tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3690497570211839412024-02-21T00:29:56.892-07:00Christian NurtureDiscipline and Instruction from a Reformed PerspectiveUnknownnoreply@blogger.comBlogger128125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-369049757021183941.post-75834217893809612972015-08-25T16:42:00.003-06:002015-08-25T16:42:56.001-06:00NEW ARTICLES TO COME AT NEW SITE: PastorMathis.comNEW ARTICLES TO COME AT NEW SITE: <a href="http://pastormathis.com/">PastorMathis.com</a><br />
<br />
All my old stuff will be slowly moved there. And these two sites (<a href="http://polymathis.blogspot.com/">polymathis</a>, too) will always be here until <a href="http://pastormathis.com/index.php/2015/07/01/american-churches-marginalized-and-that-is-a-good-thing/">Google kicks me out</a>!..Don't laugh, <a href="https://caffeinatedthoughts.com/2015/07/examiner-com-fires-christian-pastor-says-content-not-a-good-fit/">Examiner.com canned me</a> for writing too many gay marriage articles.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-369049757021183941.post-70859598457557750132014-07-30T14:26:00.001-06:002014-07-30T14:26:11.470-06:00Pastoral thoughts on family integrated church movement, 8 part series<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #666666; font-family: HelveticaNeue, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.625rem; margin-bottom: 1.5rem; padding: 0px;">
In Scotland, by the North Sea, the small town of Elgin had simple educational requirements. The directory for the local grammar school required that "upon the Lord’s day, masters and scholars shall convene in school at eight o’clock in the morning, and after prayer in the English tongue, the several classes shall be exercised—the seniors in the exposition of a sacred lesson [of the Psalms or catechism]...and the juniors in getting ‘by heart’ some select English psalms, or the ordinary catechism; they shall return to school in the afternoon at the first bell after sermon, and be exercised till the second bell in reading their sacred lesson…" (Grant, <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=EXsWAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22masters%20and%20scholars%20shall%20convene%20in%20school%20at%20eight%20o%E2%80%99clock%22&pg=PA427#v=onepage&q&f=false" rel="nofollow" style="box-sizing: border-box; color: #0088cc; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank">427</a>).</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #666666; font-family: HelveticaNeue, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.625rem; margin-bottom: 1.5rem; padding: 0px;">
This requirement is dated 1649. Scotland had Sunday school 131 years before the supposed first Sunday school of Robert Raikes.</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #666666; font-family: HelveticaNeue, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.625rem; margin-bottom: 1.5rem; padding: 0px;">
[Continued <a href="http://www.examiner.com/article/pastoral-evaluation-of-the-family-integrated-church-movement-part-1">here</a>...]</div>
<div style="background-color: white; box-sizing: border-box; color: #666666; font-family: HelveticaNeue, 'Helvetica Neue', Helvetica, Arial, sans-serif; font-size: 16px; line-height: 1.625rem; margin-bottom: 1.5rem; padding: 0px;">
[The following are Pastor Mathis' lecture notes in a multi-part series from the <a href="http://www.pmwopc.org/CalSemPas.html#2014" rel="nofollow" style="box-sizing: border-box; color: #0088cc; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank">Spring 2014 Presbytery of the Midwest Seminar</a>, "A Pastoral Evaluation of the Family Integrated Church Movement." More information on the movement, homeschooling and the history of Christian education, see the new book <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Uniting-Church-Family-Shawn-Mathis/dp/1495489582/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1404358459&sr=8-1&keywords=uniting+church+and+family" rel="nofollow" style="box-sizing: border-box; color: #0088cc; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank">Uniting Church & Family</a>(<a href="http://www.amazon.com/Uniting-Church-Family-Observations-current-ebook/dp/B00IT69ZJY/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&qid=1404358459&sr=8-2&keywords=uniting+church+and+family" rel="nofollow" style="box-sizing: border-box; color: #0088cc; font-weight: bold; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank">Kindle format</a>).]</div>
Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-369049757021183941.post-60667430658760709012013-03-13T15:45:00.000-06:002013-03-13T15:45:56.446-06:00Uniting Church and FamilyImagine in the not-too-distant future:<br />
<ul>
<li>That almost every family homeschooled.</li>
<li>That every church discontinued its Sunday schools and youth groups.</li>
<li>That every family practiced daily Bible reading and prayer.</li>
<li>That every father led his household.</li>
<li>That every child said ‘yes sir’ and ‘thank you.’</li>
<li>That the churches were full every Sunday—full of dead man’s bones.</li>
</ul>
The current efforts at uniting church and family upon a method instead of the Gospel can easily lead to this danger. This is especially the case in today’s climate of weak and confused Christians.<br /><span id="more-6831"></span><br /><strong>The Gospel First</strong><br />57% of self-confessing Evangelicals <a href="http://www.blogger.com/post-edit.g?blogID=369049757021183941&postID=7894489844770016764" target="_blank">deny</a> that Christ is the only way to heaven. <a href="http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/5-barna-update/57-home-school-families-have-different-backgrounds-than-commonly-assumed" target="_blank">Barna </a>numbers suggest that being a homeschooler is no sure defense either: half of those polled believe that salvation is not by faith alone. And anecdotal evidence could be multiplied until the Second Coming.<br />
<br />
The American family today certainly needs instruction in the basics of family life: fatherly leadership, motherly responsibility, parental discernment and the like. But they need more. They need to understand the sinfulness of sin. That the Good News must first have bad news to make sense. That all their obedience, Bible reading and church attendance will not eradicate their wickedness before God.<br />
<br />
And while their hearts are pricked, they should be offered the Balm of Gilead. Not just any generic, Evangelical, warmed-over Deistic moralism, but the good-old fashioned, man-humbling and Christ-exalting Gospel.<br />
<br />
Or as Spurgeon proclaimed:<br />
<blockquote>
I have my own opinion that there is no such thing as preaching Christ and Him crucified, unless we preach what nowadays is called Calvinism. It is a nickname to call it Calvinism; Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else.</blockquote>
Uniting the church and family begins foremost with the Gospel. How can it be otherwise?<br />
<strong></strong><br />
<strong>Church</strong><br />
Because the Gospel message is entrusted to the Church and <em>not </em>to the family, any Christian praying for revival and reformation must pray for the Church to be faithful.<br />
<br />
It is to the Church that God has given teaching, sacraments, prayer and discipline for the sanctification of the saints. It is to the Church, and the pastor in particular, that the ministry of reconciliation is given. This means the Church of God, the Bride of Christ, is the mother of all Christian families…and orphans, widows and singles (Gal. 4:26).<br />
<br />
The deacons should help take care of the poor and helpless. The ruling elders should govern in righteousness and humility. And the minister should faithfully preach and teach the whole counsel of God, especially the Gospel.<br />
<br />
The Church must be governed by Jesus Christ, through His Spirit and Word. The activities of the Church must be within the parameters of the Law of Christ. Public worship must be jealously guarded and carefully in line with the positive warrant of the Bible. All other activities—fellowship and teaching opportunities—must be exercised within the boundaries of glorious freedom found in Christ (Rom. 14:10).<br />
<strong></strong><br />
<strong>Family</strong><br />Even so, the family has its own sphere of responsibility. First and foremost, the head of the home needs to unite his family with a faithful church. Period.<br />
<br />
The parents must also unite in purpose: will the Gospel be the distinguishing truth in their family or some method? The children must see the parents take Christ’s message seriously. They must see the parents love the church of God. The whole family must faithfully attend the public means of grace, especially preaching.<br />
<br />
The parents must unite in practice: daily family worship is a must; catechetical instruction is important; loving discipline is necessary; parental involvement is demanded. And practical expressions of love and obedience should be the order of the day.<br />
<br />
This means prioritizing time and talents. The Christian Sabbath should order family time during the week. Tithing should order the finances. The time and money remaining should be used in order of importance with sports, clubs and the like at the bottom of the list—or eliminated if they crowd out the ever-important spiritual nurture required day in and day out (Deut. 6:7).<br />
<strong></strong><br />
<strong>United families</strong><br />The unity of church and family begins with the Gospel. But it does not end there. It is a unity of a family, where those who do the will of God are brother, sister and mother (Mk. 3:25). Biological ties may be severed by the Gospel (Mat. 10:34), yet those spiritually united to Christ will still have the Church as “the house of God, which is the Church of the living God, the pillar and ground of the truth” (1 Tim. 3:15).<br />
<br />
This should not be a pie-in-the-sky idea but a truth with practical consequences. For instance, in 1 Timothy 5:1, Paul commands Timothy not to rebuke the older men and women of the Church but to come alongside and entreat or exhort (parakalei) them as members of the family–even the younger among them.<br />
<br />
Likewise, in Titus 2:3-4 Paul commends the older women to be “teachers of good things” and to train and admonish the young women of the Church—whether married or not. If this is true for women, it is true for men (cp. Paul’s mentoring of Timothy). And if this is true for ad hoc situations, then it is true for more structured situations (cp. LCQ 99).<br />
<br />
The children of the Church, by virtue of their baptism, must be instructed by the Church (Mat. 28:20). The content is the entire Word of God. The goal is for God’s glory and the salvation of their souls. And the method–whatever details may be employed—must include someone mature because instruction is not only taught but caught.<br />
<br />
Naturally, this does not mean supplanting parental responsibility but supplementing their work and exercising the Church’s own responsibility toward her covenant members.<br />
Ideally, parents would feel comfortable with a trusted, godly brother or sister instructing their child. In practice, the older men may meet at a restaurant to talk about life while the younger men listen and learn. Those mothers strong in English could instruct a group of children in the fine points of grammar. Such variations are neigh endless.<br />
<br />
The members of the family of God must never lose sight of how much they can influence the covenant child by their example alone: do they show love to each other? are they ready to restore the weak? are they quick to acknowledge sin? The covenant child should know that whatever adult he is in contact with has the same expectations as his parents.<br />
<strong></strong><br />
<strong>What it all means</strong><br />Families are hurting. And many churches are not helping. Yet a true union—even revival—of the church and family cannot exist without the fundamentals of the Gospel. As an 1809 <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=6z0AAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22narrative%20of%20the%20state%20of%20religion%22&lr&as_brr=3&pg=PA339#v=onepage&q=%22narrative%20of%20the%20state%20of%20religion%22&f=false" target="_blank">report</a> of the General Assembly summarized the matter:<br />
<br />
