Jesus Camp - Children and the Church
There has been much publicity surrounding the release of Jesus Camp, a new documentary chronicling a camp associated with Kids in Ministry International. Watching the trailer prompts a long list of possible topics to discuss in relation to this movie (a coming "Christian Holy War?", Pentecostalism and the power of suggestion, the marks of true Christian commitment, etc.) but since (1) I have not seen the film, and (2) it is possible that the film does not accurately portray the reality of the situation, I would rather discuss something that can be more accurately and fairly discussed. And so this discussion will be based not on the Jesus Camp film per se, but rather the published statements of KIMI itself.
Note: It is not my intention here to criticize and nit-pick the specifics of a presumably well-intentioned Christian ministry, but rather it is my intention to use the occasion of their temporary fame to consider the underlying issues that this highly publicized film brings to the surface. In other words, this article is not so much about KIMI as it is about the bigger issues involved. KIMI itself is only the occasion for the discussion, not the subject.
Several issues are at stake in the philosophy behind the ministry of KIMI (and presumably reflected in Jesus Camp). Does the work of the church depend upon the leadership of children? I do not doubt that children can be saved at a young age (Jonathan Edwards was convinced of the conversion of a four-year old during the Great Awakening) nor do I doubt that children who are truly converted are a true, real, and important part of the church, just as are any regenerate members. However, are children appropriately qualified to lead the church in such a titantic quest as "taking back America" (leaving aside the question as to whether that is even the church's proper mission)?
Specifically, two questions must be answered: What is the role of children in the church?, and What is the church's responsibility to children? The witness and faithfulness of the church is at stake in how we answer these questions, so we must answer them carefully and be sure about the answers we give. If we are to disagree with the premises of the ministry portrayed in Jesus Camp, let us do so with clear biblical conviction and sound reasoning.
Before diving into these two questions, here is the specific quote that prompted these questions in my mind:
What probably was the most significant twist to this year's camp was when Pastor Leon from South Africa felt impressed of the Spirit to "pass the baton" of spiritual leadership on to the kids and teens on his first night of speaking. His last night was marked by him "turning the tables" in the spirit. This resulted in us adults stepping back and allowing the children and the teenagers take the stage and do all the preaching and ministry.We leaders were all blown away by the powerfully anointed messages coming from children as young as nine and ten years old as well as the teenagers.
So what is the role of children in the church? Specifically, are children qualified to serve as leaders or teachers in the church (surely one cannot lead the church without the authority derived from a teaching ministry)? Parents are told to instruct their children (Deuteronomy 6:7, 20-25). The assumption is that it is the parents, not the children, who are privy to the requisite knowledge and experience to help the children make sense of God's works, not the other way around. I have no idea what the content was of these "powerfully annointed messages," but I must wonder if they were forged out of any significant study of the biblical text, consideration of the theological issues involved, or informed by the many thoughtful and probing minds of history. I Kings 12:1-11 implies that it was foolish for Rehoboam to follow the counsel of his young friends, and not his father's wise (and older) counselors. As a result, the kingdom of Israel was torn in two. Much of Proverbs is expressed in the context of parental teaching (1:8, 10, 15; 2:1; 3:1; 4:1; 4:10; 4:20; 5:1; 6:1; 6:20; etc.). It seems that younger Israelites were not held responsible for the faithless decision to reject God's promise of land (Numbers 14, particularly vv. 26-35) - implying that the onus of responsibility fell on adults, not children. The New Testament gives authority over the teaching ministry of the church to "elders," who are considered so not necessarily by age but by maturity. However, would anyone argue that a 10-year old has sufficient maturity to qualify as an "elder?" The biblical arguments could be added at some length, but it seems clear that, scripturally, children occupy the role of learner, not the role of teacher. Does that mean that children never have insight into God's Word, or that an adult cannot be convicted when a child reminds him of a biblical truth? Certainly not, and since authority is based in the biblical revelation itself and not the messenger, we should always listen when anyone points out biblical truth to us - adult or child, man or woman. But those instances are a far cry from putting children in a position of teaching (and thereby authority) in the church. Think about this when you read that KIMI gladly "passed the baton" of teaching over to children.
This leads us to the second question - what is the church's responsibility to children? If children are not to teach, then what are they to do? And what is the church to do with them? Though there are things that children can do (in most situations they can minister alongside adults; and converted children must certainly be taught to pray for others, encourage others, and speak to others about Christ), the church must realize that if the church's success rises and falls on children, then we have betrayed our children. For the church is not supposed to look to children for inspiration, guidance, and leadership, but rather the church (and parents) is supposed to take an active role in discipling and teaching children. Perhaps if we did a better job of truly discipling our children, teaching them the gospel and showing them the way of Christ, they would be wise enough to sense the folly of asking them to teach us.
Some alternative models of children ministry can be found here and here. Jesus Camp has put the issue of children's ministry on the front burner, so let us carefully consider how we will fulfill our obligations to our little ones. Yes, children are important. In fact, they're too important to burden with our responsibility.
Note: It is not my intention here to criticize and nit-pick the specifics of a presumably well-intentioned Christian ministry, but rather it is my intention to use the occasion of their temporary fame to consider the underlying issues that this highly publicized film brings to the surface. In other words, this article is not so much about KIMI as it is about the bigger issues involved. KIMI itself is only the occasion for the discussion, not the subject.
