[cue scraping noise of soapbox being pulled into position] :-)
It may be observed that there such departures from Christian (and
presumeably other) faith following this "shattering" script. But at the
end of the day, we have no way of answering the questions you propose
below.
But there is a larger issue here, I think, having to do with a critical
faith transition, the shift to personal responsibility for our growth
in faith and practice.
I think this relates directly to two perhaps inadequately served groups
in church life. The first group is those who are exiting high school
with little to no preparation for subsequently thinking critically
about the tenets and foundations of their faith. The second is a
(typically) older group that Willow Creek Community Church has recently
identified.
THE WILLOW CREEK DISCOVERY
The Willow Creek Community Church has conducted a very significant
internal (and to some extent external) assessment of whether they are
accomplishing what they have set out to do. The assessment and the
reporting out in a booklet called "Reveal" are very candid, and pretty
courageous in my view. You can find some YouTube clips on this topic,
and Willow Creek has reported out their findings to date, along with
some thoughts as to how to repond to their findings. I think there is a
significant problem with one graphical interpretation of the data, but
the basic findings and the startling discoveries that flow from them
are nonetheless valid.
The bottom lines are that, despite the hugely successful and
influential work they have established, they conclude that they have
"failed" (their language) in achieving some key aspects of their
mission. Willow Creek has concluded that they have failed by and large
in
helping their members make a crucial transition from "being fed" to
becoming "self-feeders".
The most startling collateral discovery (which they have subsequently
found to be independent of gender, age, or particular church) is that
some 25% of their most involved and committed members self-describe
themselves as "stalled" ["I believe in Christ, but I haven't grown much
lately."] or "dissatisfied" ["My faith is central to my life and I'm
trying to grow, but my church is letting me down."]. Worse yet, one out
of four of these are considering leaving the church.
As I read and studied these findings, I found myself making mental
reference to James Fowler's "Stages of Faith". I hasten to make two
parenthetic comments regarding these "Stages of Faith". First,
Fowler's definition of "faith" is a very broad all-of-life-and-living
(worldview or belief system) one. As such, faith in the nature of
Christian faith would comprise only a small subset of Fowler's faith
stages. Second, Fowler was always having to clarify for folks that the
six stages were born of observation (descriptive) and were absolutely
not offered as a prescriptive roadmap (though a person in a particular
stage was unfailingly found to have passed in sequence through earlier
stages in their travels). As with any such defining work, there are
those who take issue with Fowler's findings and conclusions.
One point I connect with was that people who fall into any of Fowler's
first three stages all rely on external authority as their source of
truth and direction (parents, teachers, pastors). The transition to
internal responsibility for one's theology corresponds loosely to the
transition between Stage 3 and Stage 4 in Fowler's description. Fowler
says of that transition, "
For a genuine move to stage 4 to occur,
there must be an interruption of reliance on external sources of
authority...a relocation of authority within the self." I suspect
that one does not have much control over whether or when such a
transition might begin, but when it does, it is the beginning of a
rather profound and radical shift to personal responsibility for their
own feelings and beliefs. I think that may be a fair description as
well of the beginning of transition into one of Willow Creek's
"self-feeders".
It might also be instructive to take a look at the findings of Alan
Jamieson in a study of church "leavers".
They were not leaving
'mainline' churches in decline. They were leaving growing evangelical,
pentecostal, and charismatic churches. They were not leaving during
'adolescence'. They were leaving as adults, predominantly between
thirty and forty-five years of age. They were not leaving after
being involved for a short time. They were leaving after an average of
15.8 years of involvement. They were not leaving from the
fringe, but from the very core. 94% were church leaders. P18 40% in
full-time Christian study or work or both. Jamieson finds that
most leavers fall into one of four categories he categorizes as
'disillusioned followers', 'reflective exiles', 'transitional
explorers' and 'integrated wayfinders'.
The observation often made with respect to Fowler's work is that most
adults in church life wind up suspended in something like Stage 3 where
the authority is either required by or volitionally ceded to the
pastor, primarily as a default. My sense is that the "dissatisfied" and
"stalled" identified in the Willow Creek study may be folks who have
somehow sensed that there is "more", and are not finding it. There is
more, but I wonder about the extent to which most mainstream churches
are constitutionally able to respond to these expressed needs. Willow
Creek seems to feel that the answer lies in encouragement (mentoring or
coaching) into deeper Bible study and personal devotion. I sense that
they are making too little of their success at what they do best,
while at the same time - as an artifact of their particular
(non)denominational identity - remaining distanced from the much larger
landscape of Christian history and practice and conversation, both
historical and contemporary.
