Keeping the buzz buzzing
09 May 2012 Leave a Comment
This is my post on the so-called gay marriage (a true oxymoron) issue, since the news today has thrust in into the light again. I mainly feel like writing to share my recent shift in thinking. My stance for years has been the happily inoffensive claim that marriage is simply a religious institution and that the government should not have anything to do with it. Instead, I argued, any and all unions could and should be recognized (including gay ones) in a “civic” and neutral way for bureaucratic purposes (taxes, etc.) However, I continued, since the government does recognize (and even officiate) what it calls marriage, I wanted to defend the term in my religious way- as heterosexual. I know of few political opponents who could fault me for my views, granted they accepted my basic premise that marriage is a religious (used here to mean the opposite of universal- a tragic abuse of the word indeed) entity alone.
So what corrections do I now offer? Precisely that this agreed-upon premise is total horse pucky. Marriage is first of all a public rite (and right) that may or may not have a “religious” component to it at all. Of course, as a Christian, I understand that the requirement for fullness of marriage is that it ought to be sanctified and lived out in the sacramental reality of the Church’s life. But, whereas I once interpreted any secular marriage to be simply bunk, I now see a true and real and sacred institution that has been entered into by all peoples since the time of God’s first creative acts until now, and always with his automatic sanction, comparable to how each child conceived is also a divine gift, and not solely those born in ”religious” contexts or ways (directly into a baptismal font?). Furthermore, I think public recognition of marriage is critical to the very nature of its essence and occurence, thus inevitably involving a political jurisdiction (if not for anything more than record keeping). This does not amount to a lowering of my view of the sanctity of marriage, but rather to a lifting of it to what I perceive to be a view more faithful apprehension of the Biblical revelation of life for mankind (i.e worldview).
How does this actually affect my political stance? Practically speaking, very little. I still want marriage to be defined correctly (as between man and woman only). The big difference is that, instead of my position coming from a place of circumstance (“well, since things are less than ideal, here’s my little sticking point”), it comes from a stronger ideological disposition (“the basic universal definition of marriage itself, and not just my private version of it, must be defended and upheld, even in a secular government”). I am still willing to concede that gay “unions” can be somehow justly articulated and recognized in a limited way. But, where I once was even able to possibly conceive of two different kinds of marriages, one governmental and one ecclesiological, I now seek to demolish any such artificial and arbitrary inculcation of the notion. There is marriage. It is for heterosexuals, by definition. That is all. God help a people who can’t see this straight (pun intended).
Thanks for tuning in to this important update.
The chair
29 Apr 2012 Leave a Comment
Before we get rolling to far along post-great Lent, I thought I’d share this last combo reflection from my jogging/fasting fusion mind meld. Fittingly, it has to do with what happens after it all comes to a conclusion. We break the fast- we feast- we celebrate the Resurrection. It has been a glorious couple of weeks in that respect. So many wonderful things (like playing music again) have been so mood-enhancing at our house. My last few jogs have felt so strong, like I was only half-way done once I reached my destination. At the very end of my particular route just happens to be a concrete bench. It is actually quite an inviting bench, but more importantly it signals the end of my run and has thus taken on all kinds of very comforting connotations, as you can imagine (though I have never sat in it).
This is precisely what I’m reflecting on. After having said so much about the labors of lent and the importance of their meaning being extended beyond that period into all of life (and yet accepting that they are in fact heavier labors than normal), I now want to round it all out by warning against the dangers of just plopping down in the lap of indulgence and forgetfulness. What a waste if all that time we work so hard and then we take no care of what comes after. That bench continually reminds me of the athletic wisdom that you cannot just sit down after strenuous exercise. You have to “warm down”, otherwise you’ll have terrible lactic acid build up (say hello to cramps and sore muscles). Likewise with my soul. While I have definitely enjoyed a few luxuries in the last two weeks (especially in the candy arena, though, for those who know me well, I must say I am completely reformed of my old bingeing ways), I am striving not to simply drop to the floor in my prayer, and spiritual labors. I have had to be reminded to be vigilant still, not letting my guard down on sin and selfishness in my soul. Not taking for granted the Lord that we worship. Sure, this is a season of refreshing (and it has been delightful in that), but not of abandonment. That chair does mean that the extra heavy work can be reduced for a time back to something more sustainable. But God help me avoid the temptation to simply sit in it, propping my feet up as if the war were over. There’s still plenty far left to go in this journey, and the last seven weeks were meant to strengthen my arm for battle, not the opposite. The choice is always in our hands dictating which way it goes.
