RE: [asa] Who's to blame for the lost ones?

What does Willow Creek teach, specifically, about origins? Looks like
they are OEC-friendly to me- against evolution. Is that helpful in
training people how to deal with science and religion?

A webpage of theirs:

http://www.willowcreek.org/truthquest/event2.asp

Other than that, I agree with the post about teaching people to think
for themselves and the discovery of Willow Creek.

...Bernie

________________________________

From: asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu [mailto:asa-owner@lists.calvin.edu] On
Behalf Of Jim Armstrong
Sent: Thursday, June 05, 2008 3:18 PM
To: asa@calvin.edu
Subject: Re: [asa] Who's to blame for the lost ones?

[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

----- Original Message ----
> From: j burg <hossradbourne@gmail.com>
> To: "Dehler, Bernie" <bernie.dehler@intel.com>
> Cc: asa@calvin.edu
> Sent: Thursday, June 5, 2008 11:31:47 AM
> Subject: Re: [asa] Who's to blame for the lost ones?
>

> 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.
To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.