by Russell Houske
Debate has arisen recently regarding the legal age of adulthood, specifically when we can rightly refer to someone as an adult. Some might argue that adulthood is a subjective idea that depends mostly on the maturity of the individual in question, with twenty-one years being only an arbitrary age for adulthood. The bulk of this debate deals with issues that relate only to the secular culture. Most concerns typically regard questions such as the seeming discrepancy between when individuals may purchase alcohol and when they may volunteer for military service.
However, the real concern is much greater, and it must be addressed. As we diligently work to prepare our children for making necessary and healthy life decisions, are we teaching them to make these important decisions with spiritual conviction? Are we helping to equip young adults to make leadership decisions within the church?
To begin any substantial discussion of discipleship, we must understand that spiritual maturity begins with the encouragement of a role model figure and that it is fully developed only under the pedagogical oversight of someone with similar convictions. The most obvious and efficacious place for this to occur is in the home. Charles Shelton agrees in the thesis of his book, Adolescent Spirituality: “The adolescent’s response to Jesus’ call is inextricably tied to the beckoning of grace as it is experienced at his or her own developmental level and in the context of his or her own life experience.”[1]
This idea of life experience has much broader implications than simply the external influences of the adolescent. Life experiences are actually inextricably linked to the developmental environment of the home because the environment of the home is the most influential developmental sphere. Although we could consider any number of points, the goal of this article is (a) to present what appears to be an ever-increasing problem and to review the reasons that indicate the problem, and (b) to examine specific areas of concern and to offer a biblical solution applicable to churches and parents.
The Problem
With regard to religious matters, our culture has shifted to a model that encourages exploration rather than instruction in spirituality. This shift is a major problem, because home discipleship, which is a biblically mandated function, is essential to developing a healthy spirituality in any individual, and especially that of new believers. Hardly anyone would argue that the home is the fundamental learning environment for all things, including spiritual matters. If the home is indeed the fundamental learning environment, then the church bears the responsibility of encouraging and reinforcing the biblical instruction presumably occurring in the home. Pastors and church leaders are obligated to equip parents for their work within the home. That is to say: Church leaders must take care not to attempt to fulfill these duties themselves but rather to encourage families to do so instead.
Young men today seem to falter faster and faster regarding their responsibilities, especially ministry related ones. A recent ONE Magazine article noted: “55% of our [Free Will Baptist] pastors are over 50 years of age, and 80% are over 40.”[2] Such statistics demand that we ask about the status of our young men. Danny Baer, along with many others, is rightfully concerned that “this could indicate we [FWB] will soon have a lack of preachers to fill our pulpits.”[3]
Certainly, this concern is a reasonable one deserving our prompt and thorough attention. Baer’s research is helpful, even if his primary purpose in writing is not to sound the alarm but rather to survey the current state of FWB churches. Such articles, along with an abundance of anecdotal evidence, have caused many to ask where the young men are.
Cause for Concern
Young men face an enormous amount of pull toward apathy today, which we could attribute to the relativistic culture in which they live. This temptation toward apathy evidences itself in the challenges that church leaders are currently facing.
Twentieth-century theologian, Carl F. H. Henry acknowledged a similar temptation when he wrote, “Evangelical Christianity today confronts a ‘new theology,’ a ‘new evangelism,’ and a ‘new morality,’ each notably lacking in Biblical content.”[4] This lack of Biblical content is the pitfall with which young men are now contending. It is the challenge that spiritual mentors are combating as they struggle for the souls of young men and women. This is a cause for concern.
Regrettably, many people seem to be unaware of the struggles that young men face, as if they themselves have forgotten the dangers of spiritual immaturity. However, that was not the case with the nineteenth-century English preacher J. C. Ryle. In one place Ryle recalls, “I have a most distinct recollection of the joys and sorrows, the hopes and the fears, the temptations and difficulties, the mistaken judgments and the misplaced affections, the errors and the aspirations, which surround and accompany a young man’s life.”[5] One cannot help but to think what might occur if older men now possessed similar ruminations of their own experiences.