Tool, vehicle, foundation
11 Apr 2012 Leave a Comment
So I revisit again the practice of fasting and its application in the spiritual “effort”. Previously, I emphasizes that Lent should not be seen as merely an isolated time where one achieves some sort of spiritual gain via the manipulation of various tools, practices, or perceptions. Rather, it should be understood and embraced as a special time of extra effort in a genuine and lifelong journey of responding to the call of God to constantly return to Him (and stay there) from the lives we attempt to live in very “distant countries” (see prodigal son parable). This, however, does not imply that somehow fasting itself, or prayers, or acts of mercy, are automatically equivalent to the righteous goal that God has in mind for our sanctification. Indeed, all of these can be counterfeited. In fact, Satan himself never eats!
No, these actions are indeed “tools” in their basic sense. But not tools that we pick up in a self-directed project to better our selves. Rather they are tools given by God to us to accomplish, through obedience, those deeper aims of changing our hearts. As soon as one takes them up, one is humbled by difficulty with which they are yielded in hands weakened by sin. This humility is a first-fruit of the season. Of course, such tools can accomplish many things, such as sharpening our approach to life and others, creating space for learning and growth, reminding us of our origins and ontology, help to accustom us to the inevitable suffering that the kingdom calls us to, etc. If applied in this way, prayer and fasting begin to take on a character beyond that of simply tool, and unto that of a path toward closer intimacy and deeper obedience before God. It even shows itself to be part of the foundational elements of righteousness itself, which consists of restraint of self, of passions, and is a profound effort and beginning of virtue as it attacks our lust, gluttony, sloth, etc.
All that remains to remember is that, at this point, we are no longer participating in some private and personal improvement program (even spiritually speaking). Rather, these “tools”, these “vehicles” are directing our life back to the cross of Christ and the experience of the Kingdom (in the Church) that He calls us all to. I pray that we may be found worthy, as unworthy as we are, to partake of that heavenly banquet together as we learn to surrender ourselves and any good we might imagine having for that life that was poured out by Jesus Christ, the incarnation of the fullness of God.
Jogging and fasting (part two)
06 Apr 2012 Leave a Comment
Don’t get the wrong idea- the last run before today was the last time I posted about running- none in between. Been busy, but trying to get some exercise in where I can…
This time, I felt, again, like there were many insightful reflections on the nature of the spiritual effort that I really wanted to flesh out. Crudely- here they are:
I was extra weary from generally eating less than I’m accustomed to. Interestingly, I accepted that I would be running a bit slower than normal. This is interesting because when it comes to lenten efforts, I get caught up despairing about how much of a horrible weakling I am spiritually speaking, but I don’t tend to stop and realize that this is a time of extra difficulty than normal and so extra struggle/”slowness” should be expected. It doesn’t mean I take a soft stance against my sin or stop allowing God to show me the areas that I must submit, or in general causing me to bow before him without the sense of having much to offer. It just means I don’t despair and I keep on running with the strength given.
I though many other things, but after a little while, I was too tired to keep trying to think so much (I’m outta shape, ok). I had been running on “automatic” with all my focus internal. But I felt called to wake up to an external focus, with all physical actions aligning with the purpose of running rather than thinking about running. Subtle difference but big implications. Even as I write this, I want to hurry up and stop writing this. We can’t just keep focusing on the ideas of drawing near to God and repenting of our isolation from Him. We have to do it! Turns out, all that energy we use thinking about thinking about thinking about doing it adds up to a good amount of energy for the “run” itself. There is a goal to all this, a prize we are striving towards and which is especially difficult to keep in mind in our “treadmill” approach to things.
Finally, there was the home stretch. As Holy Week and Glorious Pascha come, we can lift up our hearts and give what we have left to the end, feeling the joy and the pain all meshed together in the grand finally of Jesus’ approach to Jerusalem to encounter the fullness of evil head on in his victorious suffering and death and resurrection. May His triumph becomes ours through uniting with Him always, now and ever, and unto ages of ages.
