My last post has stirred up some, uh….”interesting” commentary and email. To the point: in the view of some people, evangelism of teenagers is abusive and unethical. Since I’m a preacher who preaches the Gospel to teenagers with an appeal for their conversion, I’m engaged in abusive behavior.
This especially seems to to apply, to some, to the cases of those who are stated unbelievers or atheists. If I know that is their position, then to evangelize at all is to be disrespectful and manipulative. These young people should not have to hear Christian appeals for conversion and it is entirely appropriate to see this kind of activity as unethical pressure tactics on those least able to resist.
These claims hit close to home. I’ve devoted most of my life to evangelizing students, and I am not bashful about it. That said, I am just as passionate to reject all unethical methods, pressure tactics and manipulation. Scripture, in fact, commands me to abandon and oppose any underhanded or unethical use of the Gospel. I am told to serve and love others in Jesus’ name, and to proclaim/teach the Gospel with faith and submission to Christ at the center. I am given specific instructions to honor God in evangelism by leaving matters of the heart and conscience to him. My calling is to love, communicate and relate. I am an incarnational proclaimer of the Good News. I can’t manipulate and represent Jesus. I also can’t equivocate and represent Jesus.
When I deal with students, I am straight up about evangelism. If they take my class, I will occasionally explain the Gospel to them. I stress that their beliefs are welcome to be shared as well. I use no decisional tactics and I have no personal interest as a teacher in what a student does with the claims of Christ. I pray for these students, and would find it impossible to pray for them without praying that they come to know Christ.
I am just as honest about preaching. I give full permission to ignore or reject whatever I say, but I am straightforward that my calling and vocation is to proclaim, explain and apply the Gospel. I use no altar call. I use no tactics or manipulations of any kind. It’s the Gospel, an appeal to believe, a prayer and I leave it with them and the Holy Spirit.
I tell my students that I am completely open to being evangelized by them. I invite questions and I ask questions. Because I am in a Christian school with a missions focus, I have many non-Christians in my Bible classes and preaching services. We have dialog constantly. It’s a natural outgrowth of the diversity of our school.
I can see that the handwriting is on the wall. Those who speak of Christ, even in a private school, are going to be labeled abusive. Those who seek for decisions from anyone uner 18 is going to be called a child abuser. Ministries to young people will come under increased scrutiny for everything they do if there stated goal is to bring about conversion.
Do the ethical issues associated with conversion mean evangelism with anyone under 18 is immoral and unethical? What do you think?
The Internet Monk Archives 
iMonk says:
“By the logic of some, infant baptism would be child abuse. It’s a worthy topic.”
I am not sure how worthy a topic it is but I am sure that this is an unfortunate case of defining the term “child abuse” down.
In an age when parently authority is under attack and in an age when children can be taken from parents at the mear hint of abuse – real abuse – I would suggest that throwing terms like child abuse around carelessly is not a wise thing to do.
Putting that aside it also serves the unintended purpose of desensitizing us to REAL abuse. If a parent baptizing an infant is abuse then what do we call it when a parent beats a child so badly that he/she is left crippled for life? Words are important and when we misuse words there are important cultural implications.
LikeLike
Well Phil, no offense, but don’t you find it just a little bit arrogant that you would presume to tell me what emotion is driving my argument.
My own opinion is that evangelism must always be motivated by love. So, tell me, is it love NOT to share the Good News? Is it love NOT to tell someone about God’s love for them? What motivates YOU when you fail to share the Gospel message. Is it fear of rejection? Fear of being offensive? Shame? Shelfishness?
If I play your game I can simply accuse you of self-justifying your disobedience to Jesus’ commandment to share the Gospel. Incidently, it is also possible to do the wrong thing out of love.
LikeLike
“My point is that the worst evangelism is no evangelism at all…that is the most damaging kind.”
I couldn’t disagree more. This is the classic fear-based argument for evangelizing that I heard over and over as a child. Since it’s based in fear, it really is self-concerned, instead of being truly concerned for the other. I’ve been told that sharing the Gospel is always an act of love. But I think I Cor. 13 shows that it’s possible to do the right things without love. The fact that one is evangelizing does not trump I Cor. 13 in any way.
LikeLike
By the logic of some, infant baptism would be child abuse. It’s a worthy topic.
LikeLike
Evangelism is the nugget of truth (good news) all wrapped up in a package of love. Without the love, what possible truth can there be?
Perhaps the problem begins when we start to see “conversion” as something that can or should be mass produced, outside of personal relationship. When we want to count those hands, and are not walking alongside the pilgrims, young or old, who own the hands, and for whom metanoia is a process that may take seconds, hours, weeks, months, years or decades…
It’s not abusive for children or teenagers to hear the Good News that Jesus is alive and loves them, but children are so terribly vulnerable to fear and to social rejection. They want to belong and they lack the judgement that is available to adults (or most adults anyway) to reflect more objectively on what it is they want to belong to, and why.
I’m sure that when abusive tactics are used, this sets up the young person to fall into disillusion, disappointment and anger as he or she matures and thinks back on what was done and why. Where will the preacher be when that happens? Probably somewhere else, counting a few more hands.
I notice that no one has responded to the question about infant baptism, Monk, perhaps because most respondents here are not part of churches that practice this. I don’t have an answer, but have recently been part of a discussion elsewhere about whether baptisms should take place against the wishes of a parent. The conundrum involves the extent to which baptism is viewed as a sacrament and an occasion of grace. At the one extreme it would be seen as some kind of ‘magic’ (and it sounds as if the Sinners’ Prayer, for some Fundies, is also a form of that same magic). At the other extreme, some hold that baptism can only be “believers’ baptism” in which it doesn’t really matter if God shows up because it’s only symbolic and all about us making our stand.
Baptism is clearly another topic altogether but the issue of abuse or riding roughshod over people’s feelings and preferences, in pursuit of what’s seen as a more important goal by those who believe they know better – well, that’s pretty much the same old story. Thanks for a great topic and blessings on you for trying to be both truthful and loving with the young people in your care.
LikeLike
the way you present the Gospel helps on this one. as you’ve said, you present without asking for a raised hand and trust that God will stir hearts. we present, God calls, people respond. the manipulation of students bothers me. i’ve been at young life camps where hundreds of kids come forward, many of whom have come forward the year before, because they have been manipulated into thinking if they don’t make this decision right now they are going to hell and their leaders will be disappointed.
youth ministry cohorts are the worse in the area of manipulation. the pressure on camps, retreats, etc to make converts is ridiculous. but the role of presenting the Gospel and expecting a response cannot be diminished.
the culture presents all sorts of “good news” approaches, but we don’t consider them abuse. try this product, it will fix you. now that’s abuse!
LikeLike
Ty M.
“NO KIDDING – I used the example of Carrie to demonstrate the weakness of your argument!”
I realize that, but in so doing you only demonstrated your inability to distinguish between fact and fiction.
LikeLike
Memphis Aggie, +1.
LikeLike
Actually Verne that makes you completely in step with the cultural mainstream.
LikeLike
Memphis Aggie, I gather you deem it “insensitive” to discuss Jews and Nazis in the same breath, as if their collective crimes were similar. In that case, yes–I am insensitive. I simply do not care about your pet causes and distinctions. No doubt this is because I am a wicked person, completely out of step with the cultural mainstream.
LikeLike
If evangelism means leading someone into a stable and loving relationship with Jesus, then by definition it is pretty hard to pull off by hit-and-run, manipulative techniques.
If “evangelism” means “doing whatever it takes to get converts to utter the magic words that will make them forever safe even if they later become totally disillusioned with manipulative Christians,” then I can see why believers in this kind of evangelism think anything goes.
We have similar issues with vulnerable patients in our faith-based hospital; in a power imbalance, the person in charge has to be really careful that the patient doesn’t somehow interpret it as, “No pain meds unless you agree to Bible study.”
LikeLike
two points I’ve taken away from this thread
1) as followers of Christ, we MUST keep preaching the gospel, to as many as can understand our message; that includes children.
2)we must be vigilant to present the gospel in ways , and in words, that accurately reflect who Jesus is, and what HE said.
that’s my take: being careful about #2 does not mean we stop #1
somebody said: the worst preaching is no preaching at all…reminds me of something D.Moody (allegedly) told his critics: “I like the way I’m doing it better than the way you’re not doing it…” Wonder if he really said that…
Greg R
LikeLike
Alfred
NO KIDDING – I used the example of Carrie to demonstrate the weakness of your argument!
LikeLike
Cindy says:
“Alfred, if it takes ‘manipulation’, it isn’t the Gospel; it isn’t Christ.”
Cindy – Thank you for stating the obvious. And when I start to defend manipulative evangelical practices please call me on it. However, I didn’t so please don’t. Unless your position is the same as some on this board (that ALL evangelical efforts aimed at children is ipso facto manipulation and therefore unethical) then I have no beef with you.
Ty M. says:
“Setting up hypotheticals in an attempt to downplay whatever abuse someone may have suffered at the hands of a group you approve of is the worst sort of straw man. I may as well provide a “scenario†of a child’s life akin to what Stephen King’s ‘Carrie’ suffered…”
Ty M. – You would have a point if what I said was in fact a hypothetical — but it isn’t. It is a very real situation which plays itself out with thousands of children every year.
Your comparison with Stephen King’s ‘Carrie’ is purely fiction and has no resemblance to real life. Ironically, you are guilty of the very rhetoric you accuse me of.
LikeLike
Verne,
I agree with one law for everyone; that’s a strawman. You completely missed or willfully ignored my point about insensitivity and the failure to make important distinctions. The question is not directly relevant to this thread except that equating evangelization with child abuse is another example of a distorted sense of proportion.
LikeLike
Verne,
Yes there other factors, but it was the Swastikas in permanent marker that caused Children’s aid to sweep in in the first place.
