The
biblical record of human development lists three basic stages: infant, child,
adult. Neither the term nor the concept of “adolescence” is to be found. The
concept was introduced by G. Stanley Hall, the first president of the American
Psychological Association, in 1904. The concept of adolescence developed by
Hall rested on two primary pillars: Darwin’s theory of evolution and Freud’s
theory of psychodynamics. See any red flags there?
H. A.
Ironside, who lived during the time this theory was developing, did not approve
of “youth ministry.” He believed that when Christians left childhood they
should gather with adults, hear adult sermons, begin to take on adult
responsibilities, and live and work in the company of adults. While they were
quite immature, they were, nonetheless, adults. Dr. S. M. Hutchens, a modern
scholar, responding to Ironside’s writings says, “I have seen plenty of
evidence that the idea of ‘the teen’ as generally conceived – not just as a
chronological marker, but as an attitude and set of expectations – is a kind of
poison.” Indeed, Paul stated succinctly, “When I became a man, I put away
childish things.” (1 Corinthians 13:11)
Author Ken
Myers made an even more striking statement in a recent interview posted at
www.christianpost.com.
“One of the biggest and most consequential
forms of cultural captivity of the Church is the way Christians have accepted
the rise in the mid-twentieth century of what we call “youth culture,” with its
assumption that intergenerational discontinuity is the norm. Given the fact
that culture rightly understood is an intergenerational system of communicating
moral convictions, the very term “youth culture” should be seen as a
contradiction in terms.
Marketers have successfully entrenched the
notion of youth culture by creating product lines that are intended to define
adolescent identity as a deliberate rejection of parental expectations. Not
only does this age segregation weaken the family’s ability to pursue the
cultural task of moral transmission, it also weakens the understanding of the
family itself. A proper understanding of the meaning of family is
intergenerational in all directions.
The dynamics of youth culture segregate
generations and extol the experience of the present at the expense of honoring
the past and preparing for the future Youth culture isn’t good for culture. It
is a form of disorder. And yet is a form that American churches were quick to
embrace, apparently because they believed that adapting to the form of youth
culture was an effective way to communicate a message of salvation. The
question of whether or not it offered a good way to live life, of whether or
not it was culturally healthy and sustaining, doesn’t seem to have been of
great concern to many Church and para-church leaders for the past sixty years
or so.”
Among some
Evangelicals and other followers of Christ there is a growing level of scrutiny
being applied to the concept of adolescence and its impact on the Church. That
scrutiny is uncovering some very disturbing trends. The DVD Divided and the
book by Scott Brown, A Weed in the Church, are just a couple examples.
Once again,
the Church seems to have bought the product the culture offered without looking
at the “country of origin” or the dangerous side effects that come with its
use. Let’s be like the Bereans in the book of Acts, searching the Scriptures
for direction in all matters of belief and practice.
Sincerely
in HOPE of the Gospel,
J. Mark Horst
HERALDS OF
HOPE, INC.
Reprinted by permission.
Reprinted by permission.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Please, tell me what you think about this article. I appreciate your feedback!