Exercise and futility
01 Apr 2012 Leave a Comment
As the last week of Lent begins, and as I finally got back out to go jogging yesterday after a month-long bout with the ever-intesifying cold bug (note to self: don’t get sinus infection again), I’ve been thinking a lot about the nature of the relationship between Lenten “efforts” and “regular” efforts throughout the year. At first I resisted the idea of talking about Lent from the perspective of exercise (like jogging) for a couple of reasons. First, because it plays into the ever-present temptation to think of Lent only in terms of the physical fast, or in the even narrower sense of “what we give up” rather than the journey toward God, and the surrender of all aspects of life, of one’s very self. Second, as mentioned in my last post, Lent is not well grasped, and may in fact be counter-productive if grasped, as a personal effort to attain some things. It is better seen as a surrender of personal efforts and agendas to return to the efforts and agenda of God in our lives. Third, while exercise is almost always done in a very individualistic and/or “private” way (even when in a group the headphones are one and there is zero social interaction), Lenten efforts are not a private affair. They are a returning to Christ via a return to the celebration of the community which is His very Body on Earth. Having listed these, I will proceed to use the metaphor of exercise to make some points, because I think there are some really valuable connections.
Lest Lent become an exercise in futility, it must have some sort of articulated relationship with the rest of our lives beyond Lent. Without this, it simply collapses back into all the errors mentioned above, if not also supporting a sort of restrain-indulgence (or more bluntly, Christian/non-Christian) rhythm that is totally off target (i.e. not the Mardi Gras mentality). Sadly, physical exercise, as well, has fallen victim to a very abusive appropriation of its truest function and purpose. Instead of being creatures made in the Image of God, for whom “work” and effort are natural and good, we treat it merely as a means to an end. Whether that end be a certain “shape” to our bodies, a certain “condition” of our muscles or organs, a certain “ability” of our actions, or the maintenance or improvement thereof, exercise is used simply as a tool to get somewhere rather than as an embraced end in itself. Likewise, Lent, if merely seen as a temporary means to an end, becomes something falsified and “practice” rather than actual progression in sanctification. No, we should instead find ways to affirm both labors in our life so that they are never dispensable to us as a “tool” would be depending on the ”job” at hand.
At the same time, neither can we simply be jogging non-stop all day. We take certain physical actions that punctuate our lifelong exercise in ways that isolate weaker parts. In fact, we often don’t even realize how “out of shape” we are until we do in fact try to “go for a jog” (physically or spiritually). Thus, while it is easy to let the magnanimity of Lent undermine our “normal” efforts as something less than full, we should instead see this time as an anchor that the rest of the year is tethered to; it defines it and lifts it, rather than overtaking it or denying it. Without this time, we slip into a lethargy and sloth that are part of the entropy of this fallen world. What’s amazing is how those who have a lifestyle of exercise will avoid certain foods or over-eating not because they’ve built up some profound will-power, but because they know they will feel the negative consequences later on in the form of cramps, fatigue, etc. The rest of us can simply put down a pound of strawberry wafer cookies (…) and not even think about how bad that is for us, though it might be possible to discern the actual growth of our fatty tissues in real time. This makes it plain in the smallest of ways, how, while we don’t run all day, the run affects our entire day, leading us to a more “healthy” life even in “normal” time.
Approaching Lent
18 Feb 2012 3 Comments
Not too long ago I read an intriguing book called “Will and Spirit” by Gerald May. I’ll spare you the report, but I will borrow one distinction he makes that I find very helpful for discussion about the meaning of the Lenten journey. He thoroughly develops the difference between “willingness” and “willfullness”. I must confess up front that I very much enjoy that both involve the will as I see this as an unavoidable issue in human psychology and spirituality. He paints the former as the ideal disposition and operation of the will- one of choosing to surrender to more than self. He shows the latter as fitful grasping that is born out of and leads to a closed off heart and ultimately an imaginary world (an idea very well correlated to another compelling book I highly recommend called, “Life: the movie” by Neal Gabler). God wants us to be creatures who learn to use our wills for the former, and the latter use lies at the heart of the fall of mankind from His perfect grace.