LikeLike
Thank you, Michael. It appears that there are several important factors under consideration, other than neo-Nazi beliefs.
Memphis Aggie, yes–Jews and neo-Nazis ought to be treated equally under the law. This has nothing to do with WW2 or Palestine. If the law says that children of xenophobic parents are to be seized, then it cannot be selectively applied. I think you will find that there do exist Jewish groups which are as extremist as any white supremacist.
LikeLike
Alfred, if it takes ‘manipulation’, it isn’t the Gospel; it isn’t Christ.
LikeLike
Alfred
“Compare your poor pathetic upbringing with a single mother home where the daughter raises herself because her mom is too busy getting on with her own life. The daughter is taking drugs and having sex by the time she is 14. By the time she 16 she has already had 3 sex partners and perhaps an abortion and is considering suicide.”
Setting up hypotheticals in an attempt to downplay whatever abuse someone may have suffered at the hands of a group you approve of is the worst sort of straw man. I may as well provide a “scenario” of a child’s life akin to what Stephen King’s “Carrie” suffered at the hands of her psychotic evangelical mother as a counterpoint to yours.
If people have suffered at the hands of less than ethical evangelical authority figures, it may be a better testament to the superiority of your position to examine when and where the methodology of “believe or burn” has failed and seek to correct it, than fall back on apologetics like “Well, at least you won’t be in HELL” or “The other side abuses worse than we do, and here’s a worst-case hypothetical to prove it!”
Note: Let it be known I am NOT lumping all evangelicals into the sort of “hell house” or “roaming van” methods of converting youth, but rather those who specifically practice and/or defend it.
LikeLike
iMonk:
You don’t have to own them all, but evangelicals do have to own Haggard, being that he was president of the national evangelical association. You can’t be more officially evangelical than that. And I’m afraid you’re on your way to the True Scotsman fallacy. One advantage evangelicals have over Catholics is that it’s much easier for them to disown their crazies. If a Catholic priest hurts a kid, no one doubts his Catholicism. But if an evangelical minister does, people can claim, rightly or wrongly, that he wasn’t a “real” evangelical or not “our kind” of evangelical.
A positive example of what I’d like to see is all the Catholic leaders who stood up and hollered when the priestly abuse scandals came to light, the ones who demanded reform, resignations, and arrests. I’m mindful that I’m way beyond evangelism of kids now, but it was a good example of people standing up, both in public and inside their religious circle, demanding that a wrong be righted.
LikeLike
Anna A says:
“Most of us commentors are over it. We just want to make the distinction between good evangelism and bad evangelism. That goes for both adult level and child level work.”
Really? Well, by some of the comments I read all evangelism is bad evangelism.
My point is that the worst evangelism is no evangelism at all…that is the most damaging kind.
LikeLike
Wow Verne equating Nazis and Jews in parallel phrases in the same sentence is quintessential moral equivalence. It would be actively difficult for anyone to be more offensive. I expect you did not intend to give offense so you might reconsider you’re analogies. As for the substance of what you’re saying, I happen to agree.
LikeLike
Alfred,
Most of us commentors are over it. We just want to make the distinction between good evangelism and bad evangelism. That goes for both adult level and child level work.
Bad-scaring a child about the rapture, so that they think that they have been left behind everytime they come home to an empty house (been there-done that as a victim myself.)
Good- Modeling a Godly lifestyle backed up with Gospel teaching. A book table left by the Gideons in a high school.
LikeLike
I’m certainly not opposed to evangelistic efforts aimed at youth — but I do fear that evangelicals often over-evangelize young people. By that, I mean that a lot of effort seems to be directed toward getting kids to answer an alter call during an officially church-sponsored service or program — so much so that kids eventually develope a sort of immunity to it. Heck, I can remember my own teenage years in a Baptist youth group, and I can’t count the number of times that I and my fellow youth went down front to get saved or rededicate or whatever. Sometimes we did it just to keep our youth pastor happy and give the adult church members the impression that their church’s youth ministry was effective — basically, so they would keep the trips and pizza parties flowing. I know it sounds aweful, but we intentionally humored the adults for our own purposes while trying to keep things pretty shallow and social. To us, answering alter calls was nothing more than playing a part that was expected of us.
I’m thinking that maybe evangelicals would do well to look beyond the alter call as both the means and goal of evangelism. Maybe it would be good if we gave young people very specific training in how to seek God for themselves (private prayer, listening for God’s voice and direction, personal Bible study), rather than insisting that they come to a decision about Christ due to a 30 to 45 minute sermon and several heart-tugging stanzas of “Just As I Am.” And maybe we could give them opportunities to speak freely about their own doubts and struggles — actually open up honest and fear-free dialogue between youth and their adult leaders — rather than just insisting that they believe what they’re told to believe.
If we want more of our youth to geniunely receive Christ within themselves and dedicate their lives to following and obeying Him, then we really need to create more freedom and space for that to happen in a real, nonmanufactured way and stop requiring that both the Holy Spirit and our youth keep conversion confined to the appointed place in the church program.
LikeLike
Verne,
Here is a fairly good summary of the Neo-Nazi story published today. Note: It excludes some of the more graphic stuff that the little girl said to interviewers.
Neo-Nazi mother may get custody back
LikeLike
I am hearing a lot of outrage on this board over the harm of child evangelism. It sounds like a lot of you were brought up in legalistic fundamentalist homes. Fine, I am sorry to here that life was not perfect for you.
Now get over it.
Compare your poor pathetic upbringing with a single mother home where the daughter raises herself because her mom is too busy getting on with her own life. The daughter is taking drugs and having sex by the time she is 14. By the time she 16 she has already had 3 sex partners and perhaps an abortion and is considering suicide.
That scenario (and far worse) is becoming far too typical of a child’s life in America today.
Now remind me again why you are concerned with MANIPULATING a child at the age of 5 or 6 or 9 or whatever by teaching them about the love of Christ because of the HARM that will cause.
God help us!
LikeLike
Debbie says:
“If one actively evangelizes w/o parental consent, Alfred, one is manipulating. Just from a simple developmental standpoint, kids believe what authority figures tell them until their thinking matures to a more rhetorical stage.”
Debbie this is an interesting position to take as this would make expressing a point of view to a child (I will not split hairs here about age – I know 20 year old who are more impressionable than some 6 year olds) without the explicit consent of the child’s parent unethical.
By what moral principle (not legal – moral) do you assign absolute intellectual authority of a parent over a child – to the absolute exclusion of other influences.
Your point of view is very strange to me in that we know that we are all influenced by hundreds of opposing pooints of view – most of which, in our culture, are very different from the Christian world view. For Christians to exit from the market place of ideas and let the world hold sway (without an answer from Christians) over the next generation is a formula for disaster.
Now you are correct that I made a seemingly contradictory statement to Verne by asserting that
parent should have free LEGAL rein to indoctrinate their children as they see fit. I also said that parents should have the LEGAL right to protect their children from ’sales pitches’ or undesirable outside influences.
But Verne was asking a LEGAL question not a question about ethics (at least that is how I interpreted his questions)…those are very different things.
If I am in a position where I can influence a child (in what I believe is a positive way), and I do so, that is both my legal right and is ethical (in my opinion – if done appropriately). The parent of that child also has a legal right to prevent that child from being in a position where I can influence her. Removing those legal right of the parent would lead to a great harm to society and to children in general.
LikeLike
iMonk it impresses me that you are talking to these kids and essentially discipling them instead of trying to get them to do an altar call. I think that your method would make “counting the cost” more real and conversion more real as well. Like Spurgeon supposedly told people to go home and search the scriptures and come back on Monday or Tuesday if you were still interested.
LikeLike
I grew up in indie fundie churches. We actually got together and burned records, or which records were still left at that time (late 80’s). But I always thought Hell House and Judgement House were junk and cheesey. About as bad as the ten minutes I made myself sit thru some new video of “Pilgrims Progress” that Hagee was selling on TV about two weeks ago. It was horrible. What normal person would want to watch it?
Too cheesey.
LikeLike
Post Christian asked:
Doesn’t it enrage you that some in your faith are harming children in the name of spreading that faith?
Sure, but it enrages me much more that some are only too eager to shut down ANY evangelism to this age group because of the excesses of a minority. That’s like telling Jesus to take the day off because Simon Bar-Jesus has his freak show in town. The alarmists have only succeeded here in showing us that very good things can be perverted.
Any other revelations ??
LikeLike
This is one reason why we converted from a credo-Baptist to a paedo-Baptist tradition. Not to say you don’t have some of the same problems, but Evangelization, Enculturation and basic Child-Rearing are much easier to unite in my own experience.
LikeLike
Michael, could you give more details about exactly what the neo-Nazi couple are alleged to have done? Was it only a matter of their beliefs, or were they conspiring to commit actual crimes? Antipathy for other races is actually fairly common–and not only among whites. Whatever course you advocate for the neo-Nazis, you should also agree to apply it to the Jews who follow right-wing Israeli politics, blacks who belong to the Nation of Islam, etc.
We have to expect children to be exposed to evangelism (which will not always be tastefully carried out), just as they will be exposed to people trying to cultivate sexual relationships with them, or sell them something. Of course there is a great difference in ages–young children need to be monitored at all times, not so older children.
That said, a van hanging around a school lot definitely ought to be stopped by the police, and its occupants checked against the computer. If they seem to be legit, they should still be warned away, as they have no business being there. Inside the school, I expect children occasionally to evangelize one another, but of course their teachers (if the school is state-run) must restrain themselves. Really, this is only common courtesy–surely a value common to both sides, if not always practiced as well as it might be.