“In those parts of the church, without exception, in which vital religion has flourished, in the course of the last year, the fundamental doctrines of the gospel; viz. the total depravity of human nature, the divinity and atonement of Jesus Christ, justification by his imputed righteousness, the sovereignty and freeness of divine grace, and the special influences of the Holy Spirit in the regeneration and sanctification of sinners have been decidedly received and honoured.”Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-369049757021183941.post-39765986070124540832012-08-31T15:37:00.000-06:002012-08-31T15:37:00.488-06:00What Is a Family Integrated Church?Is your Christian education based upon evolutionary and secular thinking? It is if your church practices the usual age-segregated Sunday school according to a new church movement.<br />
<br />
The family-integrated church movement, primarily within the homeschooling community, is a self-conscious challenge to classic Christian nurture. It has already affected some Reformed churches. This paper will explain what it is and examine its assertions by the Word of God and church history.<br />
<br />
Many such churches are associated with the National Center for Family Integrated Churches (NCFIC). The center was publicly part of the Vision Forum organization until 2009.<a href="http://www.weswhite.net/2011/04/family-integrated-mathis/#_ftn1" id="_ftnref1" name="_ftnref1">[1]</a> The NCFIC, among other things, is about “uniting church and home,” inveighing against the typical Evangelical church’s abundance of age-segregated, special-interest programs. It unequivocally rejects age- and family-segregation that separates children from parents.<br />
<br />
Churches interested in associating with this organization must be in “substantial agreement” with the NCFIC confession, a “working document.” Churches are not officially endorsed and denominational affiliation is no barrier to enrollment.<a href="http://www.weswhite.net/2011/04/family-integrated-mathis/#_ftn2" id="_ftnref2" name="_ftnref2">[2]</a> Although not a church planting agency, it wants to “encourage new church plants” based upon this model.<br />
<br />
The confession includes a laudable rejection of children’s worship services and affirmations of parental responsibility; it also includes some questionable assertions. For instance, it rejects “family-fragmenting, age-segregated, peer-oriented, youth driven, and special-interest programs” (Article VII). This is another way of rejecting typical Sunday schools, youth groups and the like.<br />
<br />
The core challenge of the confession is Article XI:<span id="more-5306"></span><br />
<blockquote>
<em>We affirm </em>that there is no scriptural pattern for comprehensive age segregated discipleship, and that age segregated practices are based on unbiblical, evolutionary and secular thinking which have invaded the church.</blockquote>
This affirmation uses unqualified language beyond the vague adjective <em>comprehensive</em>. While the confession never uses the words “Sunday school” and the like, the unqualified language and logic is clear: “age segregated practices are based on unbiblical, evolutionary and secular thinking”; modern Sunday schools are age segregated; therefore, they are based on “evolutionary and secular thinking.” <br />
<br />
This serious charge is also publicly asserted by the leaders of this organization.<br />
<br />
In his lecture about the history of Sunday schools, the founder and current board member, Mr. Phillips, declares these schools a “modern invention without biblical and historical precedent—period.” He also asserts that today’s church has “ . . . an entirely new hierarchy of social groups based on age: . . . dayschools . . . adolescence . . . PMS for women of certain age . . . these are all variations of <em>evolutionary hellish thinking</em>.”<a href="http://www.weswhite.net/2011/04/family-integrated-mathis/#_ftn3" id="_ftnref3" name="_ftnref3">[3]</a> Mr. Phillips claims that such special-interest thinking resulted from Greek thinking (youth and efficiency) instead of Hebraic thinking (discipleship and relationships). In fact, the “modern classroom . . . is a distinctly Greek and pagan approach to education”—an approach initiated by the Devil himself.<a href="http://www.weswhite.net/2011/04/family-integrated-mathis/#_ftn4" id="_ftnref4" name="_ftnref4">[4]</a><br />
<br />
It is certainly true that age-segregated programs (and special-interest programs in general) have been abused by churches and become crutches for too many families. Too many churches readily regulate the family into niche-market “ministries,” keeping the families busy while teaching them little of God’s Word. And too many families like it that way: there is less responsibility for them and they feel godly. Even so, do such abuses warrant rejection of any type of special-interest programs or age-segregation? Are all age-segregated approaches unbiblical, even evolutionary?<br />
Such a serious charge is supported with three main claims: the “desert island test” of the Bible, the evolutionary roots of modern education, and the revival of families.<br />
<br />
First there is the novel “desert island test”:<br />
<br />
“[If all you had was the Bible on a desert island] . . . would you naturally conclude that you should fragment children along age-groups and put them in grade-based classroom . . . would you see a foundation . . . would you see a pattern, would <em>there be any ground, any refuge in God’s Word that leads you to mimic this approach?</em>”<a href="http://www.weswhite.net/2011/04/family-integrated-mathis/#_ftn5" id="_ftnref5" name="_ftnref5">[5]</a><br />
<br />
In other words, if the education method cannot be found in the Bible (by command or example), then it is forbidden (cp. Articles II, XI). In contrast, the Reformers stood upon the liberty of the Word of God (Rom. 14:4). For example, Christian liberty allows believers and churches to use note-taking, picture-books, and catechisms. They are neither commanded nor forbidden, yet are perfectly allowable if used correctly.<br />
<br />
In fact, Luke (2:42ff.) explains that as a boy, Jesus was separated (segregated) from His family while under their authority. Furthermore, the temple layout at that time was family segregated: there was a court of the men and a court of the women (and children). The synagogue, regularly attended by Jesus, the Apostles and the early church similarly divided the family.<br />
<br />
Moreover, the apostles preached to women and children without the presence of their male heads (Acts 16:13). Nehemiah 8:2 records the public meeting of the men and women of Israel, “all that could hear with understanding.” It appears that those of mature understanding attended, leaving those not able to understand (smaller children) at home or with the servants.<br />
<br />
Next, it is asserted that many methods of education are evolutionary in origin. Yet, historically, children were separated from family, even age-segregated, before Darwin’s book published in 1859.<a href="http://www.weswhite.net/2011/04/family-integrated-mathis/#_ftn6" id="_ftnref6" name="_ftnref6">[6]</a> During the time of Christ many a young Jewish boy attended age-segregated day schools. The early church fathers and councils encouraged the creations of schools. New England worship services segregated the women from the men, and the children sat together elsewhere with adult supervision. Catechizing by ministers or elders could include separating children from parents and boys from girls. Larger schools, such as at Calvin’s Geneva, included seven grade levels with a typical child in a grade for about a year before testing for the next grade-level.<br />
<br />
Lastly, there is the claim of revival:<br />
<blockquote>
Home educators, almost by definition, have turned their heart to their children [Mal. 4] . . . So there’s been a revival that’s taking place in the heart of these homeschool families. And this revival works itself out to the local church . . . our prayer: every Christian in the world is in a family integrated church. And there should be nothing but that, but you know what that is going to lead to? That’s going to lead to people homeschooling! . . . <a href="http://www.weswhite.net/2011/04/family-integrated-mathis/#_ftn7" id="_ftnref7" name="_ftnref7">[7]</a></blockquote>
Three points will demonstrate this as a misguided prayer: 1. The Malachi four passage involves the family <em>and </em>the church with the minister (the prophet) as an instrument of revival in the family. 2. Luke 1:16ff. interprets “fathers” and “sons” in moral or spiritual terms. 3. Why pray for more such churches instead of more <em>Reformed </em>churches?<br />
<br />
In summary, even though this confession’s emphasis on family is commendable, its unqualified rejection of age-segregation is biblically unfounded and contrary to historical facts. There is no Biblical “desert island test”; there is no biblical prohibition against properly practiced segregation; and there is no revival that focuses on family-integrated churches.<br />
<br />
The church does not need another movement. In today’s climate of Christian darkness, churches and families do not need another <em>method</em>; what they need is the <em>old</em> <em>message</em>. A 2008 Pew Research Center study notes that fifty-seven percent of confessing Evangelicals believe in other ways to heaven than through Christ.<a href="http://www.weswhite.net/2011/04/family-integrated-mathis/#_ftn8" id="_ftnref8" name="_ftnref8">[8]</a> Ignorance about basic Law and Gospel is wide-spread as well.<br />
And in an already fragmented church landscape, an emphasis upon this narrow issue only creates another sub-culture that weakens Christian unity. It also diminishes the role of the church in nurturing the children (Matt. 28:19, 20; Deut. 31:12ff.).<br />
<br />
The views documented here are integral to the NCFIC’s very existence. To sign the confession is to publicly associate with these public sentiments. In spite of the leaders’ strong denunciations, it is hopeful that open dialogue can move beyond methods to uniting over the message of the Gospel.<br />_______________________<br /><strong>Footnotes</strong><br />
<div id="ftn1">
<a href="http://www.weswhite.net/2011/04/family-integrated-mathis/#_ftnref1" id="_ftn1" name="_ftn1">[1]</a> In January 2009 the NCFIC changed their site from Vision Forum to www.ncfic.org. The confession was expanded too. Mr. Phillips (president of Vision Forum), is on the NCFIC board; his articles and lectures are used by the center.</div>
<div id="ftn2">
<a href="http://www.weswhite.net/2011/04/family-integrated-mathis/#_ftnref2" id="_ftn2" name="_ftn2">[2]</a> The registered Colorado churches include Dispensationalists, Presbyterians, Seventh Day Adventists, a range of worship styles and infant, child and father-led communion (as of Spring, 2011).</div>
<div id="ftn3">
<a href="http://www.weswhite.net/2011/04/family-integrated-mathis/#_ftnref3" id="_ftn3" name="_ftn3">[3]</a> Track 2, <em>The</em> <em>History of the Sunday School Movement, </em>Doug Phillips; track 13, post-Civil War era. Emphasis mine.</div>
<div id="ftn4">
<a href="http://www.weswhite.net/2011/04/family-integrated-mathis/#_ftnref4" id="_ftn4" name="_ftn4">[4]</a> Vision Forum about-page, 2010; <em>History</em>, track 3.</div>
<div id="ftn5">
<a href="http://www.weswhite.net/2011/04/family-integrated-mathis/#_ftnref5" id="_ftn5" name="_ftn5">[5]</a> Ibid, emphasis original, track 13; cp. track 2. Scott Brown, the center’s director, makes a similar argument, “Yet this structure [Sunday school] cannot be found anywhere in the Bible. It is not commanded in Scripture.” <em>The Sufficiency of Scripture at Work in the Family Integrated Church</em>, Scott Brown, NCFIC online, Jan. 2011</div>
<div id="ftn6">
<a href="http://www.weswhite.net/2011/04/family-integrated-mathis/#_ftnref1" id="_ftn6" name="_ftn6">[6]</a> Such facts and more are documented at ChristianNurture.blogspot.com or in good history books.</div>
<div id="ftn7">
<a href="http://www.weswhite.net/2011/04/family-integrated-mathis/#_ftnref7" id="_ftn7" name="_ftn7">[7]</a> Phillips, quoted from “The Family-Integrated Church Movement,” interview, <em>Generations Radio</em>, sermonaudio.com, June 12, 2006. This broadcast is favorably referenced by the NCFIC blog, January 21, 2009.</div>
<div id="ftn8">
<a href="http://www.weswhite.net/2011/04/family-integrated-mathis/#_ftnref1" id="_ftn8" name="_ftn8">[8]</a> Pew Research Center Publications, Religion in America, <a href="http://pewresearch.org/pubs/876/religion-america-part-two">http://pewresearch.org/pubs/876/religion-america-part-two</a><br />
<br />