As we begin to prepare for the increased intensity of spiritual “efforts” in the month to come in celebration and reception of the death and resurrection of Christ, it can be very easy to blur the ideas involved and end up in a futile, and even spiritually damaging, act of pride. It all hinges on another distinction, if you’ll indulge me, between self-discipline and the discipline of self. The self is not extinguishable, and in fact our aim should be to the contrary- to become the true selves God created us to be. But the definition, boundaries, and operation of the self is definitely a problem for us. It is a problem because we choose to define ourselves in an isolated and “selfish” fashion. Even our efforts to be self-disciplined become our own achievement over our own selves, without any reference to a broader horizon or deeper transformation of our definition.
What we really need is not the ability to go long periods without food (though this can and should be a powerful tool for what we do need) or other feats of personal willfullness. Instead, we need to have our selves disciplined in the sense of breaking down the barriers of our drive for independence and our profound ambition for the glories (or goods) we desire. We need to remember that our selves have God as their necessary source, or else they perish. We need to return to a way of living which is in denial of selfish achievements that are of self, by self, and for self. A way which is truly disciplined to the core- not just in our actions of eyes, ears, mouth, nose, hands, feet, etc. Any outward actions should be signs and guides along the path of reflection upon how often and how far we have turned away from the root, the power, the source, the truth, the way, the life, the love, the peace, the joy, the mercy, the justice, the goodness, the God who made us- our creator, sustainer, savior, Lord, coming King, guide, teacher, leader, head, and our all in all…(have this video on my mind) He calls us to a vision of life that cuts at our understanding of “self” so much as to make it worthy of the challenge “die to self”. Pray for me, a sinner. I don’t think this is gonna be pretty….
Authentic hypocrisy
15 Jan 2012 Leave a Comment
I feel like every time I write a blog post these days I am starting off thinking “I don’t ever get to write anymore, so here goes some quick thoughts for the mean time”. For this edition of my tip-of-the-hat to blogging (I guess the name of my site is more and more apt), I want to help the world get one thing straight- the definition of hypocrisy. It just gnaws at my soul to hear it continually used incorrectly, and especially when this is done in attacking some aspect of life and ministry that we need to continue to push forward in. Here’s what happens: in striving to live a life that is good, moral, pious, righteous, etc. every single person has to wrestle with the measure of their own failure and weakness in these areas. Common responses can be understood by the popular Kubler-Ross stages of grief (denial, anger, bargaining, depression, and acceptance). But, the utmost danger is involved by virtue of the temptation and tendency towards, and ease of, despair. It takes a lot of courage not only to continue to be good in any particular area or instance, but also to strive to be good when it is most tempting and difficult not to. Precisely at this moment, it is downright demonic to fall victim to the accusation of hypocrisy when it does not exist. Especially for Christians, for whom such claims are connected with the biblical theology that profoundly condemns hypocrisy as a fundamental point of foundation in the faith, this is quite halting and calls for great care and precision.
So for the sake of all the use and abuse of this word and this concept, I think it full and safe to simply call us back to the english definition of the word via the dictionary. Hypocrisy is being fake. That is all (though not all types of “being fake” count as hypocrisy of course). In the etymology of the word, it means to act or to play a part, emphasizing again the artificiality of it. Now I ask you this- Is a person who continues to laud a holy life and yet fails to live a holy life simply a phony? In many cases, no. Is a person who tells others that they need to do something a certain way, but doesn’t do it that way themselves, simply acting a part? Not necessarily. Is a person who works at living in a way that is moral and to uphold a reputation as someone who, while not perfect, is trying hard to get there, and yet fails miserably at some point, being a fake? Again, this is the wrong accusation altogether. Now, is a person who claims to be very spiritual and yet has no love for others, and in fact attempts to abuse others for their own ”spiritual” gain worthy of the label, “hypocrite”? Absolutely. Why? Because what she claims about hersself is simply not true. She is pretending to be spiritual, but real spirituality will always lead to the challenge in our hearts to love others. Of course, our love for others may be imperfect, fitful, and definitely full of failures, but to be satisfied with no love for others, adn indeed to be intentionally manipulative of them, is to demonstrate that one is not truly a person of spiritual pursuits at all.