On the other hand, there clearly exist growing numbers of faith
communities (or
"clusters") who have found connections to that larger landscape of
Christianity. These corporately seem to more or less reflect the
definition of Fowler's Stage 4. They are engaging that larger landscape
of history, practice, and conversation in ways and to degrees that they
could not connect with though traditional church life. Because these
premises and permissions contrast with those in traditional church
life, these faith communities seem to be almost entirely comprised of
new church starts based on new premises, or are perhaps a resurrection
of an older church that has essentially failed in its former
expression.
To the point, these folks are largely those who have survived the
significant and often troubled transition to an internal compass, for
whatever reason in their
personal history.
A HIGH SCHOOL GRAD PERSPECTIVE
The other point that resonates for me is that in the other aspects of
life, this transition to auto-pilot typically happens in adolescence.
I think Willow Creek's sort of "failure" in many churches is woven into
its authority structure, both implicit and explicit. In my experience,
there is no clear identification of a transition to an internal
compass, any desirability of such a transition, or specific preparation
for and/or nurturing of such a transition. The pattern for such
preparation would be timely (teens?), sustained (because the process is
usually gradual), and suitably accompanied (walk-along or paraclete
presence to mentor and encourage). That sort of support may exist, but
I have not encountered it in any intentional implementation.
It seems that this is in part a natural consequence of a very common
script in church life. The reality is that at this time in adolescent
church life, the programatic focus is the solidifying of doctrinal
positions and how to articulate them clearly, in preparation for
exiting high school, and entering college or life work. A further
complication is that often leaders are themselves young. At a time when
they might themselves otherwise be in the midst of the task of
internalizing their faith, they are effectively asked to shelve any
such reflections in favor of their job descriptions, again doctrinal
and praxis affirmations. Moreover, there is often broadcast a sense of
liability associated with thinking critically, reading and hearing
"other" ideas, and manifesting "doubt" in the form of reexamining ones
foundations of belief. One result is that these young folks often wind
up with weak roots. They would quite naturally be the owners of a
fairly narrow
stereotypical image of a monolithic denominational faith, including its
relationship
to the growing insights and understandings of the physical Creation.
There seems to be essentially no hint of the rich landscape and
diversity of thought, practice, and conversations of Christianity,
either historical and contemporary. That seems to me to constitute a
vulnerable ignorance, whether by intent or default. What happens then
when someone poses a question for which a young person does not have a
ready answer, or someone points to some aspect of Christian history
that comes as a complete surprise?
One straightforward result is that the faith as experienced in these
transitional years (just before going away to college!) may be more
akin to a garment of do's and don'ts and positions and articulations,
worn in communal conformity, than it is a faith that is at least in
transition into an internalized faith with an internal compass and
illumination.
WHAT THESE MAY HAVE IN COMMON
In the case of the high school exit scenario, there is a sort of
quantum drop-off, the distance between what they have been taught,
including their awareness of the larger landscape of Christian thought
and practice. It is a drop-off because it can be encountered suddenly
and unexpectedly with no effort on the part of the individual.
In the "stalled" and "dissatisfied" scenario, there is a quantum
barrier as well, but it is more in the nature of a wall. Some may find
renewed energy and satisfaction through the guidance (coaching and
mentoring) being considered by Willow Creek.
In short, I wonder if the "height" of these dropoffs and walls might
both be reduced by earlier and intentional awareness-creation
activities that illuminate these larger landscapes. There is a
practical problem, namely the spectre of possibility that some folks
may find one of these other "paths" more attractive (or more resonant)
than the one they are on in their particular church. But one finding of
a recent large and important survey by the Pew Forum on Religion &
Public Life is an enormous fluidity in religious affiliation, with 28%
of Americans leaving the faith of their childhood, and 44% of
Protestants having either switched religious affiliation, adopted an
affiliation for the first time, or dropped any affiliation. In light of
that fluidity, and the dissatisfaction that underlies it, this spectre
would seem to be without real traction (to mix a metaphor). At the
very least, one should be aware of the diversity in ones own
denomination - or kindred denominations - in order to respond most
benevolently in our stewardship of these caught in the webs of
dissatisfaction or stasis,
or falling in Jamieson's
categories: 'disillusioned followers', 'reflective
exiles', 'transitional explorers' and 'integrated wayfinders'.