On the subject of “hell house” (which I know only from cartoons)–do these people not realize that this is at least as likely to inspire amusement or disgust, as terror for their souls? When I read in school the famous sermon of Jonathan Edwards (who is the subject of the other thread), I laughed at the garish imagery–as well as the notion of congregation members leaping out the window in despair!–and suspect my reaction to be a common one.
LikeLike
josh s blake wrote:
>That’s an interesting question. How did these >children/teens become atheists? Did they just >wake up one day and say, “Hey, I’m an atheist?†>Sure, they could have grown up with a disbelief >in God at home, but otherwise, wasn’t there some >sort of evangelism (or anti-evangelism) to bring >these people to their disbelief?
Hey, atheist lurker here.
I realize that anecdote is not the singular of data, but in my experience, no, no evangelism required. I grew up with Christian* parents; they didn’t make a big deal of it, but they believed. When I was young, I tried to convince myself I believed too, but inside I was pretty much always going: you’re kidding me with this, right?
I wasn’t ever proselytized by an atheist, and I certainly didn’t read any particularly atheist books – in fact I was a little surprised when I did an internal inventory and realized that was the label that described my religious beliefs the best.
Anyway, back on track. It doesn’t sound like what our host is doing is improper or manipulative. I’ve met a number of Christians (and Jews and Muslims and Baha’i) who have been very open about their faith, and my life has been enriched by knowing them.
Martha
*for values of Christian that include Catholics.
LikeLike
I could understand if someone mistook you for a proto-Catholic, Spence, but a Branch Davidian? No way.
LikeLike
The unbelievers have a point. I’m thirty years old and I became a Christian when I was fourteen. As I think back to the time of my conversion, I now clearly see the manipulation. Although I am grateful for being told of the saving faith that can only come through Christ, I wish it would have happened another way. It’s as if I were 100 pounds over weight and had a emotionally abusive parent guilt me into to shedding the pounds. Losing the weight is great (life saving), but the tactics used to get me there was not.
LikeLike
Post-Christian:
I think that mainstream Christians consider events such as you describe to be ipso facto the work of deranged mentally ill sociopaths and criminals, and would hesitate to feel they need to say “Oh….we don’t approve.” We view it as having nothing particularly to do with us. It’s like saying that if Ted Haggard has sex and does Meth with a male prostitute we should write columns saying “We aren’t that kind of evangelicals.” It’s perverse on its face. We don’t need to disassociate. Only those who want to tar us would even think of associating us with those tactics.
Much like I don’t hear the left apologizing for the Unabomber or Environmental Terror groups.
peace
ms
LikeLike
iMonk,
I find the whole discussion comical because I can only fall back on my own behavior when I was a mere teenager. I was an atheist, arrogant, opinionated and distrustful of all authority, but especially teachers! If you could have evangelized me, more power to you!
But if you put this in a larger context–the best teachers I had MADE me think, and taught me HOW to think. I think sometimes we sell the kids short–they cannot think, they are susceptible to brain washing, etc. Most kids I know are opinionated and unafraid to mix it up over a host of topics–the Gosple included.
Keep up the good work; your eternal student and brother in Christ.
LikeLike
iMonk,
I understand your distress at seeing your life’s work demonized; however you are the victim of the bad behavior of others.
Whatever it’s worth to you, reading your blog I am convinced that you, personally, can be trusted to evangelize in a rational, moral, ethical, non-abusive, caring manner. Very few others can.
LikeLike
If someone from my faith was pulling up in a van and proselytizing children on their way home from school, I’d be doing everything in my power (such as it is) to get the authorities all over their case if they didn’t cease and desist immediately, and I would take the opportunity to cast shame upon them publicly within our shared religious circle if an appropriate opportunity arose and they hadn’t repented.
Another example is a local preacher here who a couple years back who tried to physically beat the devil out of an autistic kid in worship. I would think his co-religionists have a responsibility to let people know that he wasn’t acting in accordance with their faith and to condemn what he did from within the understanding of that faith.
I grew up around Jesus Camp-style children’s programs. My parents sent me to those things because they thought they would be good for me. That’s all you can ask of a parent. It’s certainly not grounds for taking kids away from their parents.
I would hope that discerning evangelical leaders who have kids in their flock who could potentially become Jesus Campers would speak out loudly against it and try to persuade parents against sending their kids. Just like I hope discerning Unitarians or liberal Episcopalians would speak out loudly against some of the harmful lefty loony stuff that they do to their kids, instead of just saying that different parents make different choices.
LikeLike
Specifics, post-Christian? I’m disturbed by Jesus Camp, but I’m not going to take children away from parents for loving their kids but being loony.
LikeLike
I’m perplexed by some of these comments that seem to be so enamored with the *right* to evangelize that they completely step over the harm being done by some evangelism of minors, and being done quite regularly in some quarters. Doesn’t it enrage you that some in your faith are harming children in the name of spreading that faith? It seems like you’re more concerned that there are leftists out there who think you’re wrong than that children are being sinned against in the name of your religion. That’s not good news in my book.
LikeLike
A few random thoughts (which may have already been said in the previous 92 comments which I haven’t read yet):
* As to anyone who names the name of Christ and yet classifies evangelism to any demographic as a bad thing, I would ask what they do with Romans 10:14 ?
* What you are decrying is the ultimate baby-with-the-bathwater. Genericize your closing question and it becomes, “Because some people screw up XYZ, is XYZ automatically bad?”
* History tells us that some of the disciples were probably under 18. So, apparently, not only was Christ the second Adam, but the first Abuser. So you’re in good company, Michael.
* We live in an age where people are allegedly offended by any identification of faith that they do not share, and a belief that they have a right to not be offended. One would be hard-pressed to call it “abuse” if the subject is an adult, but it’s easy if the subject is a child, and it sound so much sexier.
* In many states, a 13-year-old girl is capable of handling on her own (with no input from her parents) whether she is going to have an abortion. But she’s not capable of handling someone sharing their faith with her. Puhleeeeze.
LikeLike
I certainly have heard the line of “reasoning” from less-rational atheists that:
1) Religious belief is a pathology
2) Nobody over the age of 21 not raised religiously would become religious unless they were unusually stupid or insane
3) Being raised religiously is the main cause of having religious belief
therefore : 4) Raising children religiously is a cause of adult pathology
therefore : 5) Raising children religiously is abusive
therefore : 6) The state should be able to intervene in families to prevent religious upbringing.
LikeLike
As much as I feel some parents out to be publicly flogged for what they do in raising their kids, once you get past requiring parents to teach kids to read, write, do math, etc… at a decent level, and are not physically abusive, I strongly fell parents should have free reign to teach them any philosophy they want.
Anything less and you get into a violation of even the most conservative reading of the 1st amendment. “Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof …”
As much as I think Mormons have it wrong, they have the right to be totally wrong. Ditto Dawkins if he has kids.
LikeLike
Rick: I appreciate the fact that you posted, knowing that your point of view was going to be the decided minority, and not that liked by some. It would have been easier, but dishonest, to stay in hiding. You did have a bumpy start to your post, it sounded like this:
I’m dealing with American evangelicals
and then something about not being surprised that your words were twisted. And you have 40plus years of ministry experience behind you ?
If your interest is to minister to the Yanks, and assorted others here, you might want to avoid the generic insult to start your post. Or, perhaps, go all the way , call Monk a fat hillbilly, and go from there…. hot or cold and all that. I’m somewhat joking, but my point is your voice of ‘correction’ will be hard to hear (if it is in fact GOD sent correction) when you put yourself in such an adverserial posture from the get go.
Again, not sure your goals here, and if you are a frequent lurker here, you’ll know that the IM crowd is very diverse, very outspoken, and representative of many views and traditions. That’s a lot of the attraction.
MONK: you are to be commended for putting the topic out in the open, into the light, instead of just sulking….which would have been my response, probably. Loved the comments.
GREG R
LikeLike
Oops, my above comment should read:
“A few people raised the issue of raising a child up to be a “Neo-Naziâ€.”
LikeLike
Sorry, I posted the above before I was done.
I just want to say one more thing. Parents, and schools will always teach their children something. Will always pass morals, beliefs and ethics on to their children. The question is are they good morals, beliefs and ethics or are they bad ones.
C.S. Lewis said something to the effect of everyone has a philosophy, the only question remains, is it a good one or a bad one.
LikeLike
The hyperbolic use of words like abuse in such a context is of a piece with a standard left-wing strategy of putting your opponent “beyond the pale”. One can then argue that one is for free speech, but this is “over the line”. This strategy includes a sort of bait-and-switch. Everyone is against abuse, so you just expand the definition to include all your opponents. Just like everyone is against sexual harassment, and suddenly people became legally liable for crude jokes. Everyone is against hate speech, and suddenly factual statements about Islam are “hate speech”.
Keep up the good work, iMonk. You inspire me every day.
BTW, I’m American, but not “evangelical”.
LikeLike
This has probably been said here many times, but I don’t have the time to read all the posts.
I appreciate you and your ministry, Monk. Keep it up.
But I find it ironic that those whou oppose “evangelizing” minors on certain grounds have no problem with other groups doing it. It’s only Christians who get attacked.
When I was student teaching in a public school a woman from Tibet came into an elementary classroom and led the students who were obviously minors in Buddhist religious practices.
I noticed one commenter above targeted all and any religious “indoctrination” but never included or mentioned secular humanist indoctrination. It is taken for granted that the tenants of secularism are true and therefore should be taught to children under 18 in the home.
Why is it then wrong to believe and teach that the tenants of Christianity are true and to teach those to our children?
Where does one store the universal solvent? No container will hold it, for it eats away at everything it touches.
So one takes the extreme, and dangerous, position that children ought not to be taught anything whatsoever, but should be allowed grow entirely on their own. But that in itself is a moral statement of belief. Why is it any better than the Christian’s moral statements?