Having said that, pleaes remember that it is one thing to see something contradictory in someone’s life and call it out as such. It is another to go beyond this to accusing that person of being a total fraud. Similarly, I think it is possible to have even areas of one’s life in which one runs perilously close to hypocrisy, and in which one needs to be challenged either to give up one’s projected image (to oneself or to others) or to change one’s behavior to better exemplify what one does indeed hold to in one’s heart (btw, gotta love the oneness in this sentence…). And yet, while this is true, it would hardly be fair (or even possible) for someone to know the other person’s heart well enough to level the claim of hypocrisy at them. Still, this happens with frightful frequency, especially in a generation of people who would rather never be told they need to change their ways. Nevermind that it is quintessentially a logical fallacy to respond with “Oh, shut up, you’re just a hypocrite”. It is usually also plainly not true that the one doing the challenging is in fact guilty of the crime of pretense.
Let me say this to conclude: many of us have probably met someone in our lives who we felt was probably a hypocrite when is came to morality/spirituality. But I want to posit that probably most of us were wrong about those people. I suggest that the real ones are a lot easier to see than the subtle ones most of us attempt to judge. They are out there, to be sure. But there are far more out there who are wrongfully accused of it. And that is a great tragedy to me. It’s hard enough to deal with the difficulties of sin and suffering in the world without the muddied waters of this mistake. So help me out, will you? Before you use the word, think, “do I mean to say that the person is a faker? a poser?” If yes, proceed (with caution) to use the word. If not, say (to yourself) what you really mean, like “that person has a double-standard” or “that person is not perfect” or “that person doesn’t follow their own advise”. or “that person doesn’t is unable/unwilling to do what they know is right”. This will make me very happy. Thank you.
God and circumstances and Godliness
29 Dec 2011 Leave a Comment
A couple months ago( I wrote this then but never published it, ha) I had an experience at Church that was one of the most moving I’ve had in a long time. No single factor deserves the credit, except for God’s Spirit I suppose. But don’t get me wrong. I’m not saying I had one of those “moments” where I “felt” the Holy Spirit in a special way and that I really liked it. Instead it was the form and content of all that was said and done that was formative and transformational for me where I was at. My weekend was on a downward trend of anxiety and frustration over a whole range of issues. One of the readings that morning was about when the people of Israel complained in the desert. It was convicting. A follow up reading was done antiphonally with the congregation repeating the second part of each poetic phrase of a selection from Psalm 78 where the people sang out the praises of how God provided for and led our ancestors in the faith. It was so wonderful to remind myself of God’s faithfulness in this very biblical fashion. I was ashamed at how much I had forgotten the goodness of God in my own life as well.
Furthermore, I began to scrawl out notes about three of the most significant events in the Gospel: The Transfiguration, the Cross, and the Resurrection. I quickly thought of it like this. The Transfiguration revealed God’s glory beyond circumstances. It was as if the curtain of this world’s darkness was pulled back for a moment allowing the full weight of truth to become visible (and terrifyingly good). The Cross revealed God’s love in circumstances. In this image, we see the full weight of trouble and sin and yet God’s powerful enduring love in it. How intimate and strong! In the Resurrection appearances, we see God’s victory over circumstances. All of this infused my heart with immeasurable hope and courage. Additionally I began to feel like I really could go forward and continue to profoundly love the unlovely (like myself) with unconditional value and respect, and also with courageous confrontation when necessary. If God is glorious beyond, victorious over, and loving in the midst of the darkest accumulation of the world’s wicked circumstances, then I could, by Him living in me, have no reason to faint under any complexity.
Sometimes, for me, I really do get zeroed in on circumstances in life. It’s not because I am forgetful of God, but rather, for the very sake of the kingdom of God, I view every aspect of life as an opportunity to manifest and witness His kingdom’s dominion- and this intense task orientation sometimes means I lose sight of the forest for the trees. But I have to admit that recently I’ve gotten dizzy and overwhelmed to the point of feeling like this was a battle with an uncertain conclusion. God gives more than a good hope. He gives beauty and happiness beyond the fight, strength and perspective in it, and the eternal victor’s prize beforehand! I felt more free to confess my faults than ever before and more peaceful and empowered afterward. It is His work beyond me, in and through me, and unto His own secure dominion. I will praise Him and give my all to accept and follow and learn. Just thought I’d share that.