[ORIGINALLY POSTED AT WES WHITE'S SITE. That site is closing so my articles are moving here.]</div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-369049757021183941.post-71863498355345528912012-08-17T09:39:00.002-06:002012-08-17T09:39:45.970-06:00Overt misquote in the movie Divided"The first one to plead his cause seems right, Until his neighbor comes and examines him." Proverbs 18:17<br />
<br />
<em>The Claim</em><br />
When watching the movie, <a href="http://www.examiner.com/christian-perspectives-in-denver/review-of-the-christian-movie-divided-review">Divided</a>, last year at the Colorado homeschooling conference, I was curious about what kind of historical evidence would be brought forward. Would the true story of Sunday school be told?<br />
<br />
To my dismay, it was not so.<br />
<br />
[continued <a href="http://www.examiner.com/article/flagrant-misquote-the-movie-divided">here</a>]Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-369049757021183941.post-30492586636745608232012-06-18T07:03:00.000-06:002012-06-18T07:03:09.903-06:00Family Integrated Church podcast seriesFor those who prefer audio interviews, here is the entire four-part series:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.thatmom.com/2012/05/25/family-integrated-church-podcast-series/">Part 1</a><br />
<a href="http://www.thatmom.com/2012/06/01/part-two-of-podcast-series-on-the-family-integrated-church-movement/">Part 2</a><br />
<a href="http://www.thatmom.com/2012/06/09/part-three-of-podcast-series-on-the-family-integrated-church-movement/">Part 3</a><br />
<a href="http://www.thatmom.com/2012/06/14/part-four-of-podcast-series-on-the-family-integrated-church-movement/">Part 4</a><br />
<br />
Otherwise, check out the written series of related articles <a href="http://christiannurture.blogspot.com/p/uniting-church-and-family.html">here</a>.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-369049757021183941.post-5563207104344862002012-06-07T07:51:00.003-06:002012-06-07T07:51:55.253-06:00Family integrated church podcast, part 2Part 2 at Thatmom.com is up, <a href="http://www.thatmom.com/2012/06/01/part-two-of-podcast-series-on-the-family-integrated-church-movement/">here</a>.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-369049757021183941.post-24338522138843285732012-05-28T08:26:00.001-06:002012-05-28T08:26:45.498-06:00Family Integrated Church podcast series at Thatmom.com<a href="http://www.thatmom.com/2012/05/25/family-integrated-church-podcast-series/">Here</a> is the beginning of a series of interviews I gave Mrs. Campbell at thatmom.com.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-369049757021183941.post-83569429333834661432012-04-18T10:54:00.001-06:002012-04-18T10:54:24.696-06:00Denver pastors discuss solutions to family crisis"At a symposium in Denver, a panel of three pastors discussed why Christian families are losing their children to the world and how this can be prevented. Local homeschooling advocate and internet talk show host, Rev. <a href="http://www.reformationchurch.com/contact.htm" rel="nofollow">Swanson</a>, was on the panel presenting his vision of family restoration. The event was hosted at Park Hill Presbyterian Church on Monday night, April 2."<br />
<br />
Continued <a href="http://www.examiner.com/christian-perspectives-in-denver/local-pastors-discuss-solutions-for-america-s-family-crisis">here</a>.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com1tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-369049757021183941.post-16780238339420808962012-02-07T09:25:00.001-07:002012-02-07T09:29:19.571-07:00A sketch of the history of age-segregation among ChristiansThe following is a sketch of the facts I have uncovered in my research over the last few years in response to claims from many homeschoolers and/or family-integrated proponents. It is a slightly modified reprint (spelling and format) from the original post at puritanboard.com:<br />
<br />
Hello <span style="background-color: black;">Boliver</span>,<br />
<br />If you are referring to Divided, please see the comments at the puritan forum <a href="http://www.puritanboard.com/f67/divided-movie-68770/" target="_blank">here</a>. And my review <a href="http://christiannurture.blogspot.com/2011/06/divided-movie.html" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">here</a>. <br />
<br />It is important to know that the organization behind the movie actually has two problems with the modern "youth programs": separation from parents and age-segregation. Thus the history of Christian schooling as well as catechizing are both relevant in showing the gross inaccuracies of this movement. <br />
<br />
[To fully understand the NCFIC and her leaders please read my article, <a href="http://www.weswhite.net/2011/04/family-integrated-mathis" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">What is a Family Integrated Church?</a> (According to a current church member of Mr. Brown's church and one-time intern for Mr. Brown and currently employed with the NCFIC, Mr. Glick, my article was accurate).]<br />
<br />Here is a sample of the history of catechizing (and school class divisions). <br />
<br /><i>Jewish Church:</i> "In this period a synagogue presupposed a school, as with us a church implies a Sunday school. Hence the church and Sunday school, not the church and the district school, is a parallel to the Jewish system. The methods in these schools were not unlike those of the modern Sunday school. Questions were freely asked and answered, and opinions stated and discussed: any one entering them might ask or answer questions. Such a Jewish Bible school, no doubt, Jesus entered in the temple when twelve years old...in the apostolic period teachers were a recognized body of workers quite distinct from pastors, prophets, and evangelists (see 1 Cor. xii. 28, 29; Eph. iv. 11; Heb. v. 12, etc.). The best commentators hold that the peculiar work of teachers in the primitive church was to instruct the young and ignorant in religious truth, which is precisely the object of the Sunday school." (<em>A Religious Encyclopedia</em>, Schaff, <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=o08XAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22The%20best%20commentators%20hold%20that%20the%20peculiar%20work%20of%20teachers%20in%20the%20primitive%20church%22&pg=PA2262#v=onepage&q&f=false" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">2262</a>)<br />
<br /><i>Ancient Church</i>: “These catechetical classes and schools were intended to prepare neophytes, or new converts, for church-membership, and were also used to instruct the young and the ignorant in the knowledge of God and salvation. They were effective, aggressive missionary agencies in the early Christian churches, and have aptly been termed the 'Sunday schools of the first ages of Christianity.' The pupils were divided into two or three (some say four) classes, according to their proficiency. They memorized passages of Scripture, learned the doctrines of God, creation, providence, sacred history, the fall, the incarnation, resurrection, and future awards and punishments..." (Schaff, ibid)<br />
<br /><i>Reformation & Post-Reformation:</i><br />
<br />The Geneva Academy had two divisions: <em>schola privata</em> and <em>schola publica</em> (the Academy proper). The <em>schola privata</em> (the lower school) was divided into seven grades, admitting children as young as age six. Most boys stayed in each grade a year, but could advance earlier. School began at six in the summer and seven in the winter and lasted until four in the afternoon. Children went home under escort from nine to eleven in the morning. Classes were on Saturday as well and included an afternoon recess. The children sung Psalms one hour a day as well. Catechism classes were held Sunday afternoons. (<em>The History and Character of Calvinism</em>, John T. McNeil (New York: Oxford University Press, 1967), 194ff. cp. <em>Calvin and the Biblical Languages</em>, John Currid (Christian Focus Publications) 2007). <br />
<br />Article 21 of the Dutch Church Order of Dordt (1618) orders that “consistories everywhere shall see to it that there are good school teachers not only to teach the children reading, writing, languages, and the liberal arts, but also to instruct them in godliness and in the Catechism.” (cf. the full Dordt instruction for catechetical teaching <a href="http://www.puritanboard.com/f18/catechizing-children-68903/#post884413">here</a>).<br />
<br />"John Knox devised a system of Sunday schools, at the very beginning of the Reformation in Scotland, which system has been in operation in that country more or less extensively ever since. So that the Sunday schools which now exist in Scotland are derived, not from the system of Raikes in England, but are only a revival of the old system of the Reformer. These schools are frequently referred to in the records of that Church, and in the biographies of good men connected with it. In 1647, the General Assembly recommended to all universities to take account of their scholars on the Sabbath day of the sermons, and of their lessons in the catechism [students at "universities" could be as young as twelve]. John Brown, the godly carrier, had in his day a Sabbath school at Priesthill. It is stated, on the authority of Rev. John Brown, D. D., of Langton, Berwickshire, that Sunday schools were in existence in Glasgow, and other places, in 1707. They were in operation in Glasgow, and other places, in 1759, and also in many places in 1782." (<em>The Congregational Quarterly</em>, 1865, p.<a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=TvsQAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22the%20more%20faithful%20and%20watchful%20pastors%22%20mather&as_brr=1&pg=PA20#v=onepage&q&f=false" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">20</a>)<br />
<br />The pastors and elders of the Bohemian Unity of Brethren church would assemble the older children of the church after the worship services to examine how well they retained the sermon; “hence our ancestors held separate addresses to the different classes, the beginners, the proficients, the perfect; also to the single, and again to the married by themselves: which practice it is evident was not without its advantage.” "At the conclusion of the noon and afternoon service, the elder youths and girls remain, and are examined by the preacher (one of the elders assisting him with the former, and one of the matrons with the latter) to ascertain what attention they have paid that day in hearing the word of God, and how much each has retained. Moreover, during the Lent season, on Wednesday and Friday evening, meetings are held, termed salva (from the hymn..."Save us, Jesus, heavenly King,") in which the mystery of redemption is diligently inculcated, especially upon the young." (<em>Church Constitution of the Bohemian</em>, <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=p-4QAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22hence%20our%20ancestors%20held%20separate%20addresses%20to%20the%20different%20classes%22&pg=PA136#v=onepage&q&f=false" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">136ff</a>.)<br />
<br /><i>Early America:</i><br />
<br />
The church in Norwich, Connecticut, in the Spring of 1675 covenanted together to instruct their children in the fear and admonition of the Lord: “We do therefore this Day Solemnly Covenant to Endeavour uprightly by dependence upon the Grace of God in Christ Jesus our only Saviour. First, That our Children shall be brought up in the Admonition of the Lord, as in our Families, so in publick; that all the Males who are eight or nine years of age, shall be presented before the Lord in his congregation every Lord’s Day to be Catechised, until they be about thirteen years in age. Second. Those about thirteen years of age, both male and female, shall frequent the meetings appointed in private for their instruction, while they continue under family government, or until they are received to full communion in the church.” (110ff. <em>The Ecclesiastical History of New England</em>, p.<a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=dmN4PEAvIysC&dq=%22Those%20about%20thirteen%20years%20of%20age%2C%20both%20male%20and%20female%2C%20shall%20frequent%20the%20meetings%22&pg=PA665#v=onepage&q=%22Those%20about%20thirteen%20years%20of%20age,%20both%20male%20and%20female,%20shall%20frequent%20the%20meetings%22&f=false" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">665 </a>)<br />
<br />
"It is well known that every respectable family had a regular weekly exercise in the catechism [in early New England]; and also that once a week in some towns, or once a month in others, the minister gather the children and youth of his parish, at two o’clock, on Saturday afternoon to catechize them." (<em>The Congregational Quarterly</em>, 1865, <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=TvsQAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22the%20more%20faithful%20and%20watchful%20pastors%22%20mather&as_brr=1&pg=PA21#v=onepage&q&f=false" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">21</a>)<br />