LikeLike
It is through this experience that it became apparent to me that my Christian friends seem to relish bragging when one of their children gets saved. There is an unspoken principal that all children of Christian parents must get saved or else we are not being good parents and need to try harder. — Ed
It’s the CHRISTIAN (TM) version of “My kid can beat up your kid”, “My kid’s a Genius and your kid’s Not”, or “My kid speaks thirteen languages, won a dozen national-level medals in his soccer league, and is at a special boarding school in Europe where they’re prepping him for the Ivy League.”
The Christian version of Parental One-Upmanship, that’s all.
LikeLike
Here in the capital of the Evangelical wasteland, a woman parked her van outside a public school and tried to convince a girl to come in and learn about Jesus so she wouldn’t die and go to hell. Apparently, an unrelated church has a reputation for approaching students on their way to school and home for the purposes of proselytizing. That’s uncool. — Beth
That’s well beyond “uncool”, Beth. That’s the type of approach that’ll attract the attention of the local cops. That SHOULD attract attention from the cops. (And think of the resulting opportunity to cry “Persecution!”)
I mean, parking van outside public school and high-pressuring a girl to “come in”? That sounds WAY too much like a serial rapist/serial killer abduction MO with the van as a cozy little “crime scene on wheels”. At the very least, just parking the van and soliciting looks a LOT like a drug deal setup or a cruisy pedo. (Van as “mobile crime scene on wheels” is a direct quote from a retired FBI profiler; several serial killers he profiled used that MO to abduct their victims.)
LikeLike
I consider Hell House and Judgment House to be abusive and incredible perversions of the Biblical Gospel. I once put my job on the line to avoid having one come here. I abhor them.
LikeLike
Michael, after reading your description of how you teach your students, I wished I could have been a kid in your class.
Having grown up in an fundamentalist Independent Baptist environment, I’ve spent quite a bit of my adult life trying to figure out how to still believe in Christ without being a fundamentalist. This may seem like a simple thing to many. Some of you know, it’s anything but simple. Many days have been spent on the brink of giving up Christianity altogether because I couldn’t get past the idea that the only “real Christians” are fundamentalists. Therefore, I would have to be one, act and talk like one. That I wasn’t willing to do. So the only logical alternative seemed to be rejection of Christianity altogether.
Just last year I read Jeff VanVonderen’s “The Subtle Power of Spiritual Abuse”. It allowed me to put a label on what I experienced as a kid–the high-pressure fear-of-hell tactics to get me to believe; the hyper-focus on me making a decision “before I leave the building tonight!”; the many false-dilemas made between “God’s Truth” and science/psychology/sociology/etc.; the trained arrogance that every interaction I had was a divine appointment to get the person saved–all of it was abusive. It was abusive because I was a child and emontional manipulation was used to get me to comply. Was it intended to be abusive? Certainly not. But intent is not a pre-requisite. If you run into someone’s car, their door still gets smashed in, even if you had no intention of doing so.
Note that I’m not saying that all fundamentalists are abusive. Nor am I saying evangelism is child abuse. What was abusive in my case were the tactics used to evangelize me.
With my own kids, we are raising them as Christians. However, we are, hopefully, helping them think for themselves, and are open to the possibility of them choosing another path as adults. I’m not a relativist, so if they did, that would be scary for me. But I know that God is faithful to his promises, and each one of them is under His care. So all I can do is love my children, teach them with humility, and let God handle the rest.
Michael, thank God for your ministry and for the way in which you approach it. I don’t hear anything like what I experienced as a kid. Oh how I wish I would have been a kid in your class. 🙂
LikeLike
I think it SHOULD be very difficult for clergy of any persuasion to speak to children without their parents’ consent. However, enrollinging your child in a Christian school constitutes consent. Letting your child go to Sunday School/Children’s Church/any church related activity is consent.
I’m with the other posters who talked about going to churches that were all up into that Rapture theology. I consider what happened to me as a youth, in church, to have been psychological abuse. I still struggle with the psychic scars I have from this, and I probably will until I die.
Honestly, if I had it to do over again with my own child – I would absolutely positively not have allowed him to go to children’s church. He would have sat right up in church with me, and anyone who had a problem with it could kiss my foot. I’m not sure that what happened to him could be considered abuse, but he suffers spiritually because of it. His head was filled with bad theology. He was promised if he would just “pray the prayer” that life would be all hearts and flowers and nothing bad would ever happen to him, and of course life didn’t turn out that way… The health and wealth gospel was being pushed on those kids downstairs, and I was largely unaware of it, because it was being denounced upstairs. So, if I had it to do over again – I either wouldn’t let him go, or I’d be such a nuisance to the teachers that they’d probably ask me to stop bringing him.
LikeLike
I would think that being a preacher at a Christian school, people would know what to expect when you stand at a podium and start talking. Friends of friends run Christian schools in Iraq. (http://csmedes.org/) They are very open about what they teach and what they expect out of their students. High-ranking Muslim families flock to them because of the education.
Here in the capital of the Evangelical wasteland, a woman parked her van outside a public school and tried to convince a girl to come in and learn about Jesus so she wouldn’t die and go to hell. Apparently, an unrelated church has a reputation for approaching students on their way to school and home for the purposes of proselytizing. That’s uncool.
LikeLike
Wow! A lot of interesting comments here. There are a few that I feel must comment on.
Scott writes: “They think so in Canada. It is a funny statement to say that it is immoral or unethical to teach that their is a God and ask someone to believe it but say that is isn’t immoral or unethical to to teach that their isn’t a God and ask someone to believe it.”
Scott, are you speaking as a Canadian? This has not been my experience here. In Hamilton we have prayer groups and Bible study groups within our public schools. Friends of mine who are foster parents are free to take their children to church. There are no limitations on youth group activities, etc. So what specifically are you pointing to in Canada?
A few people raising a child up to be a “Neo-Nazi”. We do have a case concerning that exact situation before the courts in Canada. Children’s Aid is seeking custody of two children who are being raised in a family with extreme Neo-Nazi beliefs. “If” your parents are teaching you that the killing of blacks and immigrants is a good thing, do they deserve to keep you?
C. Holland – The taking of a picture of a child is protected by privacy legislation in Canada. You need parental permission to do so whether it has to do with a church or a Public School. I think that getting written consent from parents for VBS is just common sense. It protects the church more than anything else.
Bob Towell writes: “According to studies most Christians (about 85%) become followers of Jesus before 14 years of age.”
Agreed, but I have also heard of studies that showed that those who continued in the church had some sort of life rededication experience after the age of 12.
My own thoughts on the matter:
I think it is important to remember that any time you have an Adult/Teenager interaction, especially in a teaching situation, there is a power imbalance. iMonk writes that the students have the right to evangelize him, but that is like saying that the chickens in the hen house have the right to kill the fox. It is not a fair fight/discussion. Parents need to be properly communicated with, so that they have a basic understanding of the things to which their teenager will be exposed. Once the child hits college or University, it is a totally different story. (This is why I give 1/4 of my tithe to college ministries.)
LikeLike
“If you would be uncomfortable with a wiccan or Muslim or atheist doing it to your kid, you should not do it to other kids. Simple enough.â€
Well Tim if you believe your faith is on par with wicca, Islam or atheism the I suppose you are right. But then you probably went to a public school where they teach us that all world views are equally valid.
Alfred, I just want to echo and expound on sue kephart’s point, because I don’t understand how your response to Tim above abides by the Golden Rule.
This is something that I continually think about, because my oldest son’s best friend is Jewish. We love him and his family and treat him (and therefore treat/respect his parents) the way we want his parents to treat our son (and treat/respect us). He (and they) know/s we’re Christian. He knows our faith is important to us. His parents know how involved we are at our church. Rather than being something that separates us from them, it’s become something of a common bond.
Besides which, out-and-out evangelizing this child (or other children in certain situations) does not seem to me to be the only effective way to bring Christ to the child. Evangelism in deed is often more effective than evangelical words, anyhow. Please consider Jesus ministy as he explains it in Luke 7:18-23 (NIV):
Jesus cites six activities as evidence that he is the Messiah. Only 1 involves preaching the Gospel. His case largely rests on living it — on being it.
Michael, to your larger point and original post, I don’t think you’re doing anything unethical. When parents send their children to your school, they know the score. In fact, for you to do other than outright preach the Gospel would probably be unethical.
If my husband and I, for whatever reason, sent our children to a Buddhist school and they did not learn Buddhism, I would think that was…weird. And I would think the staff lacked the courage of their convictions.
The ethics of evangelizing children have to be situational, I think. That is, I think they depend on the age, place, manner and the child, himself.
I happened to come to Christ very young and of my own accord, simply because my mother read the Bible to me regularly. There was nothing coercive about it. I understood more of the message than she expected, asked questions and then asked if I could accept Christ as my savior. That was God’s plan for me.
Scaring a child with hellfire and damnation or stealth evangelism of a child from a non-Christian family doesn’t seem loving (to me). If it’s not loving, can it be of God?
Presenting the Gospel as you do, straight-forwardly, non-coercively, and openly — to adolescents, is an entirely different ballgame and you’re playing by the rules.
LikeLike
I think Dan Allison hit it on the head: the term abuse is hyperbole. Doubtless some manipulation does occur in religious classrooms, but it would be false to say it doesn’t occur in secular classrooms around sexual, ecological or political issues. I went to public schools and saw plenty of manipulation. Actually indoctrination is a better more apt term.
As for religious educators like Imonk, you are obligated to teach the Gospel if you believe. How could it be otherwise? You love God yourself and rely on His salvation, so you want that for your kids and students as well. Only those who view the Gospel as false can see it as anything but a blessing. I guess I can understand that because I worry about kids getting filled up with grossly exaggerated eco-fears of impending doom in public schools.