Several issues are at stake in the philosophy behind the ministry of KIMI (and presumably reflected in Jesus Camp). Does the work of the church depend upon the leadership of children? I do not doubt that children can be saved at a young age (Jonathan Edwards was convinced of the conversion of a four-year old during the Great Awakening) nor do I doubt that children who are truly converted are a true, real, and important part of the church, just as are any regenerate members. However, are children appropriately qualified to lead the church in such a titantic quest as "taking back America" (leaving aside the question as to whether that is even the church's proper mission)?
Specifically, two questions must be answered: What is the role of children in the church?, and What is the church's responsibility to children? The witness and faithfulness of the church is at stake in how we answer these questions, so we must answer them carefully and be sure about the answers we give. If we are to disagree with the premises of the ministry portrayed in Jesus Camp, let us do so with clear biblical conviction and sound reasoning.
Before diving into these two questions, here is the specific quote that prompted these questions in my mind:
What probably was the most significant twist to this year's camp was when Pastor Leon from South Africa felt impressed of the Spirit to "pass the baton" of spiritual leadership on to the kids and teens on his first night of speaking. His last night was marked by him "turning the tables" in the spirit. This resulted in us adults stepping back and allowing the children and the teenagers take the stage and do all the preaching and ministry.We leaders were all blown away by the powerfully anointed messages coming from children as young as nine and ten years old as well as the teenagers.
So what is the role of children in the church? Specifically, are children qualified to serve as leaders or teachers in the church (surely one cannot lead the church without the authority derived from a teaching ministry)? Parents are told to instruct their children (Deuteronomy 6:7, 20-25). The assumption is that it is the parents, not the children, who are privy to the requisite knowledge and experience to help the children make sense of God's works, not the other way around. I have no idea what the content was of these "powerfully annointed messages," but I must wonder if they were forged out of any significant study of the biblical text, consideration of the theological issues involved, or informed by the many thoughtful and probing minds of history. I Kings 12:1-11 implies that it was foolish for Rehoboam to follow the counsel of his young friends, and not his father's wise (and older) counselors. As a result, the kingdom of Israel was torn in two. Much of Proverbs is expressed in the context of parental teaching (1:8, 10, 15; 2:1; 3:1; 4:1; 4:10; 4:20; 5:1; 6:1; 6:20; etc.). It seems that younger Israelites were not held responsible for the faithless decision to reject God's promise of land (Numbers 14, particularly vv. 26-35) - implying that the onus of responsibility fell on adults, not children. The New Testament gives authority over the teaching ministry of the church to "elders," who are considered so not necessarily by age but by maturity. However, would anyone argue that a 10-year old has sufficient maturity to qualify as an "elder?" The biblical arguments could be added at some length, but it seems clear that, scripturally, children occupy the role of learner, not the role of teacher. Does that mean that children never have insight into God's Word, or that an adult cannot be convicted when a child reminds him of a biblical truth? Certainly not, and since authority is based in the biblical revelation itself and not the messenger, we should always listen when anyone points out biblical truth to us - adult or child, man or woman. But those instances are a far cry from putting children in a position of teaching (and thereby authority) in the church. Think about this when you read that KIMI gladly "passed the baton" of teaching over to children.
This leads us to the second question - what is the church's responsibility to children? If children are not to teach, then what are they to do? And what is the church to do with them? Though there are things that children can do (in most situations they can minister alongside adults; and converted children must certainly be taught to pray for others, encourage others, and speak to others about Christ), the church must realize that if the church's success rises and falls on children, then we have betrayed our children. For the church is not supposed to look to children for inspiration, guidance, and leadership, but rather the church (and parents) is supposed to take an active role in discipling and teaching children. Perhaps if we did a better job of truly discipling our children, teaching them the gospel and showing them the way of Christ, they would be wise enough to sense the folly of asking them to teach us.
Some alternative models of children ministry can be found here and here. Jesus Camp has put the issue of children's ministry on the front burner, so let us carefully consider how we will fulfill our obligations to our little ones. Yes, children are important. In fact, they're too important to burden with our responsibility.
4 Comments:
Thanks for the update on this (and the link) -
I've often held a "trickle down" theory where all bad/good theology eventually is inflicted on the children. I'll keep tabs on this as well. Thanks
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
As with any good writing, this column provokes many good follow up questions. Like you, I wonder what it means to take America back. That certainly does not sound like a biblical notion. At any rate, you rightly penetrate to the larger question of church authority, order, and instruction. I kept thinking of all the requirements for the lead teachers of the church listed in 1 Timothy 3. And I could not get the words of James out of my mind. "Let not many of you become teachers, my brothers, knowing that as such we will incur a stricter judgment." I am sure it was a thrill for those kids to preach. I am equally certain that parents who had children up there teaching were reeling with pride. But what parent wants his child to undergo a stricter judgment? These are sobering thoughts worth thinking about. Thanks for the post.
Tony - I agree with your "trickle down" theory. After all, where else do our children learn their theology? Parenthood is indeed a weighty matter (as I am now learning).
Doc Cochran - Yes, there are many more avenues to this story that remain to be addressed. Perhaps we will be blessed someday with your own comments on your townhall blog. I for one would love to hear more insights on this topic, especially if it ever becomes a big news event in the MSM. I did see a brief story on it on some news show (I don't recall which one), but other than that I have not seen much on it except on the internet.
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home