I am inclined to think that some of these newer faith communities may
be constitutionally more able to change their ways of doing business in
a way that is responsive to the felt needs of many of these folks. I
ran across one interesting conversation on YouTube in which one
Christian author/speaker and former pastor suggested we might
reconsider the Jewish transition of 13 year olds into adulthood. That
might have some profound and beneficial consequences for many young
Christians, and the future of the Christian church and its footprint in
the world.
Or so it seemeth to me.... JimA [Friend of ASA]
David Opderbeck wrote:
Bill, you make what I think is a very helpful point here,
one which many folks often make: our faith is centrally about Christ.
I wonder if the "blame" isn't so much on any particular view of origins
as it is on a highly rationalist version of the faith elevates certain
propositions, including but not least about scripture, above the person
of Christ. Did the person who found his YECism shattered and gave up
on Christianity altogether really trust in and encounter the person of
Christ? Or was his faith only in a set of propositions?
On Thu, Jun 5, 2008 at 2:33 PM, Bill
Hamilton <
williamehamiltonjr@yahoo.com>
wrote:
Burgy
wrote
> Glenn Morton has made the claim many times that it is the YECs who
are
> to blame, along with those in the church who swallow their stuff.
He
> has at least strong anecdotal evidence to back his claim.
I certainly agree with Glenn that YECism can be a factor in an
individual departing from the faith. (As a former Arminian I cannot
agree with the Calvinist accusation that Arminians believe one can
_lose_ his faith. In the Wesleyan church I came to know the Lord in we
believed that an individual could willfully depart from the faith. But
_lose_ it? Never)
But my own experience might serve as a counterexample. I encountered
YECism shortly after I became a Christian. I decided to investigate it
and believed it for a time. But I soon discovered a number of flaws in
it. At that point I had to make a decision, and I decided that no
matter what I believed about creationism, I believed in Jesus Christ,
my savior.
William E. (Bill) Hamilton, Ph.D. Member ASA
248.821.8156 (mobile)
"...If God is for us, who is against us?" Rom 8:31
http://www.bricolagia.blogspot.com/
Want to help a child?: http://www.compassion.com/sponsor/index.asp?referer=85198
> On 6/4/08, Dehler, Bernie wrote: (in part)
>
> > Imagine this, you hear a report at church that 10 kids
accepted Christ
> > in the 3rd grade Sunday School. Everyone claps.>
> > Fast forward 10 years, and you hear that the kid who entered
college
> > just left the faith because they now believe in evolution.>
> > Who's to blame, the evolutionist who is teaching the lie of
evolution,
> > or the church who says that evolution is a lie?
> >>
> Glenn Morton has made the claim many times that it is the YECs who
are
> to blame, along with those in the church who swallow their stuff.
He
> has at least strong anecdotal evidence to back his claim.
>
> I have but one example -- a high school close friend who was a
> witnessing Christian whem I was not -- who lost his faith in
college
> when he found out the YEC stuff he believed was wrong. Dick went
on to
> a career as an executive with Pitney Bowles (sp?) and is now
retired,
> living in Florida, a confirmed atheist.
>
> I think (and pray) for him on occasion. Sad.
>
> > I'm thinking more about this because I'm offering to teach a
class at
> > church, and am anticipating the push-back... I think there is
a faction
> > that wants to keep everyone in slumber.
> >
> I hope you are successful. I have taught such a class several times
> (see my web site for material). On the last occasion the regular
> teacher was (and probably is) a YEC. But she was willing to at
least
> give me equal time (three weeks).
>
> Burgy
>
> To unsubscribe, send a message to
majordomo@calvin.edu with
> "unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
To unsubscribe, send a message to
majordomo@calvin.edu
with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
--
David W. Opderbeck
Associate Professor of Law
Seton Hall University Law School
Gibbons Institute of Law, Science & Technology
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Thu Jun 5 18:18:39 2008