Ryle goes on to explain that men mature in the faith must not lose sight of these reflections. He writes, “There is the painful fact that there are few young men anywhere who seem to be Christians.”[6] Not many conservative Christians would dispute Ryle on his analysis. But an all-important question remains: Is this really the case or does it merely seem this way?
A good number of young people identify themselves as religious and even particularly as Christian, so long as the parameters are defined in a certain way. After standing in the shadows of skepticism and doubt concerning belief of most, or even all, moral absolutes, Generation Z stands ready to redefine the status quo. Additionally, many find the Bible to be overwhelmingly outdated and even archaic. (And that is not even to mention the negative connotations attached to how it speaks on divisive political issues.)
Is it time, then, that we reconsider what we mean by “Christian education”? I suppose it depends on what is meant by that question. I posit that we need to make Christian teaching relevant by underscoring its relational character. Christian ethics professor Paulus Widjaja says a great deal about Generation Z, writing, “They want to deal with real issues, not with analytical discourse or theory.”[7] He goes on to emphasize the biggest challenge that mentors face: “They don’t want to spend too much time in learning about the foundation upon which an ethical decision is made. They want a quick answer and an instant process to solve the problem.”[8] However, Christian education can make Christianity appealing and relevant, dealing with real issues, while still basing it on the foundation of God’s Word and the doctrines it contains.
While this problematic trend was still in its infancy, Henry, writing in the 1940s, predicted, “Evangelicalism will have to contend for a new order in education. . . . The western concept of popular education has its legitimate rootage in the determination of the church to indoctrinate the masses in the major doctrinal essentials of the Christian world-life view.”[9] Ryle, Henry and many others have warned about the dangers of faltering discipleship for decades and even centuries, all while encouraging us of the great potential of intentional mentoring. Without hesitation, we must give our current methods of biblical discipleship careful consideration, balancing a biblical theology with a practical theology.
Conclusion
Even though the home is the preferred area for spiritual interaction and mentorship, families do not always realize that ideal. For this reason, believers must continually seek opportunities to invest in young people, thus demonstrating the relational and applicable nature of Scripture. But we should keep in mind that two interdependent and necessary platforms exist in which discipleship must occur. Maturity ideally begins at home; home should be the most cultivated grounds. The church is a second area of influence, although it is often misunderstood as the primary environment for spiritual growth.
Unfortunately, this order is inverted or distorted in too many cases, such that it causes great confusion for young people. We must utilize these two institutions in a way that places priority to God’s given structure. Yet each institution must fulfill its appointed role in development. Godly parents influence children most in the home, and church leaders reinforce that instruction. Any deviation of this order creates anarchy and confusion. Considering that the home is the primary spiritual influencer, what shape are they in who come from homes predominantly shaped by secular culture?
About the author: Russell currently lives in Gallatin, Tennessee, where he and his wife Amber serve as the resident directors of the men’s dorm at Welch College. They have four children: Jacob, Jackson, Carleigh, and Cady. Russell also serves as a Paramedic for Sumner County Emergency Services. Prior to his ministry at Welch College, he served in both Youth and Senior Pastor positions. He is a graduate from Welch College with the Master of Theology and Ministry degree. His academic interests include practical theology, discipleship, and health sciences.
[1]Charles M. Shelton, Adolescent Spirituality (New York: Crossroad, 1989), viii.
[2]Danny Baer, “Get to Know Your Free Will Baptist Pastors,” ONE Magazine, October-November 2019: 44.
[3]Ibid.
[4]Carl F. H. Henry, The God Who Shows Himself (Waco, Tex: Word, 1966), 51.
[5]J. C. Ryle, Thoughts for Young Men, 3.
[6]Ibid.
[7]Paulus Widjaja, “Teaching Christian Character and Ethics to Generation Z,” The Conrad Grebel Review 35, no. 1 (Winter 2017): 80; accessed January 20, 2020, https://uwaterloo.ca/grebel/publications/conrad-grebel-review.
[8]Ibid.
[9]Carl F. H Henry, The Uneasy Conscience of Modern Fundamentalism (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2003), 70.
Recent Comments