<br />As late as 1808 (before Sunday Schools reached critical mass), the General Association of the Congregationalists in Connecticut, “That they [parents] require them to attend public catechisings till they are fourteen years of age, and thenceforward, during their minority, to attend seasons, that may be appointed by their pastor, for the religious instruction of youth.” <em>The Panoplist</em>, 1808, p.<a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=FZEoAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22require%20them%20to%20attend%20public%20catechisings%20till%20they%20are%20fourteen%20years%20of%20age%22&pg=PA159#v=onepage&q&f=false" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">159</a><br />
<br />"My first acquaintance with Mr. Donnelly [early 1800s] was when I became a pupil in his school in my father's neighbourhood, in Chester District, S. C. I entered his school at an early age; and as he was my first teacher, (my parents excepted,) so he was also among the last. Under his tuition I studied the elementary branches, such as reading, spelling, etc., and recited to him the Larger Catechism. The Bible was not then excluded from the school, on the ground of its being a sectarian book…the afternoon of every alternate Saturday was spent in reciting Catechisms and portions of Scripture, which had been previously committed to memory- He was a rigid disciplinarian of the Old School…” Letter, 1862, Rev. McMillan to William Sprague, <em>Annals of the American Pulpit</em>, vol. 9, p. <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=vAsSAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA75&dq=A+Sermon+Concerning+The+Catechising+Of+Youth#PRA4-PA26,M1" rel="nofollow" target="_blank">26</a><br />
<br />If you have any more questions please ask.<br />
If interested in more of how Christians educated over the centuries, please see my blog, ChristianNurture.blogspot.com <br />
<br />
<em><strong>Additional (2.7.12): I have combed some of the sessional minutes of Scottish churches in the 1600s: they had age-segregated Sunday school between services. I'll gather that info soon Lord willing.</strong></em>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-369049757021183941.post-55366163338238637092011-10-31T17:17:00.002-06:002011-10-31T17:17:43.710-06:00Lessons from ReformationWhy October 31st is significant, <a href="http://www.puritanboard.com/blogs/shawn-mathis/lessons-reformation-709/">here</a>.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-369049757021183941.post-76150542835575660702011-10-29T14:03:00.000-06:002011-10-29T14:06:55.935-06:00October 31: transformation of the WestAmericans will celebrate Halloween in ignorance this Monday. They will blissfully party not knowing that their right to party is historically based upon Protestant theology.<br />
<br />
Learn why in this series of articles celebrating Martin Luther's nailing of the 95 Theses:<br />
<ul style="margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 2em; margin-right: 1em; margin-top: 1em; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;">
<li style="list-style-image: initial; list-style-position: outside; list-style-type: disc; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><a href="http://www.examiner.com/christian-perspectives-in-denver/october-31-the-birthday-of-the-reformation" rel="nofollow" style="color: #2459a8; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank">October 31: the birthday of the Reformation</a></li>
<li style="list-style-image: initial; list-style-position: outside; list-style-type: disc; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><a href="http://www.examiner.com/christian-perspectives-in-denver/october-31-transformation-of-the-church" rel="nofollow" style="color: #2459a8; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank">October 31: transformation of the church</a></li>
<li style="list-style-image: initial; list-style-position: outside; list-style-type: disc; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><a href="http://www.examiner.com/christian-perspectives-in-denver/october-31-transformation-of-economics" rel="nofollow" style="color: #2459a8; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank">October 31: transformation of economics</a></li>
<li style="list-style-image: initial; list-style-position: outside; list-style-type: disc; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><a href="http://www.examiner.com/christian-perspectives-in-denver/october-31-transformation-of-science" rel="nofollow" style="color: #2459a8; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank">October 31: transformation of science</a></li>
<li style="list-style-image: initial; list-style-position: outside; list-style-type: disc; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><a href="http://www.examiner.com/christian-perspectives-in-denver/october-31-transformation-of-early-america" rel="nofollow" style="color: #2459a8; text-decoration: none;" target="_blank">October 31: transformation of early America</a></li>
<li style="list-style-image: initial; list-style-position: outside; list-style-type: disc; margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px; padding-bottom: 0px; padding-left: 0px; padding-right: 0px; padding-top: 0px;"><a href="http://www.examiner.com/christian-perspectives-in-denver/october-31-transformation-of-american-part-1">October 31: transformation of America, part 1</a></li>
</ul>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-369049757021183941.post-5940472905861980682011-10-01T16:42:00.002-06:002011-10-01T16:48:15.250-06:00Homeschool BlindspotsI cannot give a true evaluation of homeschooling as a movement since I have only recently begun my journey.<br />
<br />
However, after over a decade of watching and interacting with homeschooling families, I have had my private concerns. Now, some of these concerns have been voiced by a leader of this movement.<br />
<br />
<i><a href="http://www.joshharris.com/2011/09/homeschool_blindspots.php">Exposing Major Blind Spots of Homeschoolers</a></i> by Reb Bradley is a hard-hitting article that attracted scathing comments. It received greater exposure since it was republished at Joshua Harris' blog.<br />
<br />
He recounts his own personal troubles with idealized homeschooling. And he explains how wide-spread the problems are before listing nine particular traps homeschooling families can fall into.<br />
<br />
It is somewhat long as articles go but if you homeschool or wish to understand this culture then this is a must read.<br />
<br />
I pray it will bring many to the crying need of homeschoolers and non-homeschoolers alike: repentance from sin and faith in Christ.<br />
<br />
Read it <a href="http://www.joshharris.com/2011/09/homeschool_blindspots.php">now</a>.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-369049757021183941.post-54821454560246165372011-09-29T17:06:00.000-06:002011-09-29T17:06:00.115-06:00Christianity Today's review and critique of Divided the movieIt's short. Read it <a href="http://blog.christianitytoday.com/ctentertainment/2011/09/are-youth-groups-biblical.html">here</a>.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-369049757021183941.post-60144478624255434232011-09-14T11:02:00.001-06:002011-12-18T20:25:16.414-07:00Review of Mr. Baucham on youth ministries, Part 1<br />
I was recently asked my opinion on the uncut interview with Mr. Bauchman (<a href="http://www.ncfic.org/weblogmodule/view/id/910/src/@random493e73d2154bd/">here</a>). This interview was reduced and integrated with the movie <a href="http://www.examiner.com/christian-perspectives-in-denver/review-of-the-christian-movie-divided-review">Divided</a>. Since many topics were covered in this interview, I will examine some more than others, basically following my notes in order.<br />
<br />
<i>Mr. Bauchman first sets up the problem in the church: the "institutionalization of the youth." In other words, age-segregated churches are considered the "norm" and Christians cannot think of anything else. In fact, when radical change is presented "institutional inertia" resists the change and people will not change. </i><br />
<br />
I think there is much truth here. The phrase "institutionalization of the youth" is a good description of my own experience growing up in a typical Evangelical church. "Inertia" is another choice word that aptly describes the inherent conservational attitude of most humans to the institutions and methods with which they are comfortable. The churches need to reject youth-centric cultures.<br />
<br />
There is a problem with youth-worship in the church. The cottage industry graphically illustrates this sin. And much money is to be had. And that can be a large temptation to maintain the status-quo. But we should not paint such a broad brush that those against change are necessarily in it for the money or to hold their positions of power.<br />
<br />
<i>The history of Sunday school was presented next. Its origins are in late 18th century England for the stated purpose of helping illiterate children, to "teach them generally." Or put another way by Mr. Bauchman, it was "outreach from the church" to the community but was not intended "to be the discipling arm of the church" (5"). Even so, this teaching tool did not "catch on" until the mid- to late 1800s. </i><br />
<br />
As has been demonstrated repeatedly, <a href="http://christiannurture.blogspot.com/2011/08/samples-of-catechizing-over-centuries.html">history</a> is not the forte of this movement. If Sunday school is conceived of as simply instructional time in the bible that occurs on Sunday, then Sunday school is an old <a href="http://christiannurture.blogspot.com/2011/08/samples-of-catechizing-over-centuries.html">practice</a> (historian <a href="http://www.ccel.org/ccel/schaff/encyc11.s.vii.html">Schaff</a> is one example of this thinking). On the other hand, if Sunday school is conceived of as something radically different than the catechism classes of yesteryear, then it is a new tool. But newness is not inherently wrong.<br />
<br />
Many churches embraced Sunday school early on. In fact, the Presbyterian church early on adopted Sunday schools (and the "bible class") as useful tools for instruction of the young. Sunday school was already lauded by the General Assembly as early as <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=TkgRAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22narrative%20of%20the%20state%20of%20religion%22&lr&as_brr=1&pg=PA296#v=onepage&q&f=false">1816</a>. And by <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=tIQRAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22bible%20class%22&lr&pg=PA29#v=onepage&q&f=false">1830</a> the Presbyterian General Assembly listed Sabbath schools, along side bible classes and catechizing, as a means of covenant child nurture. In fact, Boylan's scholarly book about Sunday schools concludes that Sunday school was fast becoming integrated into Protestant nurturing methods after 1830 (p.20).<br />
<br />
He presented two major arguments used at that time against this "youth ministry" as it began to grow in the 1800s: 1. It will be applied to Christian children 2. Parents will stop catechizing their own children (6"). He ominously concludes that both have now occurred. What is more interesting is the argument <i>not </i>presented: that which cannot be found in the bible should not be practiced; Sunday school cannot be found in the bible, therefore it should not be practiced. This is the implied argument in this interview as well as the movie. Was it used at the beginning of the Sunday school movement?<br />
<br />
However, neither "argument" is sufficient. 1. The fact that Christian children may use an outreach tool for their own spiritual nurture is not <i>inherently </i>wrong. Churches could use catechisms as an educational outreach for the lost and have done so (like the New England Puritans) as well as use it for their own children. 2. That lazy parents exist and will always exist is no argument against the use of something that could be beneficial. Titus 2:3 tells the older women to instruct the younger women. Does this negate the responsibility of the mothers to instruct their own daughters?<br />
<br />
