So, someone has written a book called 'Killing God'. And to support its publication Penguin have surveyed 1000 13-18 year olds. The headlines? 50% of teenagers have never prayed and 16% never to church whilst 600 of them felt that religion 'has a negative influence on the world'.
It would be interesting to know the methodology of the surveying. Whether the questions provided scope to talk about the good as well as the bad. People sometimes hold positions that are contradictory, (cognitive polyphasia to give it its grand title) and nowhere is that more true than in what they believe about spirituality. So it may be they condemn the behaviours of 'the church' but concurrently see Jesus as the Son of God. Or they believe religion has a negative influence on the world because they hear simplistic reporting of 'faith based struggles' that are realistically only about politics and power. Nevertheless, I'm not the only Christian that could find grounds for suggesting the Body hasn't only ever acted as a source of light and hope.
Nevertheless, if two thirds of those surveyed don't believe in God that leaves 33%. Which is not grounds for dismay given that the media is often keen to point out how few people (I'm not sure in what other context 1m is referred to as a few) actively attend church. 1m out of 60m is less than a third. By quite a lot.
Of course that conflicts with the approximately 80% who said in the last census they considered themselves to be Christians. But I don't think we should be discouraged by the disparity between actual Christians and nominal believers. If we are 'the rump' then that's because we're committed to our faith. If we're active in our churches and communities, it's because we believe what we say we believe and have a relationship with God that releases us into our giftings and passions. And that's exciting.
What's also exciting is the challenge posed by public perception. The author of the book, Kevin Brooks said that he wrote it because he wanted to explore the personal attitudes of young people towards organised religion and traditional concepts of God. And certainly the synopsis of the book sounds like it's cashing in on a phenomenon of literature that questions old paradigms (as though that in itself was something new). Here's a book for parents who believe all religion to be false, dangerous and evil to give their children to ensure they can fight off the deceived. And that's a great piece of marketing. But I predict it will sell in both camps because in commissioning such a survey here's a marketing ploy to entice the church to pick it off the shelves. Clever, clever, clever.
"Dawn's dad is a recovering substance abuser, a one-time child molester, and...a born-again Christian. Religion: That's his latest addiction. But as far as Dawn is concerned, the Man Upstairs has robbed her of the father she once loved--drugs, drinks, and all. Which is why Dawn's gone shopping for Bibles. For research. To know her enemy. Because, to get her old dad back, she's going to have to do away with this God guy. She'd just better pray that the fallout from her father's past life of crime doesn't catch up to her first."
So is this the God Delusion for kids? It's about a 15 year old who questions the existence of God but there's little to suggest what it ultimately concludes or information on Mr Brooks' own experience of faith or position on it. His background as a philosopher suggests he's wrestled with these ideas for some time but tragically, it seems he's never really grasped what it is that Christianity is all about. In an interview with the Telegraph, he poses the question of "how can the moralities of an ancient religion relate to the tragedies and disorders of today's broken world?"
As a Christian, I know, fundamentally, that the relevance and truth of God is timeless, absolute and personal meaning that such a question speaks of missed opportunity. When did we drop the ball and lose the discourse? How did the Body of Christ manage to create a situation where people not only see us as a negative influence on the world, but reduced to being about an ancient morality rather than an unconditional personal relationship of grace?
I don't think that clearing up that misconception is rocket science. I don't think that it's problematic to explain that until Jesus tore up the rules of neighbour there wasn't much generosity of spirit towards aliens. I can't help but find it easy to point to groups like the Clapham Sect as the absolute embodiment of transforming the world, for good, in Christ's name. If people see us as negative, it's because we've retreated from the world, no longer giving balance to an image that is often only partially presented. Leaving aside the untold good that the church is doing (Christians Against Poverty, I saw tweet, are helping people respond to a cumulative total of over £40m debt) it's our relevance that's questionable; not God's.
It's time we climbed over the fence (which we probably erected) and retrieved the ball. Though he probably didn't mean to Kevin Brooks has written a book for the church to engage young people with, to build youth work around. A survey on the back of it has said kids don't pray or go to church or even believe in God but at the same time here's a statistical sample that suggests teenagers are receptive to the idea of God in numbers that dwarf church attendance.
The key is always prayer. To pray that those kids don't end up in 30 years' time having never met with Jesus or experienced his body in action. To pray that they at least know what the church represents even if they reject faith. To pray that the church stops waiting for people to fall into church shaped holes in the ground but starts being community for the world, not ourselves. The alternative is nice and simple. We can carry on standing around, waiting for someone else to make the first move towards us, to emerge from our frightening next-door neighbour's overgrown garden clutching the initiative. Perhaps we should dismantle the fence, clear the garden and love our neighbour (who is still frightening, and a little bit crazy, and smells a bit).
And, when all is said and done, y'know we might not find that ball. But, would we need to?
No comments:
Post a Comment