Now the high pressure excesses of many approaches are not only wrong, they backfire. Catholic school excesses are legendary for this effect. Of course Imonk, of all people knows the pitfalls of Gospel preaching very well. This blog revisits that issue regularly, at length.
I send my son the Catholic schools and I’m delighted when he comes home with a new prayer his teacher taught him. That’s the whole point. I want him to learn the history and depths of the Church so that his faith, when he comes to it fully on his own, will have a solid foundation. That strikes me as the basic desire of any believing Christian parent. If I were to send my son to Imonks school I ‘d be very disappointed it he didn’t get exposure to the Gospel. It’s a Christian school: teaching the Gospel is the whole point. Complaining about teaching the Gospel at a Christian school is like those guys who join the reserves and then refuse to serve when a war comes. It’s a failure to read the big print.
LikeLike
A running theme that I will comment on:
Evangelism, at all points, appears to be where we talk to people in an attempt to convert them to our viewpoint.
But it can exist entirely outside of lifestyle.
If we have to talk to people to have a witness, do any of us really have a witness for Christ?
LikeLike
As a dad of toddlers, I am all for saturating children (whether 3 or 13) with the truth of the gospel. If we believe Christ and His life, miracles, death and resurrection to be true, then why wouldn’t we tell children of all ages – just like we tell them socially-acceptable truths? I am against coercion and scare tactics because I think that it cheapens the gospel and that it potentially leads to false-believism (at any age). I feel more than confident that Michael does not do this in his ministry. Keep preaching!
LikeLike
I have a related question. Would you consider taking your youth group to the local Judgement House or Hell House abusive? And is a decision to avoid hell, the same as a decision to trust and to follow Christ? It’s something that I see quite often and find disturbing.
LikeLike
For me, crossing the line is when we go from simply sharing what we believe (in both words and actions) to attempting to “seal the deal”. It is this desire to complete the conversion experience that drives much of the manipulation (heads bowed, eyes closed while we sing the 42nd verse of “Just as I Am”).
What joy does God derive from a false conversion?
IMO, the measure of true evangelism is a) our willingness to share without any expectation of a response and b) our willingness to let someone choose not believe.
My 19 yr old son is not a Christian. Has he been exposed to the gospel message? Countless times. Taken to Sunday school and church, and sent to VBS as a child year after year? Yes. Heard the gospel message directly from me? Yes. Witnessed his sister’s conversion experience and baptism? Yes. Has he believed the gospel message? Apparently not.
It is through this experience that it became apparent to me that my Christian friends seem to relish bragging when one of their children gets saved. There is an unspoken principal that all children of Christian parents must get saved or else we are not being good parents and need to try harder.
The simple fact is that all will not believe, whether they hear the message once or ten thousand times. How willing are we to “fail” in doing what we are called to do and not go over the line and apply the abusive, manipulative tactics to “succeed”?
LikeLike
If you want to know where this is going in the US, just look over here to Western Europe. You can’t even take a picture, much less post it on a church website, of a child under 18 without express written consent of the parents, no matter how innocent the photo is.
When running our VBS, despite being held at a church and the words “Bible School” being in the title, we must clearly express in writing that the children will be given instruction/stories from the Bible–then we must get a signature from the parents.
Clergy of any persuasion speaking or interacting with children in public, even if they aren’t addressing Christian issues at the time, receive glares and stares. I fear that the EU will make it increasingly difficult for those in official church capacities to address any children under 18 that are not brought to church by their parents.
LikeLike
Do the ethical issues associated with having sex mean that health education with anyone under 18 is immoral and unethical?
Do the ethical issues associated with the redistribution of wealth mean that arguing politics with anyone under 18 is immoral and unethical?
Do the ethical issues associated with torture mean that defending the use of water boarding with anyone under 18 is immoral and unethical?
LikeLike
“For example, Jehovah’s Witnesses who refuse blood transfusions for their children should be overruled.”
I have very mixed feelings about this. Some friends of ours ran into this before we knew them. They had a young daughter with brain cancer. Surgery was done. Some chemo done I think. But they were pushed hard for radiation treatment. Very hard. It made the talk radio in the city they lived in at the time that a family was refusing “needed” treatment for a child with brain cancer. They still refused. Because it was almost a given that the child would have an IQ below 70 if radiation was done.
The child in now at college studying for a nursing degree. A current MRI shows a large fluid filled space in her skull.
Oh, by the way. Mom was an RN, dad a cardiologist.
Would a judge have intervened if the parents were not medically trained? Just where do you draw the line and allow a parent to refused medically “needed” treatment.
LikeLike
Do the ethical issues associated with conversion mean evangelism with anyone under 18 is immoral and unethical?
The mere fact that you feel the need to ask such a question shows just how much higher an authority the State is (legal age) for some people than God is (Creator and Lord over all).
LikeLike
Can’t find a original link for it right now, but in the UK recently a “foster mother who had fostered a large number of children in care and provided a loving home for them, (…) lost her job and with it her house because a 16-year-old girl she was fostering chose to convert to Christianity.”
(Seen quoted here: http://archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.com/2009/05/comres-british-christians-suffer.html)
LikeLike
Well, Rick certianly does take himself veeery seriously.
I’m For IMONK
LikeLike
oops, Do unto others as you would have them do unto you.
imonk, you did not answer my question. Are some of these children brought up in some kind of religious tradition albeit not Christian or are some brought up with none?
Sorry you are taken such a beating for trying to spread the Gospel. I think you explained the way you do this and I have no issue with it being abusive.
LikeLike
Alred, I just read your response to Verne which seems in contradiction to your post responding to Tim, which I quoted above. Can you clarify for me your position? I apologize if I misunderstood.
Should Christians proselytize children w/o parental consent?
LikeLike
>However, if you believe that there are eternal consequences to what you believe I am curious how educating a child about Christ in an non-manipulative manner is “unethical.†It certainly is politically incorrect but then you ultimately do not answer to this country’s thought police you answer to God.
I hesitate to respond because imonk’s original issue regarded teens, and I don’t want to distract w/ these issues regarding children which are a bit different, I believe. But I can’t in good conscience let that one slide.
If one actively evangelizes w/o parental consent, Alfred, one is manipulating. Just from a simple developmental standpoint, kids believe what authority figures tell them until their thinking matures to a more rhetorical stage.
By definition, one manipulates when the person on the other end can’t think for themselves. So if what you’re after are shallow converts who will be as easily swayed by the next convincing speaker, then continue preaching to children.
On the other hand, If you want a child to remember Jesus, be the guy who brought groceries to her family in their hunger because he loved Jesus. As she gets older she will compare you to the guy who preached at her to turn or burn and got her to dunk into the water out of fear. Guess whose Jesus she’ll want to worship?
BTW, I am very serious about The Way. I might even be as serious as you. I share the Gospel with words almost as often as I share it w/ my actions, but I refuse to force either on anyone, especially a child.
LikeLike
I’m quite serious: If there is a point you want to make without hanging it on someone, your contribution is welcome.
LikeLike
Do unto others as you have them do unto you.
LikeLike
Ah, point taken. I did take credit that clearly wasn’t mine. Thanks for the clarification. At the same time, me thinks thou dost protest too much. I have found a fundamental truth over the 40 years in which I have served in ministry in four countries and three continents. There are those that take Jesus and the gospel very seriously and there are those who take themselves very seriously.
btw, I love cheese with my wine (which I make myself).
LikeLike
Verne asks two questions…
1. “To what extent should parents be allowed free rein to indoctrinate their children?”
Complete! That applies to neo-Nazis, Scientologists and yes, even athiests.
2. “To what extent should parents be able to protect their children (at various ages) from ‘sales pitches’ or undesirable outside influences?”
Complete! That is a parent’s perogative. We can hope that a parent would allow a child to expeience other opinions but that is for a parent to decide not the state.
“Barring physical abuse, I would be extraordinarily reluctant to allow the state to break up any family, even if they are a family of neo-Nazis.”
I agree with you whole-heartedly.
LikeLike
Rick:
Would you like some cheese with that whine?
I wrote you an email and extensively detailed my issues with your generalization (which I didn’t allow, thereby allowing you to misrepresent your comments.)
I received at least 4 letters/comments that prompted this post. Don’t give yourself so much credit.
You are correct: your comment had nothing to do with preaching, etc.
Someone else’s did.
You have some kind of chip on your shoulder that you apparently believe gives you the right to generalize about boarding schools and how they treat students, and then apply those generalizations to my school and how I treat students. As I told you in the email, you don’t know me, or my school, or what we do.
If you find my respond to your broad brushed innuendo and openly hostile attitude toward this site to be frustrating, then my apologies.
I’ll be happy to discuss any issue pertinent to this post, but when you insinuate abuse on the part of my ministry, I’m going to respond.
It’s interesting that you wind up saying you’ve been abused so to speak on this blog. I think that says volumes about what your comments have been about from the beginning
ms
LikeLike
Let the teenagers decide for themselves what’s abusive. If we say that a teenager can decide whether or not to have sex when they are 14, they can decide for themselves what to believe or not. If society has told them that it is ok at 14 to have control over their sex life, but then tells them that they can’t think for themselves, something here is bass-ackwards.
This gets my hackles up. Of course if it does happen, where sharing good news with people (evangelism) is a crime to anyone under 18, then advertising companies should start looking over their shoulders and getting their lawyers ready – they are trying to share the “good news” of their product and quite often with individuals under 18.
iMonk, none of what you are doing is abusive (from what I hear and read anyway) and most of the people commenting seem to agree. Can’t wait to read your previous post and comments!
LikeLike
As an atheist, I see several issues here:
1. To what extent should parents be allowed free rein to indoctrinate their children? For example, should the state intervene in the case of children who are being raised in cults? What characteristics ought to trigger intervention? Whatever your answer, it ought to apply equally to Amish as well as neo-Nazis, Christians as well as Scientologists. And if your answer requires most children to be taken away from their parents and raised by an all-knowing state, I suggest that it is (thankfully) unworkable.