Friend of sinners
14 Aug 2011 Leave a Comment
I have a number of pet peeves when it comes to some of the popular misconceptions of the scriptures. My strongest ones come from times when people not only have dramatically misinterpreted them, but also then turn around and use their misguided thinking to imagine they are thereby following some radical and elite spirituality, possibly even rebuking others as missing the boat when it comes to following Jesus. One of the most classic ones has to do with the understanding of Jesus “hanging out with sinners”. If he spent most of his time chilling with the prostitutes, why are we so concerned with being all holy and separate and whatnot? Give me a break! This buzz-line of an argument has been constantly used to justify low moral standards at worst, watered down worship and ministry at best, and all around compromise in life. It goes without saying that we should love people and should desire to reach them with the gospel truth. But it does not automatically follow that we should try to “reach” people by any means possible. To put it to the extreme, should we have a pedophile over as an overnight guest or go on a drive by with some gangsters?! I think (I pray, I hope) that most of us realize that Jesus never meant for us to abandon healthy boundaries.
The fact is that he never did this himself, either. People only think this way because they fail to realize that his “hanging out” was not like we think and the “sinners” in such references were not what we think. The type of people in question (prostitutes, tax collectors, etc.) were definitely coming from groups that were dark and corrupt (though sometimes they were merely non-Jewsish), but the contexts whereby we see Jesus with them are all contexts where they were either coming to Jesus to learn from Him or else Jesus was a fellow guest of someone who was doing so, or else it was just normal day-to-day life (i.e. the woman at the well). This is not at all the same as Jesus just kickin’ back with bad people in their badness. They were overtly pursuing to some degree who Jesus was and what He was teaching. On the whole, His three short years on record were an intensive teaching and reaching journey. There was no time for any normal life of “hanging out” with any group of people except as side visits on a travelling ministry trip (which largely included synagogues… Jewish churches).
Even then, the “sinners” in question were only really called such to reference the life they came from. He is never seen “rubbing elbows” with people set in their evil ways, only with people who were dramatically coming out of it. The scriptures highlight their particular status as “sinners” as a contrast to the self-righteous and unloving Pharisees (the understanding of which is also one of my pet peeves) who are not judged or criticized for staying away from the lifestyles of evil men, but for rejecting an honestly repentant person (or even the possibility of their repentance and God’s forgiveness) out of an hypocritical (i.e. false front) rhetoric regarding ceremonial cleanliness. Technically, such people were considered “unclean” according to Jewish custom and thereby, to even be in the same house as them, especially to share a meal, without them going through a process of cleansing (going to the temple and making an offering, etc.) was to make oneself unclean as well. It wasn’t a matter of being more willing to associate with evil people “where they are”, but with never being so self-absorbed and self-satisfied that we lose sight of disinterested love and openness for all people to come to God in their need. The Pharisees’ understanding and application of this custom had cut off such possibilities of love and outreach. Yes, Jesus did reach out- way out. But he never spent any free time just shooting the breeze down in the brothels, not even as a sort of “maybe they’ll eventually wanna know why I’m different and ask me” endeavor.
I have a friend who runs an outreach center for troubled Somali youth in Minnesota (word up, Molly!). It’s awesome. These kids need some place to go that’s good clean fun and recreation, keeping them out of trouble. At the center, they do indeed just kick it with these “sinners”. But, again, the youth are coming to their center, which has special rules on behavior and leadership that infuses healthy conflict resolution, positive encouragement, and just plain gospel truth into all they do. I hope that people can see the humongous difference between this and others who, in the name of the false interpretation I’m addressing, continue to spend their time with people (“friends”) who are involved in violence, drugs, and sexual immorality. Not only do we need to separate for the sake of our own health and growth, but also so that there can truly be something for people to come to (and I don’t just mean a Church service, though they too are being drastically watered down in the name of “seeker sensitivity”) when they finally decide to leave such evil ways. The proverb cited by Paul himself (the most inclusive of missionaries) is forever true. “Bad company corrupts good morals”. But if we will continue to be a light on a hill, and not lose our saltiness, the world will be impacted for good instead!