<i>Mr. Baucham asks: "Where do you go in the Scriptures to justify this ministry? The answer is: you don't" (9"). This new insight occurred to him while at seminary. There he asked: "To reform something is to return something to its original biblically intended purpose. Youth ministry does not have one. Therefore, we do not need to reform it but we need to abolish it" (9.30"). It was a crazy idea to them.</i><br />
<br />
Again, we find the leaders of this movement begging the question in debate. The question is whether or not the church must have explicit positive warrant for non-public worship educational events. They assert <i>yes </i>without reason. If readers do not get this, they will find themselves implicitly accepting the answer given without examining the question carefully.<br />
<br />
Again, the question is whether youth ministries can be used without having explicit biblical warrant. Does the church have to find some bible verse to justify the existence of Sunday schools? If so, what is acceptable reasoning and what is not? These are the real questions that should be debated. <i>Readers should not assume that the questions offered are the correct questions.</i> Merely asserting that Sunday school must be found in the bible easily becomes a rhetorical device to bludgeon listeners.<br />
<br />
But behind these questions (answered by Mr. Bauchman but never explicated to the audience) is the more basic question: what is a "youth ministry"? If it is anything like the movie, it is apparently any and all bad things rolled up into one. But put that way, who would be for such ministries? Mr. Phillips, in his lecture "A History of Sunday School," defined Sunday school in such a precise and negative light that his argument was won before the debate ensued. Even I could cheer for him!<br />
<br />
But as all newcomers to this issue know instinctively: it is not bad youth groups and Sunday schools that the NCFIC is against, it is youth ministries <i>as </i>youth ministries that are rejected. Mr. Bauchman asserts later that the "entire structure" must go (12").<br />
<br />
<i>Apparently, after challenging the existence of youth ministries, responses included any and all types of arguments but "never" a biblical argument. There was never a text or biblical principle employed "that this is something we ought to be doing as a church" (11"). The strongest argument he encountered was, "well, there is nothing that says we can't..." He countered: "that's unacceptable."</i><br />
<br />
So far, no actual argument has been presented in the interview. Asserting that youth ministries must have biblical warrant such "that this is something we ought to be doing as a church" is not an argument but an assertion. Why should the churches accept this standard? Upon what biblical doctrine or text does this reasoning rest?<br />
<br />
If Mr. Bauchman quoted relevant verses (or even a confession of faith), maybe threw in a syllogism or two, then an argument would have been presented. Until, perhaps, recently, a lack of a clear argument has been the pattern through much of the literature and lectures of this movement.<br />
<br />
<i>Mr. Baucham continues this line of undeveloped argument noting that most of the age-segregated requirements cannot be found in the bible (again, so what?). In fact, most of the categories come from "space requirements" (12"). It is "completely arbitrary" with no more "merit" than picking people randomly as couples. </i><br />
<br />
Of note is that this observation about space requirements does not match the NCFIC's confession (article 19) which seems to tie age-segregation to "evolutionary and secular" thinking. Space requirements, I believe, is likely the culprit for many small churches, for instance. Again, so what? Only if I take on faith that I have to find a passage or doctrine that can link "space requirements" with the bible in some way can one follow this line of reasoning.<br />
<br />
But there is a biblical doctrine: Christian liberty.<br />
<br />
However, such an argument seems not to meet muster: "Philosophically there is no argument. Theologically there is no argument for any of it" (12.40"). It is unfortunate that Mr. Baucham does not present the best argument, Christian liberty, and demonstrate why it is irrelevant to the case at hand. Instead, the audience is suppose to take his word that no real argument has been presented.<br />
<br />
<i>"But we do it religiously," Mr. Baucham complains. It is as though age-segregation is the the only thing we know (12.40").</i><br />
<br />
Now, I think I can agree with that. However, that observation is different than some small church with genuine space requirements concerns. Perhaps they separate the children but not "religiously" knowing that the parents are given the final say of which class they think is best. That approach is certainly not an air-tight 23-35.5 year-old age-group that Mr. Baucham ridiculed earlier. In fact, churches have the biblical freedom to reduce their Sunday school to two groups or just one.<br />
<br />
<i>Next, he rightly debunks the pragmatic assertion that if something worked for me it should work for everyone (14"). He also shows the unbiblical nature of operating two different worship services serving two classes of people (15"). He laments that youth are no longer part of the church.</i><br />
<br />
I agree. I was unaware that some of these terrible things were happening. I only wish he would clearly separate the worship issue from non-worship issues (many Sunday schools do not overlap worship). And that he would distinguish messed-up youth ministries from well-grounded ones (Mr. Brown in his new book does exactly that). This helps the listener carefully evaluate the assertions offered.<br />
[For numbers on young people leaving the church, see Barna, <a href="http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/16-teensnext-gen/147-most-twentysomethings-put-christianity-on-the-shelf-following-spiritually-active-teen-years">here</a>.]<br />
<br />
<i>Over half-way through the interview, Mr. Baucham decries youth ministers evaluating the problems within youth ministries. Why? Because it is like the fox guarding the hen house (19")! The youth ministers are going to try to "eat less chickens" to preserve their jobs (19.20")! Naturally, he does not want to smear their motives but they would not be youth ministers if they did not believe they were "the answer" or "essential." </i><br />
<br />
Using such language (<i>ad hominems</i>) and such a nefarious illustration betrays more of his own uncharitable mindset than he may realize. Perhaps Mr. Baucham should stop evaluating churches in general since he is a pastor of a church and would naturally wish to maintain his job by denigrating other churches? Or perhaps I should wonder why the NCFIC ignores my articles. Could it be that they wish to preserve their public image. After all they would not keep propogating their views (and errors) if they did not think they were "the answer" or "essential." But I will refrain myself from any such speculations. I believe better things of Mr. Baucham and the NCFIC.<br />
<br />
(continued in part 2)Unknownnoreply@blogger.com18tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-369049757021183941.post-49207796302810064182011-09-06T11:03:00.000-06:002011-09-06T11:03:13.664-06:00Mr. Baucham on youth ministries, uncut<a href="http://www.ncfic.org/weblogmodule/view/id/910/src/@random493e73d2154bd/">Here </a>is the unedited interview with Mr. Voddie Baucham from the movie, <a href="http://www.examiner.com/christian-perspectives-in-denver/review-of-the-christian-movie-divided-review">Divided</a>.<br />
<br />
I was asked my opinion about this segment. That will be the next posting, Lord willing.<br />
<br />
<span class="Apple-style-span" style="font-size: x-small;">(More about the movement <a href="http://christiannurture.blogspot.com/p/family-integrated-church-movement.html">here</a>.)</span>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-369049757021183941.post-30456649360185977692011-08-15T21:18:00.002-06:002011-08-15T21:18:59.407-06:00Weak defense of Divided the movie<a href="http://familyintegratedchurchmovement.blogspot.com/2011/08/some-illogical-apologetics-of-divided.html">Here</a> is a summary of some typical arguments defending the new family integrated movie, Divided, and why they fall short of their intended goal.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-369049757021183941.post-25520582541114060082011-08-03T17:13:00.003-06:002013-09-13T09:59:36.225-06:00Mr. Brown's late-in-coming distinctions for family integrated churchesThe following is from the NCFIC <a href="https://ncfic.org/resources/view/air-conditioners-and-microphones-arent-in-the-bible-either">blog </a>by Mr. Brown. He is responding to counter-claims that the bible does not have cars or films just like there is no age-segregation.<br />
<br />
My hope is that my questions will help bring differing parties together. Or at the least clarify any real differences between the NCFIC and traditional Reformed thinking.<br />
<br />
<b>First of all he writes</b>,<br />
<br />
"First, the primary argument of the NCFIC and the film Divided is not that youth ministry does not exist in the Bible...What is more important – and this is the main point we want to make – is that all the positive commands and examples in Scripture call for the practice of age-integrated worship and discipleship in the church and the responsibility of parents to disciple their own children."<br />
<br />
First, the reader should note the careful (yet unclear) language "modern form of systematic, age-segregated youth ministry". What does this mean? In the movie, the reviewer is left with the worst possible illustration of such ministries. However, it is not youth ministry <i>per se</i> that is rejected but "systematic age-segregation". The NCFIC confession article uses the words "comprehensive age segregated discipleship." But it never offers a definition of these phrases.<br />
<br />
Can a youth ministry have <i>non</i>-systematic age-segregation? This important question will help clarify exactly what Mr. Brown means.<br />
<br />
Secondly, an argument from silence is used but it is a secondary argument. As such it is still invalid unless clarified by another premise. Such a premise has not been offered or proven (for example, "that which is not in the Bible is therefore suspect").<br />
<br />
Third, it is claimed "all the positive commands and examples in Scripture call for the practice of age-integrated worship and discipleship in the church and the responsibility of parents to disciple their own children." This is not precisely true since no command states: "children should <i>only </i>be family integrated for instruction," neither in so many words or by syllogistic reasoning. Not one. But apparently the bible states that "children should <i>more often than not</i> be age-integrated for instruction" according to Mr. Brown's exceptions (see below).<br />
<br />
Consider another important point: the commands and examples offered are <i>not specific enough to determine exactly how the meetings of instruction were arranged.</i> Did the wives sit with the husbands? Did nursemaids watch over the infants? Did families even sit with each other? <i>The texts do not say</i>, except Nehemiah 8 which is (special) pleaded away into an insignificant "exception". Yet history tells us that <i>during the time of Christ families were separated in the temple worship</i>. Where is the New Testament outrage for this practice?<br />
<br />
<b>Next he states</b>,<br />
<br />
"The Bible is clear about this matter, and it gives the full range of that teaching including who, where, why, what, and when....When you split youth up according to age, you are doing something that is contrary to the explicit, revealed commands and patterns of Scripture...to claim that we can set aside these scriptural methods and employ our own methods because we do things and use means not mandated in Scripture in other areas of church life is a generic fallacy."<br />
<br />
Let me take this in reverse: "generic fallacy"--I do not know what that is. I googled it. Perhaps he means the "genetic fallacy." This is a logical fallacy of denouncing (or proving) something based upon its origins. Thus a Christian who would reject Aristotelian logic because it was formalized and expanded by an unbeliever is committing the genetic fallacy.<br />
<br />
Even granting this is the fallacy he desired to use I am not sure how it relates to the issue at hand. On the other hand, when the movie points to Plato and Rousseau as the source of modern age-segregated youth ministries <i>that </i>is a genetic fallacy.<br />
<br />
<b>Now for the details</b>:<br />
<br />