2. To what extent should parents be able to protect their children (at various ages) from “sales pitches” or undesirable outside influences? And if protection is found to be necessary, how can it be feasibly accomplished? (The issue might include internet pornography, flag-saluting ceremonies, course contents, idle chatter, advertising, clothing worn by others, and even the food served in school cafeterias, or offered in vending machines.)
Barring physical abuse, I would be extraordinarily reluctant to allow the state to break up any family, even if they are a family of neo-Nazis. The fact is that almost anything is better than the foster care system, so the bar for parents should be set very low. In the case of religion, even a very extreme lifestyle might offer some advantages. In any case, it is not a subject I feel comfortable allowing government officials to rule over except in very limited situations. For example, Jehovah’s Witnesses who refuse blood transfusions for their children should be overruled. And in case of divorce, judges should be able, if necessary, to decree how the child will be raised, in case this is an issue.
The fact is, children cannot be protected from all of life’s thorns. They should learn early on that people will try to “sell” them on various things, ranging from religion to credit cards, and develop a sense of critical reasoning. Although I am an atheist, I do not hate my religious relatives, or think them stupid, and I hope my children will see the good as well as the bad in religion. To me, it is more important that they use their brains, than that they believe any particular thing (such as atheism). In any case, given the pervasiveness of religion, they might as well make their peace with its existence, if not its doctrines.
LikeLike
I am (in that wonderful British term) gobsmacked, but then again, why should I be surprised. I’m dealing with American evangelicals. Clearly, your twisting of my original comments into a blanket condemnation of evangelizing young people certainly served your purpose and gave you the opportunity to rally the troops and keep your ranking in the blogosphere.
Actually, the original commenter, me, mentioned that the one boarding school we were closely associated with had its spiritually-abusive elements and individuals.
For the record, at no point did I ever make a blanket statement that preaching to children and teens is abusive. I said that there are kids for whom preaching is harmful and not the appropriate way to be ministered to, those who, in fact, have been the victims of spiritual abuse, like the one who (not too long after his expulsion committed suicide). Or, the one who, after being encouraged to share his struggles, was then expelled for those struggles. Or, the ones whose dorm parent ripped the tape player out of the dorm vehicle when they listened to that “sacrilegious” song by U2 called “Bloody Sunday.” (I’ll leave it to you to figure that one out.)
In the original blog, I was accused of taking an analogy too and that, by doing so was unfair to this blog’s author. Actually, it is a fairly normal rhetorical method to get people to take the points of another and re-shape them to see the potential underside of the other’s perspective.
From the comments directed at me personally, I was reminded of what happens among some in the animal kingdom when one is injured (or perceived to be injured). Those around of the same species take great delight in making sure perception becomes reality, and then some. Happy dining everyone.
Today’s been quite interesting for me. And my thanks to all who encouraged me to find the help I apparently need so badly. And, I feel somewhat like a nail myself, having been hammered so eloquently and completely by you and your entourage. Oops, time to turn on the moderating controls again.
LikeLike
Tim Van Haitsma says:
“If you would be uncomfortable with a wiccian or Muslim or atheist doing it to your kid, you should not do it to other kids. Simple enough.”
Well Tim if you believe your faith is on par with wicca, Islam or atheism the I suppose you are right. But then you probably went to a public school where they teach us that all world views are equally valid.
Muslims, of course, do not agree with that relativistic nonsense which is why your grand children are more likely to go to a mosque for their religious services then to a church.
However, if you believe that there are eternal consequences to what you believe I am curious how educating a child about Christ in an non-manipulative manner is “unethical.” It certainly is politically incorrect but then you ultimately do not answer to this country’s thought police you answer to God.
Reading the comments on this board convinces me that if the Christian faith is to survive, God will need to rely on a people far more serious about “The Way” then people are in this country.
Thank God for the Chinese and African christians who have not been exposed to post-modernism. Reading most of comments on this board is like seeping in a bathtub of lukewarm water.
Nietzsche’s Last Man get behind me!
LikeLike
>It just got personal.
It will. The enemy knows where it hurts the most. Prayers, brother.
LikeLike
Is evangelism child abuse?
There was a time I would have said absolutely not, but now I find myself with the shoe on the other foot. I live in a community where those of the Christian faith are the minority. The majority religious belief here (75%) is that of a cult per Walter Martin’s Kingdom of the Cults. The majority of youth activities involve this faith group. Now I have found that one of my children, high-school age, has been in the position of being proselytized on a regular basis by adult(s) of the predominant local faith. This “evangelizing” is not happening at religious event or building, but instead it has occurred at the local public school.
Does this constitute abuse? Because my son is old enough and educated enough to handle these discussions, I would say probably not. If he were a couple of years younger, I would say absolutely yes. As a parent, I have found the whole thing to be incredibly irritating and frankly a little violating.
LikeLike
BTW- I’m not going to post any more comments about public schools. Hundreds of thousands of Christian teachers in the PSs of this country deserve better than some of these comments I’ve deleted.
LikeLike
The original commenter implied that boarding schools are de facto abusive to some kids. I would be happy to engage in a discussion of boarding schools, but the word “abuse” applied to what I do and have done for almost 35 years doesn’t set well with me. I’ve seen it all folks. I can barely watch a movie like Jesus Camp. It simply gets way too personal when the passion of my life insinuated to be a project in harm and damage. So that hit very close to home.
Same with preaching. It’s my life on this earth and I am dedicated to being above reproach for Christ’s sake. The idea that preaching is abusive isn’t ridiculous- I’ve heard some that was- but I’m not that person.
It just got personal. (I haven’t allowed some comments and others were emails.)
peace
ms
LikeLike
……and would you confirm that the baptisms are conducted in “running” water….?
LikeLike
God speaks into the lives of children and they are so much of what the Kingdom is about. According to studies most Christians (about 85%) become followers of Jesus before 14 years of age.
Absolutely Bob, however, we have a responsibility to do this above board and w/ parental consent! Feed them. Clothe them. Shelter them. Listen to them. Tell them we do it because of Jesus. Any more than that and we must prayerfully and humbly seek the parents’ consent. Do unto others, brother.
we call their parents and discuss with them what has happened.
Heck, our regional christian camp does that w/ kids from Christian families. It’s respect. It doesn’t matter what the parents believe. They deserve that level of respect because they’re the parents.
imonk, you must be getting slammed, dear brother! And I can see you feel very strongly and are very concerned about this issue. Are you convicted by Holy Spirit for your above board evangelism? or are you being convicted by your readers? Just askin’…
LikeLike
Absolute truth: When someone from another religion makes a profession of faith and requests baptism at our local church, we call their parents and discuss with them what has happened. We’ve done it with Jews, Muslims, and Chinese unbelievers.
LikeLike
Well … I think the real crux of the matter is that the parents of these children have sent them to an unabashedly Christian school. If those parents think that the students will not hear the gospel, then they’re sort of misleading themselves. They can innoculate their kids against that sort of teaching beforehand, but really … why would you send your child to a Christian school if you didn’t want them exposed to some of that? It’s not a public school …
LikeLike
Off topic, Bob Towell, are you a vineyard-ite ?? Where at, bro ??
Greg R
PS; it seems that nearly all of the most vocal critics of IMonks abusive practices have gone into hiding.
LikeLike
I don’t usually comment here, just lurk, but this post of yours really made me think, imonk.
I must agree w/ Tim and say that when evangelizing to children, one must defer to a parent’s wishes. Otherwise, one steps out of the bounds of acceptable behavior; Christian or otherwise.
In your case, parents are well aware their child will be exposed to the Gospel, and are willing to risk it in order to obtain the best education for their child. You’re off the hook.
Similarly, a parent who drops their child off at the local VBS (free child care for 2-3 hrs a night!) should expect their child to be evangelized. VBS is off the hook (though I cringe at the way some are handled).
However, I would totally *lose it* if a JW was riding down the street on their bike and stopped to proselytize my child(ren)! Totally!
Be Jesus to them, to their families. Pray for them. Evangelize their parents, but don’t step over that line and take the kid out of their safety zone and try to get them to “go against” their parents’ religious (or anti-religious) training.
The NT model (is that a loaded phrase around here? Hope not.) doesn’t present any examples of direct evangelism to children either, btw. Families/households, yes. Children, no.
The times, they are a-changing though. For years the UN, through the Convention on the Rights of the Child, has tried to usurp parents’ rights. There is a lot of ruckus going on in conservative circles about the new administration giving ground to the UNCRC. I believe the mindset we are now discussing is a product of this child-rights thinking.
LikeLike
Post-Christian: Exactly!! I was sure I was condemned to Hell. lol
LikeLike
Michael,
I have been reading you for weeks now, but this is my first time to respond. And, unfortunately, I don’t have much time to contribute to the conversation. But, I just have to quickly throw this in. We just had Wess Stafford, the president of Compassion International, speak at the National Vineyard Leadership Conference.
In light of this post and the comments, I wish you all could read his book, TO SMALL TO IGNORE. Sorry I can’t say more, but if one or two of you take the bait you will see based on his story how even in the worst of situations (a horrible boarding school situation) God speaks into the lives of children and they are so much of what the Kingdom is about. According to studies most Christians (about 85%) become followers of Jesus before 14 years of age.
Love your stuff, MIchael.
LikeLike
Rich, forgot about being afraid I was the anti-Christ. It was the worst thing imaginable because you could pray the Sinner’s Prayer and it wouldn’t take because you were, well, the anti-Christ.
LikeLike
Just to clarify, by children I meant 13 and under.
