting sources--if you had detailed information on a possible case of child abuse in your congregation, I hope that you would not follow your stated practice of "always destroy such."
"pdr" I support you.
Posted in: Our Attitudes Toward Our Leaders
Bill:
It appears that you agree that different venues may allow for different rules for attribution and/or anonyminity and therefore do not condemn anonymous comments on the web. (allegations of child abuse being only one example of a venue where anonyminity should not be the primary issue)
In some venues such as that of a pastor receiving allegations etc, knowing the source may have weight but as you say comments should be judged on the merits of their content.
I will agree that, sadly, much of what is posted on the internet under anonymity allows for inferior content but names attached to postings does not always ensure weighty content either, in my opinion.
I am happy to hear that as a mandatory reporter you follow up on allegations of child abuse and do not "always destroy such" just because they happen to be anonymous.
Posted in: Intentionally Diverse and Unified
hmn: "diverse and unified"
what, pray tell, does that mean exactly?
Posted in: Is it Important for Youth to Attend Church with Their Parents?
An observation that I borrow from someone long ago: "who told them they were naked" when they worship with their parents?
I was interested to hear a "youth leader" from another denomination emphatically and specifically state that their organization was "intentional" in supporting the worship and congregational life of the parents of the young people they served. One of the Ten Commandments was mentioned.
Do Amish young people have the same need?
Recent articles have popped up about pastors of predominantly under-30 church plants, lamenting that their congregational life is artificially truncated: no funerals, no elderly to be assisted and/or offer guidance.
Posted in: Listening to a Fellow Christian with Schizophrenia
I am curious how to square this blog with the one on April 25 by Alan Dieters: Extra Grace Required.
Or are they talking about absolutely different situations--it seems to me there will almost certainly be some overlap but the approaches of the two blogs appear to be different.
A conversation between the two bloggers as to how the friend in this blog should be accepted when he shows up in Alan's small group--how would "extra grace" be practiced if he fits into one of the categories listed in Mr. Dieters' blog?
Posted in: The Wait is Nearly Over
I am curious how Dan and Michael would address a situation which most certainly will arise: that of someone in their twenties, thirties, forties, fifties, sixties...(?) who has never made profession of faith and now feels that they can partake in communion.
Not a problem? How could they be denied under the circumstances proposed?
Posted in: Listening to a Fellow Christian with Schizophrenia
Mark:
Thanks for the response--your reservations on the "classification" issue were mine somewhat though I have been involved in enough small groups to know that the "classification" process can apply equally to the small group leader, as a gesture of modesty or humility. That is what I felt the article lacked. A little bit of "we are the people and wisdom will die with us."
You are accurate on the danger of assumptions and much more could be said about that.
Posted in: Like a Mighty Turtle...
John:
Your observations for the most part, very much appreciated.
George:
"Doesn’t requiring anything more than a majority vote institute rule by minority? "
In my opinion while the above statement seems to make superficial sense, it fails to analyze the matter at the proper depth, by ignoring the weight of tradition as part of that "rule."
Citing one anecdote does not really prove much except perhaps the "rule of the minority" evidence: one or two anecdotes.
To clarify if possible: while a systemic observation is presented regarding slim majorities in critical situations perhaps representing cases where angels would fear to tread, you counter with one anecdote (a "tyranny of the minority"). I know "enough anecdotes can constitue a Phd. research project" but countering a systemic observation with one seems to me to expect the "tyranny of the minority" to prevail.
One would have hoped for more substantial data demonstrating what happens in the majority of situations such as were presented. (I know of one particular case, where I could mention names, where it turned out disastrously.)