"The Bible is clear about this matter, and it gives the full range of that teaching including who, where, why, what, and when."<br />
<br />
I am not sure what this means. For instance, what is <i>what</i>? Is this the subject matter of the teaching? The method? It is noteworthy that <i>how </i>is missing in this list. But age-segregation is a <i>how </i>of instruction.<br />
<br />
If the bible gives the <i>what </i>of teaching where is the verse that says: "learn to read, write and type"? Where are the examples? If we are counting examples and lining them up as Mr. Brown appears to do in his book, then in the bible the majority ("primary") of examples are <i>oral </i>examples: people speaking and memorizing. The "exception" is non-verbal.<br />
<br />
If these are not the "full range" covered in his assertion then what is covered? This assertion only creates more questions.<br />
<br />
<b>Lastly</b>, he elaborates a distinction missing in the NCFIC confession and book:<br />
<br />
"Third, methods and means of discipleship are in a different class than microphones and computers. Discipleship methods are defined and commanded in Scripture and are matters of Law (i.e., God’s revealed will that we are to obey), while things like microphones, computers, and film are matters of technology (i.e., practical tools we can use as means to carry out the Law of God). In regard to technology and other practical aspects of church life (where we meet, the length of our meetings, type of seats we use, etc.), these are matters of liberty that are under the biblical guidelines for the practice of liberty. This means that Scripture must be consulted to see if they contradict anything that Scripture maintains."<br />
<br />
Not a single bible passage or theological syllogism is offered to prove this point. It is completely arbitrary to assert that "methods and means of discipleship" are substantially different than "microphones and computer." For if the sufficiency of Scripture gives the "full range of that teaching including who, where, why, what, and when" then one would expect technology (a <i>what </i>and <i>how </i>of discipleship) to be sufficiently and explicitly guided by the Bible.<br />
<br />
So, since discipleship is part of the law of God. And the "methods and means of discipleship" are matters of the Law. Therefore, these "practical tools" which Mr. Brown admits are "means to carry out the Law of God" must fall into the same category. Unless equivocation of terms is occurring.<br />
<br />
Again, upon what biblical principle does he differentiate discipleship methods that are <i>significant </i>from discipleship methods that are <i>not </i>significant (my language)? I believe that using computers for discipleship purposes <i>is significant</i> because instructional time can be hampered if one is using the computer more than a human in some cases. Generally, it is not the tool itself that is a problem but the usage of the tool.<br />
<br />
More importantly, the entire paragraph is built upon an <i>unproven </i>premise (as is the entire book): the regulative principle of discipleship. In my own words for clarification: all methods and means of discipleship invented by the brain of man without His own express commandment is wrong.<br />
<br />
Now, I have never seen it written out that way. What we have instead are the elements of this premise found in Mr. Brown's posting and book. See especially the "desert isle test." He requires that "all the positive commands and examples" must limit the range of discipleship methods to just those things explicit in the commands and examples of the bible--<i>just like the regulative principle of worship (RPW)</i>.<br />
<br />
The Scottish reformer, John Knox, explained the regulative principle of worship as, "All worshipping, honoring, or service invented by the brain of man in the religion of God, without His own express commandment, is idolatry." All Reformed creeds follow this principle for worship. Otherwise the Reformers exercised Christian liberty even in the domain of education and discipleship (read the history <a href="http://christiannurture.blogspot.com/2008/01/very-short-history-of-christian.html">here</a>).<br />
<br />
<b>Now to sum up</b>, why is "systematic age-segregation" rejected? Because all the commands and examples of the bible are age-integrated. But why does a Christian need to find explicit commands and examples of discipleship before using a method of discipleship? I do not know what their answer is. Somehow <i>discipleship </i>(however defined) has a separate moral interpretive tool than other moral fields of everyday life.<br />
<br />
But the matter does not end there. Mr. Brown allows for age-segregation!<br />
<br />
"There are times when it may be appropriate for various ages of people to meet for specific purposes" (A Weed in the Church, p.231, cp.61).<br />
<br />
<i>Then what is the whole debate about?</i> Why is this exception not placed at the beginning of the argument? Where is it in the NCFIC confession?<br />
<br />
Has the entire decade long debate been over <i>how much</i> age-segregation is allowed? If so, how much does Mr. Brown think is allowable?<br />
<br />
Very little it seems. "However, this is not to be the normative pattern of biblical youth discipleship, but rather an exception." A glimpse of <i>how much</i> is offered on page 225 where he contends that as "little as one hour a week" of age-segregation is "problematic" for those wishing biblical felicity.<br />
<br />
In other words, 1/168 of a week is still too radical to contemplate. That is .006% of a child's week! What Mr. Brown gives in one hand is virtually taken away by the other.<br />
<br />
At the end of the day, the article offered by the NCFIC did not bring much clarification. I do not know where this leaves the movement. But I do hope that the questions and observations of my article will bring more light than heat.<br />
<br />
[Family integrated church series <a href="http://christiannurture.blogspot.com/2008/01/family-integrated-church.html">here</a>].Unknownnoreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-369049757021183941.post-59797332482147624132011-08-01T17:43:00.000-06:002011-08-01T17:43:40.234-06:00Samples of catechizing over the centuriesI was asked at puritanboard.com about the <a href="http://www.puritanboard.com/f18/catechizing-children-68903/#post883666">history </a>of catechizing. Although I have focused on the broader question of how Christians educated their children over the centuries, I still have much information on this narrow question.<br />
<br />
Below was my very short answer:<br />
<br />
If you are referring to Divided, please see the comments at the puritan forum here. And my review <a href="http://christiannurture.blogspot.com/2011/06/divided-movie.html">here</a>. <br />
<br />
It is important to know that the organization behind the movie actually has two problems with the modern "youth programs": separation from parents and age-segregation. Thus the history of Christian schooling as well as catechizing are both relevant in showing the gross inaccuracies of this movement. <br />
<br />
[To fully understand the NCFIC and her leaders please read my article, <i><a href="http://www.weswhite.net/2011/04/family-integrated-mathis">What is a Family Integrated Church?</a></i> (According to a current church member of Mr. Brown's church and one-time intern for Mr. Brown and currently employed with the NCFIC, Mr. Glick, my article was accurate).]<br />
<br />
Here is a sample of the history of catechizing (and school class divisions). <br />
<br />
Jewish Church:<br />
<br />
"In this period a synagogue presupposed a school, as with us a church implies a Sunday school. Hence the church and Sunday school, not the church and the district school, is a parallel to the Jewish system. The methods in these schools were not unlike those of the modern Sunday school. Questions were freely asked and answered, and opinions stated and discussed: any one entering them might ask or answer questions. Such a Jewish Bible school, no doubt, Jesus entered in the temple when twelve years old...in the apostolic period teachers were a recognized body of workers quite distinct from pastors, prophets, and evangelists (see 1 Cor. xii. 28, 29; Eph. iv. 11; Heb. v. 12, etc.). The best commentators hold that the peculiar work of teachers in the primitive church was to instruct the young and ignorant in religious truth, which is precisely the object of the Sunday school." (A Religious encyclopaedia, Schaff, <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=o08XAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22The%20best%20commentators%20hold%20that%20the%20peculiar%20work%20of%20teachers%20in%20the%20primitive%20church%22&pg=PA2262#v=onepage&q&f=false">2262</a>)<br />
<br />
Ancient Church:<br />
<br />
“These catechetical classes and schools were intended to prepare neophytes, or new converts, for church-membership, and were also used to instruct the young and the ignorant in the knowledge of God and salvation. They were effective, aggressive missionary agencies in the early Christian churches, and have aptly been termed the 'Sunday schools of the first ages of Christianity.' The pupils were divided into two or three (some say four) classes, according to their proficiency. They memorized passages of Scripture, learned the doctrines of God, creation, providence, sacred history, the fall, the incarnation, resurrection, and future awards and punishments..." (Schaff, ibid)<br />
<br />
Reformation and Post-Reformation:<br />
<br />
The Geneva Academy had two divisions: schola privata and schola publica (the Academy proper). The schola privata (the lower school) was divided into seven grades, admitting children as young as age six. Most boys stayed in each grade a year, but could advance earlier. School began at six in the summer and seven in the winter and lasted until four in the afternoon. Children went home under escort from nine to eleven in the morning. Classes were on Saturday as well and included an afternoon recess. The children sung Psalms one hour a day as well. Catechism classes were held Sunday afternoons. (The History and Character of Calvinism, John T. McNeil (New York: Oxford University Press, 1967), 194ff. cp. Calvin and the Biblical Languages, John Currid (Christian Focus Publications) 2007). <br />
<br />
Article 21 of the Dutch Church Order of Dordt (1618) orders that: <br />
<br />
"In order that the Christian youth may be diligently instructed in the principles of religion and be trained in piety three modes of catechizing should be employed I. In the houses by the parents II. In the schools by school masters III. In the churches by ministers elders and catechizers those specially appointed for the purpose." (Full quote <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=AG8rAAAAYAAJ&lpg=PA104&ots=KXYzMTYX-P&dq=%22In%20order%20that%20the%20Christian%20youth%20may%20be%20diligently%20instructed%20in%20the%20principles%20of%20religion%22&pg=PA104#v=onepage&q&f=false">here</a>).<br />
<br />
It also stated: <br />
"That these may diligently discharge their trust the Christian magistrates shall be requested to promote by their authority so sacred and necessary a work and all who have the oversight and visitation of the churches and schools shall be required to pay special attention to this matter."<br />
<br />
[This civil enforcement was also enacted in New England and similar oversight in Geneva. Pastor oversight was neigh universally encouraged.]<br />
<br />
Now, for the parts more germane to the movie:<br />
<br />
"The schoolmasters shall instruct their scholars according to their age and capacity at least two days in the week not only by causing them to commit to memory but by instilling into their minds an acquaintance with the truths of the Catechism. For this end three forms of the Catechism adapted to the three fold circumstances and ages of the young shall be used. The first shall be for the young children comprising the Articles of Faith or Creed, the Ten Commandments, the Lord's Prayer, the Institution of the Sacraments and Church Discipline with some short prayers and plain questions adapted to the three parts of the Catechism. The second shall be a short compendium of the Catechism of the Palatinate or Heidelberg used in our churches in which those who are somewhat more advanced than the former shall be instructed. The third shall be the Catechism of the Palatinate or Heidelberg adopted by our churches for the youth still more advanced in years and knowledge."<br />
<br />