LikeLike
So do some of you believe that it is abusive to baptize infants and raise them as Christians?
LikeLike
I was a PK in a Fundamental Baptist church, so I experienced my share of scare tactics. I used to pray to “get saved” practically every night, and anytime the house was empty I was afraid that I had been left behind. For awhile I was actually afraid that I might be the anti-Christ (until I realized that he would prob. be Jewish). This is kind of funny now, but I was literally terrified of hell and being left behind for years of my childhood. It was honestly the consuming focus of my childhood for sometime. This has lead me to be very skeptical of evangelism directed to children.
LikeLike
If you would be uncomfortable with a wiccian or Muslim or atheist doing it to your kid, you should not do it to other kids. Simple enough. I do not go around telling other peoples kids there is no Santa.
LikeLike
…being facetious is one of my many glaring character defects..as witnessed by my first post..i was trying to make the not so obvious point that if we THINK God is on OUR side (or vice versa)..then we can do no moral or ethical wrong…but it gets really “stickey” when my neighbor OPPOSES ME on the same grounds…..
LikeLike
Other Jean: I agree with you, but by that standard, a lot of television, movies and advertising should be illegal for minors.
LikeLike
Michael,
No, I don’t think preaching/teaching Christianity to minors is immoral and unethical–but I do think it is very much so to emotionally coerce them into agreeing with what you say. It happens far too much, though not, from what you write about your teaching, through you. Good on you.
LikeLike
How about Dan Dennett, the atheist who believes that instruction about religion should be mandatory in all public schools?
Of course, he believes that religion is a kind of physicalist meme, and educating kids about it will help rid the meme of its seductive mysticism.
LikeLike
If the kid has nightmares about hell or panics that he missed the rapture when mom isn’t home when he gets home from school, it was abusive. A bunch of strangers at a Gospel Bill rally surrounding a ten-year-old and laying hands on him until he speaks in tongues is abusive. Calling the disabled kid up in front of the church to pray for his healing, Sunday after Sunday, is abusive.
Of course, those aren’t all “evangelism,” strictly speaking, but one of the evangelical conceits is that evangelism is that speech you make before someone walks the aisle or raises their hand when every head is bowed and every eye closed. If what you’re about is really good news, then your life is evangelism. If you’re life isn’t evangelism, then what you’re about isn’t good news. By your fruits, we know you. What most evangelicals do instead is sell you a list of 20 items of bad news, then offer you the miracle product that will make all that bad stuff go away if you’ll just say this magic prayer and really really mean in your heartest of hearts.
All that is to say that I think what iMonk is doing in class is completely legit. I imagine that even the kids who disagree with him and don’t want to hear about it still respect him for doing it. He means well, wants the best for them as he sees it, and isn’t being manipulative, and they know that.
Sorry to go off on a rant. I was the kid who, when I heard that the children’s minister was going to do an evangelism service, asked if I should be a “starter,” that is, come forward to prime the pump for kids who were reluctant to be the first to come forward. I ended and plain never started a lot of childhood and teenage friendships because of my “evangelism.” Still ashamed of that.
LikeLike
My kids are getting a better education in our local public school than I ever got in a school for missionary kids overseas, and for the most part people are too busy trying to do their jobs to worry about ideology and political indoctrination. Perhaps those who are worried about this should encourage believers to become teachers and be salt and light in that situation.
Is evangelism of kids abuse? No. But some of the methods and practices used to do so historically can be. Manipulation, heavy pressure, etc. do occur. I’ve been in some situations where I’m sure kids said they were “saved” when asked just to avoid what would happen if they didn’t!
But I think that’s the exception rather than the rule. And most teens are mature enough to engage in a genuine discussiona and exchange of ideas.
LikeLike
I think I second what has been said above- that it becomes abusive when there is a serious power difference, and when the person who is in the position that is power-deficit feels compelled to pay lip service or act in accord with the ideas and convictions of the person in power- and in doing so, needs to go against their own convictions.
So often, I think that people who have had that exact experience extrapolate from that experience that because that form of sharing/proselytizing was coercive and abusive, that’s what *all* proselytizing of the young looks like, and must perforce be abusive.
And then there are people in the world- of all denominations- who seem to behave and speak as if they believe they should get a special pass from ever having to listen to or hear ideas they disagree with. For them, persecution seems to come in the form of other people thinking differently from them.
I think, though, as long as you are making it really clear that your authority as a teacher is *not* something that makes your Christian beliefs more worthy or important than your students ideas, and don’t exert pressure or your students to conform to your values, you aren’t being abusive.
LikeLike
iMonk,
I agree with you about PS. I’m a product of public schools. I even graduated from state university. I don’t believe there is really an agenda by most of those involved in public schools either. I think people are just paranoid. 🙂
I am going to gladly send my son to public schools as well.
LikeLike
Just for the two people that care: I’m a big supporter of public schools. Don’t think their flawless and certainly am aware of their problems. (They keep my school stocked with customers.) But I am not anti-PS. Proud to be a PS kid.
I don’t quarrel with those who aren’t. Just my own views.
LikeLike
Oh-ho, that could be a lot of fun to turn around on them, actually.
Our public school system is undeniably utilized by the leftist, moral relativistic, anti-christian forces in this country as both an indoctrination camp and recruiting tool. If you want to label evangelism of teens who have decided to call themselves atheist or agnostic “abuse,” then this just opens up a wonderful can of worms for the cleansing of the education system in America of political influence. I would almost be willing to grant the point for a short while just to stir that particular bucket of offal.
The humorous unintended consequences of this allegation aside, it’s ludicrous and dishonest to characterize nearly any form of evangelism as abuse. I would call some forms subversive and even coercive, when they rely on an initial emotional response to “plant the seed” so to speak, but I can’t call that abusive. I have a hard time even seeing it as unethical, since it is in fact effective at reaching people of all ages.
So meh. If they want to call it abuse and take that to a courtroom, I’d be happy to go with them, and enjoy every moment of them explaining how evangelism is different from political indoctrination.
LikeLike
From a philosophical point of view, what would make it immoral? An atheist undercuts their own argument since morals are entirely relative without a transcendent God.
In order to say the evangelism is immoral we need to ask what moral standards we are using. A Biblical morality would probably exclude some of the modern evangelical practices, but not evangelism as a whole (such a thing could be considered immoral).
LikeLike
“Over at the Jesus Creed blog, there’s a discussion about whether sending a child to a school that teaches there were no such things as dinosaurs (etc.) constitutes abuse.”
I understand the sentiment — that teaching a child an extreme, minority view as truth will disadvantage them, but the truth is, we all teach our children what we perceive as truth. And many times we’re also very wrong. We can’t protect children from untruths, from either the world or from ourselves!
I hope to teach my son to be open-minded and inquisitive. To question things. To be ‘skeptical’ (in the sense that they should investigate things before accepting as fact). But even that is a ‘truth’ that I believe. What if that’s not the right thing to teach either?
LikeLike
Except our (US) culture is to “allow them to be kids†until they are 18 then the magically turn into adults. — Ross
I had to do that. Grow from 6 to 21 literally overnight. Now I’m somewhere in my 20s but in a 50-something body. I’m still not wrapped all that tight as a result.
My son now gets it. He’s almost 20. And he wishes he and his friends had gotten it earlier. But he knows a lot of friends who are 18 to 22 who still act like kids and is beginning to see how they might never grow up. — Ross
I’m 53 and I see people older than me who have never grown up. (There seems to be a peak about 5-10 years older than me, just old enough to have come of age during The Sixties.) There are a LOT of perpetual three-year-olds out there in sexually-active adult bodies.
LikeLike
iMonk,
The “evangelism = child abuse” meme is, for many people (although not necessarily the posters here), straight from the Dawkins/Hitchens neo-atheist playbook. Dawkins certainly rails against “the indoctrination of children” in The God Delusion, which I’ve read.
Funny thing is, he also seems to imply that atheists need to be indoctrinating children with their own worldview – for example, his website advertises “the first residential summer camp for the children of atheists, agnostics, humanists, freethinkers and all those who embrace a naturalistic rather than supernatural world view.” (http://www.camp-quest.org.uk/)
Bottom-line – we should all speak the truth of the gospel without fear to anyone, of any age. The dichotomy drawn by the commenter in your previous post is false. You can still speak the gospel in a loving, compassionate, non-judgmental but still-lucid way to those who are hurting and broken. From the sounds of it, that’s what you’re already doing anyway. So just press on, and we should be praying for you like you are praying for your students!
LikeLike
This makes me think of the Pope and the baptized boy he severed from his family in another century. The same essential question remains in that Christians pit children against parents if the families are religiously divided. I cannot imagine the Catholic Church, or ANY church, doing this now:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mortara_Affair
LikeLike
IM,
As an adult who was a victim of real child abuse, I think that those who would say “evangelism to children is child abuse” have no clue what real abuse is. A psychotic stepfather beating a child into a condition requiring hospitalization is a child abuser. A preacher, no matter how manipulative, cannot be called anything worse than a “manipulator.”
It takes a great deal of patience for me to tolerate the mentality that finds preaching to be something “abusive.” I know what abuse is. I also know what hysterical, ideological rhetoric is.
Thanks for your own perspective. Keep up the fine work.
LikeLike
I think that part of the evangelism that happens at Michael’s school is life style. It is easy to get into some good habits when others are doing them as well. (and then take them with you).
That happens to me when I am around those who pray the Liturgy of the Hours.
I dislike any form of force and manipulation, whether children or adults are the target. And that sometimes leaves stuff for others to try to clean up.
LikeLike
I used to think that it was abuse, to present a differing view.
Both my wife and I endured a lot of abuse at the hands of kids who told us we were going to hell because we weren’t saved, when basically all we did to deserve it was have parents who weren’t Baptist.