Kids these days…
09 Aug 2011 Leave a Comment
Old man rant time! I’ve been working with youth since the time I became an adult (cough, twelve years ago, cough). I went seamlessly (well, not really seamlessly so much as dramatically through a conversion experience that radically changed my life) from being a youth to leading youth. My own youth was spent in deep depravity and rebellion. My work with youth has mostly been in religious contexts. These facts have colored my perspective in a couple of ways that I know of. First, they force me to accept that, even to the extent that I may think that things have gotten worse (and no, this isn’t a post all about how downhill things have gone since I was a kid, though it includes some of that), sin in youth is nothing new and in fact should be expected. Second, for as much as we recognize that all are sinners, over the years I have become more and more deeply convinced that we should permit no room for accepting this as ok, especially in the Lord, especially when working with youth in a formative situation. God wants to sanctify His people in order to truly make them a light to the world (which is way darker than even I am regularly exposed to). Third, I have tremendous hope and aspiration for the possibilities and potential that living a righteous life from youth can afford.
My main observation about youth today (and I’ll throw in here that, of course, I’m not talking about every single person, but the general trend) is that, more than ever before, their problems and issues are direct manifestations of the popular culture. This is true because of our new era of entertainment and communication, which has blossomed with the explosion of television and been crowned with the internet, has made possible instant and constant access, with a residual movement toward turning all of reality into nothing but an entertainment program with each of us as her or his own producer (at worst co-producer, at best celebrity star of the show). This has multiple ramifications that are a big big deal for those of us who raise or otherwise minister to them. For one thing, it means realizing that, above and beyond the normal youth vs adult or human vs authority temptation for rebellion (which I do also posit has special impetus in our time) there is a new, and in my opinion stronger, force to reckon with in the battle for each person to buck off any interruption to their own desired programming for their life. In short, you have to hijack their show, maybe their whole station, in order to shape their being for good.
This is true even when their parents give you the right, and even when the student is religious, for even general Christianity today tends to present itself as self-help rather than demanding self-surrender, and especially where it pertains to submitting to another human being. But, I digress. This means shattering their delicate voyeuristic fantasies over and over in a way that never had to be done with kids of the past. And generally speaking, the older the kid (and the more cool gadgets they have and freedoms they have from parents), the harder the hammer has to be to shatter it (again we’re not talking about the good kids so much, though what we call good doesn ot exempt them from having the same need that I’m discussing here). The great news is that, on the other side, the child can find that reality isn’t something they need to hide or escape from, and that it can in fact be a great adventure and a loving kingdom, more wonderful than any of their own machinations! It may even be true that such “broken in” students are more open and pliable to truth than previous generations because they haven’t spent all their time getting calloused since they’ve not really been engaging in it (though there is definitely a lot more confusion to correct along the way).
Another major ramification is that it is far more difficult to do anything with youth that does not meet their sense of instant entertainment gratification. It is commonly observed that we all used to create our own fun and enthusiasm in various ways (some pin it down to “imagination” though I don’t accuse our youth of lacking that per se). Youth today just seem increasingly unable to do this. Motivation for engaging real life must often be provided (like a director to an actor) by someone else or else by the overwhelming nature of the activity at hand being very inherently entertaining or special. Since life is not at all like that all the time (nor even most of the time), there is a frustrating rub here. Students must be challenged to do more than they think is fun and adults must constantly consider the nature of life’s motivations for doing things in order to transfer healthy values.
According to my evaluation, the worst effect in all of this is that any and all of the terrible ways of our secular society are that much more assimilated and practiced by our youth from earlier and earlier ages, to the point that our 3rd and 4th graders are joking about sex! So many “isms” are not only underlying the stuff kids ingest through media (relativism, nihilism, hedonism, narcissism, etc.) in heavier doses than ever before, but these also are natural derivatives of living for entertainment in the first place. In a time when Christianity is being proffered as a “personal experience” I suggest we return to a more fundamentalist approach of hard core, absolute reality check. Either Christ is Lord of all or He isn’t. Either we need to revere Him or we don’t. Either love is right and righteous, or it isn’t. And on and on the list could go. We can’t begin to think we are competing with the multi-billion dollar industries that have their attention. Our truth needs to be so solid that everything else becomes starkly hollow by contrast. Our proclamations shouldn’t be like commercials for a product we’re selling, but rather like declarations of war on all lies to the contrary, with an army of arguments to back them up. Youth today will not be truly changed until they are truly challenged. Will we be bold enough?