[Radical nuts following evolutionary though? I think not. But godly men using the light of nature to differentiate between babes, children, youths and adults--broad categories followed by many cultures.]<br />
<br />
"John Knox devised a system of Sunday schools, at the very beginning of the Reformation in Scotland, which system has been in operation in that country more or less extensively ever since. So that the Sunday schools which now exist in Scotland are derived, not from the system of Raikes in England, but are only a revival of the old system of the Reformer. These schools are frequently referred to in the records of that Church, and in the biographies of good men connected with it. In 1647, the General Assembly recommended to all universities to take account of their scholars on the Sabbath dny of the sermons, and of their lessons in the catechism [students at "universities" could be as young as twelve]. John Brown, the godly carrier, had in his day a Sabbath school at Priesthill. It is stated, on the authority of Rev. John Brown, D. D., of Langton, Berwickshire, that Sunday schools were in existence in Glasgow, and other places, in 1707. Ihey were in operation in Glasgow, and other places, in 1759, and also in many places in 1782." (The Congregational Quarterly, 1865, p.<a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=TvsQAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22the%20more%20faithful%20and%20watchful%20pastors%22%20mather&as_brr=1&pg=PA20#v=onepage&q&f=false">20</a>)<br />
<br />
The pastors and elders of the Bohemian Unity of Brethren church would assemble the older children of the church after the worship services to examine how well they retained the sermon; “hence our ancestors held separate addresses to the different classes, the beginners, the proficients, the perfect; also to the single, and again to the married by themselves: which practice it is evident was not without its advantage.” "At the conclusion of the noon and afternoon service, the elder youths and girls remain, and are examined by the preacher (one of the elders assisting him with the former, and one of the matrons with the latter) to ascertain what attention they have paid that day in hearing the word of God, and how much each has retained. Moreover, during the Lent season, on Wednesday and Friday evening, meetings are held, termed salva (from the hymn Salva nos Jesu, rex cmli, "Save us, Jesus, heavenly King,") in which the mystery of redemption is diligently inculcated, especially upon the young." (Church Constitution of the Bohemian, <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=p-4QAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22hence%20our%20ancestors%20held%20separate%20addresses%20to%20the%20different%20classes%22&pg=PA136#v=onepage&q&f=false">136ff</a>.)<br />
<br />
<br />
Early America:<br />
<br />
The church in Norwich, Connecticut, in the Spring of 1675 covenanted together to instruct their children in the fear and admonition of the Lord: “We do therefore this Day Solemnly Covenant to Endeavour uprightly by dependence upon the Grace of God in Christ Jesus our only Saviour. First, That our Children shall be brought up in the Admonition of the Lord, as in our Families, so in publick; that all the Males who are eight or nine years of age, shall be presented before the Lord in his congregation every Lord’s Day to be Catechised, until they be about thirteen years in age. Second. Those about thirteen years of age, both male and female, shall frequent the meetings appointed in private for their instruction, while they continue under family government, or until they are received to full communion in the church.” (The Ecclesiastical History of New England, p.<a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=dmN4PEAvIysC&dq=%22Those%20about%20thirteen%20years%20of%20age%2C%20both%20male%20and%20female%2C%20shall%20frequent%20the%20meetings%22&pg=PA665#v=onepage&q=%22Those%20about%20thirteen%20years%20of%20age,%20both%20male%20and%20female,%20shall%20frequent%20the%20meetings%22&f=false">665 </a>)<br />
<br />
"It is well known that every respectable family had a regular weekly exercise in the catechism [in early New England]; and also that once a week in some towns, or once a month in others, the minister gather the children and youth of his parish, at two o’clock, on Saturday afternoon to catechize them." (The Congregational Quarterly, 1865, <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=TvsQAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22the%20more%20faithful%20and%20watchful%20pastors%22%20mather&as_brr=1&pg=PA21#v=onepage&q&f=false">21</a>)<br />
<br />
As late as 1808 (before Sunday Schools reached critical mass), the General Association of the Congregationalists in Connecticut, “That they [parents] require them to attend public catechisings till they are fourteen years of age, and thenceforward, during their minority, to attend seasons, that may be appointed by their pastor, for the religious instruction of youth.” (Panoplist, 1808, p.<a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=FZEoAAAAYAAJ&dq=%22require%20them%20to%20attend%20public%20catechisings%20till%20they%20are%20fourteen%20years%20of%20age%22&pg=PA159#v=onepage&q&f=false">159</a>.)<br />
<br />
"My first acquaintance with Mr. Donnelly [early 1800s] was when I became a pupil in his school in my father's neighbourhood, in Chester District, S. C. I entered his school at an early age; and as he was my first teacher, (my parents excepted,) so he was also among the last. Under his tuition I studied the elementary branches, such as reading, spelling, etc., and recited to him the Larger Catechism. The Bible was not then excluded from the school, on the ground of its being a sectarian book…the afternoon of every alternate Saturday was spent in reciting Catechisms and portions of Scripture, which had been previously committed to memory- IIe was a rigid disciplinarian of the Old School…” (Letter, 1862, Rev. McMillan to William Sprague, Annals of the American Pulpit, vol. 9, p. <a href="http://books.google.com/books?id=vAsSAAAAYAAJ&pg=PA75&dq=A+Sermon+Concerning+The+Catechising+Of+Youth#PRA4-PA26,M1">26</a>.)<br />
<br />
If you have any more questions please ask.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com4tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-369049757021183941.post-10830956250071758212011-07-25T19:55:00.000-06:002011-07-25T19:55:45.270-06:00Fellow blogger with good analysis of Divided the movieMy fellow blogger, Adam, has a few good thoughts about the semantic confusion from the NCFIC and the Divided movie, <a href="http://otrmin.wordpress.com/2011/07/16/some-comments-on-the-movie-divided">here</a>.<br />
<br />
"Do parents have the authority to teach kids? Yes. Do churches have the authority to teach kids? Yes. Where is the contradiction, and what is the objection? I don’t know, and I am finding that, the more I listen to these guys speak, the more I am impressed with their ability to say very ambiguous statements with a ton of conviction and passion. That is, honestly, not helpful."Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-369049757021183941.post-76500368090364554822011-07-22T18:46:00.000-06:002011-07-22T18:46:57.259-06:00Unity of Church and FamilyAlthough I have critiqued the family-integrated movement, it is not enough to show its errors. An alternative must be presented. And here it is:<br />
<br />
<a href="http://www.weswhite.net/2011/06/uniting-church-and-family/">Uniting Church and Family</a>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-369049757021183941.post-90906757423402947662011-06-23T08:57:00.000-06:002011-06-23T08:57:36.879-06:00Divided the movie<div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">Why are churches losing upwards of 80% of the youth?</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">Why are Christian youth increasing in childishness?</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">What can be done to stop the demise of the next generation?</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">A new, provocative movie, <i>Divided</i>, seeks to give an answer. The movie was shown on June 17th at the Christian Home Educators of Colorado conference in north Denver.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><i>Summary</i></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">The movie was fifty minutes long. The producer, Mr. LeClerk, takes the viewer on a grim journey into the heart of youth ministries. He interviews church kids, youth ministry experts, statisticians, and pastors.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">In an ever-spiraling descent into marketing madness, the film ably portrays the deep-seated pragmatism of the teenagers and their would-be pied-pipers. One youth leader bluntly told the camera that the youth did not need more Biblical truth but more practical things, more relationships, more fun.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">Mr. LeClerk then "discovers the shockingly sinister roots of modern, age-segregated church programs..." The roots do not begin with Mr. Raikes of late eighteenth-century England but with Plato and Rousseau. And even more, there is no biblical precedent for such programs. Therefore, the solution is to tear down the entire youth ministry--branch, root and all.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">To rescue a lost generation it will take churches and families following the Word of God. Churches should stop usurping parental responsibilities. And parents should take back their God-given duty to train and nurture their own children. This will rescue the next generation.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><i>Analysis</i></div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">The movie was created in conjunction with the National Center for Family Integrated Churches (NCFIC). The president of this organisation, Mr. Brown, figures predominately in the movie.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">The photography, mood and music were spot-on. This is obviously a professionally made film. The pacing was good. Its presentation was not over-the-top or in-your-face, but subtle and dramatic. Aesthetically, the movie deserves full marks.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">But presentation aside, what of the content? Given the applause at the end of the Friday night showing in Denver, it grabbed the audience. Setting the problem up with multiple teen-interviews, peppered with real-time video of Christian "rock concerts," LeClerk masterfully guides the audience through the entertainment-minded youth ministries of today.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">This <i>is </i>a serious problem. Children, teenagers and youth alike are baptized in a sea of childish entertainment all for the sake of "relevance." If the statistics are only partially accurate, they are astounding enough. Too many youth <i>are </i>leaving the church.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">And the parental problem is equally heinous: too many parents feel godly sending their children off to youth camp while neglecting family worship, home discipleship and basic doctrinal fidelity. Added to this problem are too many churches willing to accept the status quo.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">In fact, a Pew <a href="http://pewresearch.org/pubs/876/religion-america-part-two">study</a> shows 57% of confessing Evangelicals deny that Christ is the only way to heaven. Barna <a href="http://www.barna.org/barna-update/article/5-barna-update/57-home-school-families-have-different-backgrounds-than-commonly-assumed">numbers</a> suggest that being a homeschooler is no sure defense either: half of those polled believe that salvation is not by faith alone.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">Although the show does a good job presenting the youth problem, it misses the wider context of that problem. With such wide-spread doctrinal ignorance, is it any wonder the youth leave the shallow churches?</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">Unfortunately, the history section leaves much to be desired. Pointing out that Plato wished to send children to the state schools is not the same as proving this as the intellectual source of today's age-segregation. The omission of the fact that the Reformers and Puritans practiced age-segregation is another problem.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">What of the solution: to demolish youth ministries and incorporate family discipleship?</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">The solution is wonderful...if understood correctly. But proper understanding cannot come from the movie since it leaves out important pieces of information. For instance, Mr. Brown believes there are times and occasions for the family to be separated (see his <a href="http://christiannurture.blogspot.com/2011/05/weed-in-church-review.html">book</a>, <i>A Weed in the Church</i>). Likewise, Mr. Phillips thinks there are times to speak to teenagers as teenagers.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">In other words, the rhetoric of the movie would forbid any and all age-segregation. When in actuality the leading proponents have a more nuanced position. If the film were twenty-minutes long this lack of nuance could be tolerated.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">What family discipleship entails was lightly touched upon. But the proper role of the church was not clearly articulated. In contrast, Mr. Brown's book helpfully clarifies that the pastors and laymen have a role in the life of the youth.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">Overall, the movie delivers the content and delivers it well. The problem is that the content is one-sided. There is a youth problem but there is a larger problem of Gospel ignorance. It would be better to read the book, but at least the movie will challenge Christians to rethink the role of youth ministries.</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;"><br />