If evangelism means threatening children with hell — and make no mistake about it, that’s a big reason for being Christian where we live — then it’s hard for me to see how that’s healthy for the child.
iMonk’s approach to evangelism is very healthy, IMHO, but it’s also a minority position.
Over at the Jesus Creed blog, there’s a discussion about whether sending a child to a school that teaches there were no such things as dinosaurs (etc.) constitutes abuse.
I think cultural war is more insidious than pure evangelism, myself. When my daughter’s school conducted abstinence education, my wife and I were not happy campers at all. If I could’ve done it without embarrassing her, I would’ve taken her out of it. You know what you call the father of a daughter who receives that kind of education? Grandfather.
Meanness to a kid in the name of Christ can be forgotten in time, but a teenage mother is forever.
LikeLike
I think it depends somewhat on the context. Or more how it’s done. To answer mike’s response, “….only if they are making converts to Mormanism or Jehovaâ€s Witness…THEN IT WOULD BE WRONG……was that good answer?”
If I knowingly sent my kid to an LDS or JW school or activity then I have no reason to be upset. If either of them gave a flyer to my kid at the beach or something, I wouldn’t have a problem with it. If they tricked my kid to going to something or in other ways manipulating him, I would certainly be upset.
My wife works at a Christian pre-school. So she, in some way, evangelizes to 3-4 year olds. She even told me once that a parent asked to principal to not ‘talk about God so much.’ Well… why the heck are you sending your kid to a Christian pre-school if you don’t want them to learn about God?
LikeLike
To address your question: “Do the ethical issues associated with conversion mean evangelism with anyone under 18 is immoral and unethical?”
If this were a public school it might be immoral and unethical because of tax dollars spent, captive audiences, and the first amendment. But yours is not a public school. It is a private, Christian school and, while not exactly a church, it might as well be as far as many parents are concerned. They send their children to you knowing full well that you teach the Bible and that you present the gospel. With that understanding it would be immoral and unethical for you to do otherwise.
Should churches abandon Sunday schools for minors? Can we no longer have Church summer camps? Thank God for the first amendment–protecting us all from uninvited proselytizing (at taxpayer expense, in the public arena) but also guaranteeing the freedom to preach to the willing in churches and Christian schools. Let’s keep insisting on it and not apologizing.
“For I am not ashamed of the gospel…” (Romans 1:16)
LikeLike
Are there some unethical practices? Sure there are.
I guess spending an eternity in hell is a better option?
LikeLike
I think the abuse occurs when you use your privileged position and authority to force your message on a captive audience that could not foreknow what you were going to talk about and did not consent to it.
A person needs to either give prior consent to listen to you or have some method to stop listening to you. In a school or lecture setting, there is often no escape, so you have to be tactful.
LikeLike
How about “Is lack of religious training child abuse?” I had next to no religious training as a child & somehow knew that the Bible had the truth. I am 61 & until maybe 50 or so often felt like a new Christian even tho I accepted the Lord in my late teens. Lack of teaching absolutes leaves a child feeling that something important is missing. I always felt there were absolutes. I’m glad I found the Lord.
Yes, I know there are Christian parents that are legalistic & confuse their kids. Then there are hypocrites that are strict about their kids, but live loose lives. There are many variations of mistakes that parents make. I feel that being honest & keeping communication open is important as a parent. We are not theologians & shouldn’t try to be, but we can teach them the basics about the Lord & how to learn more about Him.
LikeLike
I went, once, with a Baptist Minister friend to a Independent Fundamentalist Baptist Youth Rally. I will spare you’all the details of what was definitely an, um, interesting experience.
But how is it that preaching the Gospel to a room full of children is any less abusive than some of the educational curriculum in our public schools? Curriculum that is becoming more and more difficult for parents to opt-out of, especially in the areas of sex education, social studies, science/biology? Most curriculum has a bent to it and most children are very captive audiences, not to mention enduring bullying and ridicule if their parents *do* opt them out of something.
If preaching the Gospel to children who know this is part and parcel of their educational experience and their parents know this is part and parcel of their educational experience is abusive, why isn’t public school…where the agenda(s) are much more hidden, insidious, and calculated to be so…also deemed abusive?
Perhaps the day is coming when simply being who and what we are (and what we *do*) will be subversive, illegal, intolerant. God will strengthen us as we strengthen each other for the role we have been given.
Kyrie eleison… And God bless you iMonk. You and your school.
LikeLike
If the parents are aware that it is a Christian school then I think they should not be surprised that their child will be ‘exposed’ to Christianity. I had an Islamic exchange stuedent. Went to Sunday worship with us. Loved singing the hynms and would comment on the pastor’s sermons on the way home. He knew lots about Jesus. Allah’s greastest prophet. His parents were fine with this and our family had many respectful discussions with him. My kids were 17, 11 and 7.
I learned more about my country and my faith having our exchange students than any book or course I could have taken.
I myself am rather cross pollinated religiously and I think it adds to not subtaracts from my very Trinitarian Christianity.
I do have a question. How many of your students have a faith tradtions (Islam, Buddahist, so on) vrs none?
LikeLike
Its important to make a distinction here based on how old the kids are. 16 and 17 year olds ought to have sense enough to understand what’s being said to them. The thing that upsets many people in my experience is manipulative behavior on the part of some churches to get 4 and 5 year olds down the aisle, and this is way too common in certain evangelical quarters. I’m not sure that its child abuse, but its a disgrace and we need to oppose it.
It comes from the idea that unless a child comes to Jesus at an early age, they will never do so, something you hear time and time again (and which seems to assume that God is a pretty useless and powerless creature). I know plenty of adults who’ve converted, and honestly, they are the most serious and convincing people I’ve met.
LikeLike
“You’re a child until you’re an adult, which often happens around 13, 14, 15. I’ve always thought of the youth I work with as (young) adults. I call them adults, I treat them like adults, I speak to them as adults.”
Except our (US) culture is to “allow them to be kids” until they are 18 then the magically turn into adults.
NOT!
My son now gets it. He’s almost 20. And he wishes he and his friends had gotten it earlier. But he knows a lot of friends who are 18 to 22 who still act like kids and is beginning to see how they might never grown up.
Kids need to be made into adults. It takes a decade or more. You can’t expect it to happen overnight at their 18th birthday.
LikeLike
….only if they are making converts to Mormanism or Jehova”s Witness…THEN IT WOULD BE WRONG……was that good answer?
LikeLike
I work with a ministry that focuses entirely on providing Scripture not just to teenagers, but also to children. So that colors my response to the question.
Also, I’m not a died-in-the-wool evangelical. I grew up in a liberal family in the Pacific Northwest (that bastion of liberalness . . . also, one of the best places ever). I’m pretty sure that there usually isn’t just a single moment in the life of a Christian to which they can point and say, “There. There it is. That’s when I REALLY became a Christian.” For my part, I can point to a season–kind of like a several-years-long tunnel–where I entered without knowing Christ and Him crucified, and I exited recognizing that it is in Him that I live and breathe–that He is my Lord.
All that said, here’s my simple answer: no. Evangelism with anyone under 18 is patently *not* immoral and unethical. But many activities we’ve attached to the act of evangelizing *are*.
At the end of the day, it’s just a heck of a lot more complicated than we think. It’s hard (maybe impossible) to do *just right,* but difficult does not equate to wrong.
LikeLike
Jams:
The parents agree to have them here, and the student agrees without the parent present in the room.
ms
LikeLike
I’m currently a youth minister. One of the questions I’ve had recently is about how for many cultures and for much of human history, there hasn’t been America’s current concept of the ‘teenager’. You’re a child until you’re an adult, which often happens around 13, 14, 15. I’ve always thought of the youth I work with as (young) adults. I call them adults, I treat them like adults, I speak to them as adults. I don’t know if that changes anything in this discussion.
LikeLike
Evangelism is child abuse???
Man, tell ’em to get a life!
LikeLike
File it under what the pot said to the kettle, or things that are good for the gander as well as the goose: As exhibit A, the defense would like to introduce Atheist Sunday Schools.
LikeLike
They think so in Canada. It is a funny statement to say that it is immoral or unethical to teach that their is a God and ask someone to believe it but say that is isn’t immoral or unethical to to teach that their isn’t a God and ask someone to believe it.
LikeLike
That’s an interesting question. How did these children/teens become atheists? Did they just wake up one day and say, “Hey, I’m an atheist?” Sure, they could have grown up with a disbelief in God at home, but otherwise, wasn’t there some sort of evangelism (or anti-evangelism) to bring these people to their disbelief? To answer, no, I don’t think that evangelism to young people is wrong. I think there are wrong ways to go about it (manipulation, etc, as stated in your post)but I find it rather ignorant to say that teaching kids that money and stuff is ever important, that sex is really no big deal, that God is a delusion, that the government will save you from your problems, that ___________(fill in the blank) is okay and even noble and that teaching them about a loving Savior is wrong.
“I can see that the handwriting is on the wall. Those who speak of Christ, even in a private school, are going to be labeled abusive. Those who seek for decisions from anyone under 18 is going to be called a child abuser. Ministries to young people will come under increased scrutiny for everything they do if there stated goal is to bring about conversion.”
I can see this one coming, as well, have seen it already, and it’s scary.
LikeLike
I am firmly convinced that much of what is done in the name of evangelism is unethical, in that the tactics used are psychologically manipulative and are scripturally flawed. Evangelicals as a whole seem to have forgotten that the goal is discipleship, not conversion; baptism, not a raised hand indicating a decision; followers of Christ who are not merely “born again”.
Having said that, based on your description I see nothing wrong with what you are doing. You are open and up-front about your position and willing to allow opposing viewpoints. That’s without getting into the other factors; that their parents have chosen to place their children in an openly Christian environment.
I just don’t see any issues here.
LikeLike