</div><div style="margin-bottom: 0px; margin-left: 0px; margin-right: 0px; margin-top: 0px;">[More about the NCFIC organization <a href="http://www.weswhite.net/2011/04/family-integrated-mathis/">here</a>. More about Mr. Phillips <a href="http://www.examiner.com/christian-perspectives-in-denver/an-extended-analysis-of-the-claims-of-doug-phillips">here</a>. A Review of Mr. Brown's book <a href="http://christiannurture.blogspot.com/2011/05/weed-in-church-review.html">here</a>.]</div>Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-369049757021183941.post-21869443440030066682011-06-17T13:57:00.001-06:002011-06-17T13:57:31.060-06:00Recent articles about family integrated churchesThis week was full of family-integrated church articles.<br />
<br />
For those interested in intelligent interactions on this issue I offer the following. The first is an article I hope many proponents of FICs can agree upon.<br />
<br />
1. <a href="http://www.weswhite.net/2011/06/uniting-church-and-family/">Uniting Church and Family</a> The proper relation requires the Gospel.<br />
<br />
2. <a href="http://christiannurture.blogspot.com/2011/05/weed-in-church-review.html">A Weed in the Church: A Review</a>. I may expand on this in detail.<br />
<br />
3. Family-Integrated Church Series by Prof. Sam <a href="http://www.mctsowensboro.org/faculty--staff/resident-faculty/">Waldron</a>. Part 17 <a href="http://www.mctsowensboro.org/2011/06/family-integrated-church-17-samuel-jesus-and-paul-part-1/?thankyou#comnotify#comment-613">here</a>. It is an irenic engagement.<br />
<br />
4. <a href="http://www.examiner.com/christian-perspectives-in-denver/christian-homeschooling-conference-who-is-doug-phillips">Christian homeschooling conference: who is Doug Phillips?</a> There is a lively exchange in the comment section. Unfortunately, it is not as productive as the discussion with Mr. Glick <a href="http://www.weswhite.net/2011/04/family-integrated-mathis/">here</a>. Many ardent supporters of this movement tend to jump the gun and assume that if you critique them then you are against parents having the primary responsibility of instructing their children.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com6tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-369049757021183941.post-43106317042789646482011-05-31T16:10:00.003-06:002011-06-23T15:03:12.527-06:00A Weed in the Church: A Review<i>Overview</i><br />
There is a crisis among the Christian youth. They drop out of church. They remain childish. They are biblically illiterate. The church is losing the next generation.<br />
<br />
Author Scott Brown, pastor and director of the National Center for Family-Integrated Churches (NCFIC), insists this youth problem is of “epic proportions,” requiring repentance and change right now.<br />
<br />
<a href="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEimyRqdt9OIUre7jbn8PcF3d-S4o2lgUik74A-HGz_RaqmLVAvbRTl6y7U0VBPBMMG0NEMk7OjGQUN7yYWesFDM4eV5v3i-Ns1_OE5aWAbDUQQjUWOha-Ek4E-wWvPMmIIeR5MPBDi9juI/s1600/weed.gif" imageanchor="1" style="clear: right; float: right; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 1em;"><img border="0" src="https://blogger.googleusercontent.com/img/b/R29vZ2xl/AVvXsEimyRqdt9OIUre7jbn8PcF3d-S4o2lgUik74A-HGz_RaqmLVAvbRTl6y7U0VBPBMMG0NEMk7OjGQUN7yYWesFDM4eV5v3i-Ns1_OE5aWAbDUQQjUWOha-Ek4E-wWvPMmIIeR5MPBDi9juI/s1600/weed.gif" /></a>This <a href="http://www.amazon.com/Weed-Church-Scott-Brown/dp/0982056745/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1306880413&sr=8-1">book </a>is his clarion call to change youth discipleship. It is divided into five sections: orientation, history, solution, objections, and implementation. The first section is a much-needed explanation of what <a href="http://www.weswhite.net/2011/04/family-integrated-mathis/">family-integration</a> (FI) is and is not. He offers ten qualifications that help nuance the concern and the solution. He also explains his view of sola Scriptura in relation to not only worship but discipleship.<br />
<br />
The second section of the book traces the history of age-segregation. Section three (the largest part) collects the biblical data for youth discipleship for both the family and the church. Section four rebuts eleven arguments against age-integrated discipleship. The last section tersely explains nine steps to planting an age-integrated approach. <br />
<br />
The thesis of the book argues that this problem among the youth (drop-outs, childishness, etc.) is caused by (among other things) “systematic age-segregation.” Age-segregated youth ministry “is the result of apostasy in the church,” the supplanting of the Word with man-made traditions of discipleship (p.43). But the modern youth ministry is not only defined by age-segregation or Sunday school but by a curiously long, heavily-descriptive sentence (p.47). <br />
<br />
The author offers a two-fold solution: stop age-segregation and start age-integration (especially get the fathers involved). This dual solution is to be implemented en toto and not piece-meal (p.249ff.). Obedience to God is a hard calling, but ministers must persevere for the sake of the families.<br />
<br />
<i>Analysis</i><br />
A Weed in the Church does the church a service by graphically illustrating the corrosive effects of a youth-oriented, niche-market culture. It rightly calls fathers back to their God-given duties to disciple their children and to lead their families. It rightly denounces children worship services. <br />
<br />
The opening chapters include details that attempt to clarify the concerns. But the highly-specific definition of youth ministry (p.47) is partly a loaded definition that poisons the well of discussion from the very beginning. For instance, youth ministries are described as methods “that usurp parents’ authority over their children.” Many good churches that are careful in their use of Sunday school and the like would take great umbrage at being labeled thus without evidence. <br />
<br />
The book does not make the historical <a href="http://christiannurture.blogspot.com/2008/01/very-short-history-of-christian.html">case </a>that age-segregation is secular and evolutionary in origin. There is no explicit tie-in between each historical segment. Lining up quotes is not the same as proving their connection. Further, the omissions of the many age-segregated meetings in history—such as age-specific meetings in Puritan New England—are conspicuous by their absence. <br />
<br />
The heart of the book, the theological assertion, is tenuous at best. It is asserted that God did not tell the church to use age-segregation for discipleship; therefore it should not be used (p.47, 85). This appears to be (what I dub) the “regulative principle of education,” a confusion between Christian liberty and the Reformed doctrine of worship (cp. chapter 5). This approach is assumed but never proven.<br />
<br />
Further, segregation “does not properly fulfill” the biblical requirements for discipleship and is contrary to the “primary examples” of church gatherings (p.203, 74). What a “primary example” is in contrast to secondary examples is not clear. And since segregation does not “properly fulfill” biblical requirements it is odd that some age-segregation is allowable (p.231).<br />
<br />
It is true: churches should stop abusing age- and family-segregated meetings like a drunkard abuses wine. And many families feel godly using the multitude of programs to bypass their own responsibilities. But the author simply throws all such meetings into the waste basket of evolution—almost. He admits there are times and occasions for the family to be separated (p.61, 231), yet never explains when and why such a time should be an “exception.” In contrast, he actually argues that even if fathers were properly instructing their children and youth groups were Bible-centered with only one-hour a week meetings, it would still be wrong (p.57, 218, 222, 225). What is given in one hand is taken by the other.<br />
<br />
<i>Conclusion</i><br />
I am a child of age-segregated discipleship. I grew up with Sunday school. I attended my local youth ministry. I went to school. If Scott Brown was the typical youth group leader, I was the typical teen target for that leader.<br />
<br />
Yet I was not a typical youth. By God’s grace, I paid attention to the pastor. And I paid attention to my parents, my <a href="http://christiannurture.blogspot.com/2008/01/very-short-history-of-christian.html">father </a>in particular. But, like many today, I was ignorant of much Christian doctrine and practice. <br />
<br />
So I tried to obey God’s Law to gain heaven. I tried so very hard until the Law shattered my ego. Around the age of sixteen, I recognized my inability to save myself through good works. I cried out to Christ to save me from myself. A few years later, through the doctrines of sovereign grace, I matured in my faith.<br />
<br />
Are youth-oriented, programmatic “ministries” a problem? Yes. Do fathers need to take their duties seriously? Yes. And this book is a needful reminder of these facts. But there is a greater problem that is harming youth and families alike: a soil of widespread ignorance of the Gospel. The basic truths of Christianity are needed in the churches. The conversion of a teen-ager twenty years ago illustrates this dire need.<br />
<br />
<br />
[<i>More analysis of the book may be forthcoming. A picture of what uniting church and family should look like, <a href="http://www.weswhite.net/2011/06/uniting-church-and-family/">here</a>. More about family-integrated beliefs <a href="http://www.weswhite.net/2011/05/rejoinder-family-integrated-churc/">here</a>.</i>]Unknownnoreply@blogger.com2tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-369049757021183941.post-29445165659973988412011-05-28T09:53:00.009-06:002011-05-28T09:59:43.922-06:0075th Anniversary of the Orthodox Presbyterian ChurchThis summer marks God's faithfulness for sustaining the Orthodox Presbyterian Church for 75 years.<br />
<br />
The official celebration time will be during the meeting of the General Assembly, the week of June 8th to the 14th. There will be a banquet celebration on Saturday, June 11 at 5:00 pm at the Sandy Cove Conference Center in Northeast, Maryland.<br />
<br />
Tickets are $25.00 for non-GA commissioners (more info <a href="http://www.opc.org/GA/75thAnnivPage.html">here</a>).<br />
<br />
There is a Facebook <a href="http://www.facebook.com/pages/OPC-75/163294843685284" target="_blank">page</a>for the younger generation. Otherwise, the older generation can visit the <a href="http://www.opc.org/GA/75thAnnivPage.html">website</a>.<br />
<br />
But there is more.<br />
<br />
There will be a pre-Assembly Conference arranged by the Committee for the Historian. It is free and open to the public.<br />
<br />
The Conference, "The OPC at 75," is on Wednesday, June 8 from 2:00–4:00 p.m. There will be two talks: "Is the Past Really Past?" and "The Church that Calvinists Have Been Waiting For?" The first talk will be by<br />
the OPC Historian John R. Muether. The second talk is by OPC ruling elder Darryl G. Hart.<br />
<br />
Even if you cannot make the event or are not part of the OPC, please rejoice with us as we praise God for His faithfulness.Unknownnoreply@blogger.com0