Shepherds! Protect the Lambs

One of the most frustrating things I have found in over two decades of working with youth in both a church and Christian school context has been the response of Christian pastors to Christian education. It ranges from apathy to antipathy. Few have the courage to call their congregations to obedience to Christ in this area. This despite the very real danger state education presents to the little lambs in their flock.

My experience has been that many young adults from Christian homes are either incapacitated and rendered impotent by the secular worldview they imbibe during their 17-year secular discipleship programme, or they leave the faith. And a lot of them do leave the faith.

Just this week, I was chatting with a friend who spoke of two young people he knew, both attending secular schools. One no longer attends youth group or church and has decided he is not a Christian any longer. The other, a young woman, has been so indoctrinated by feminism and humanism that she looks up to feminist icons who are responsible for the liberalisation of abortion.

Can pastors continue to look the other way? A pastor is a shepherd. When a lion or a bear came to attack and kill David’s sheep, he would seize them by the hair and kill them ( I Samuel 17:35). That takes manly courage and the ability to face risk and danger. This is the need of our hour. We need pastors who are willing to be courageous men. They must stand between the lambs and the wild animals out to devour them.

Jesus himself warned of the danger posed to little ones. After calling a child to himself and showing his disciples that they must become like little children to enter the kingdom of heaven, he gave one of his starkest warnings. He said, with this little child and perhaps others next to him, “Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened round his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea.”

We know, without a shadow of a doubt that the 17-year anti-Christian state discipleship programme is in a large part responsible for many little lambs being torn to pieces. Any Christian leader worth their salt should be aware of this. Teaching a child that God is irrelevant to the world he has made by never mentioning him in 17 years of education is likely to cause him to stumble. Teaching a child that Christ is Lord of his heart, but that he isn’t too interested in the rest of life is causing our children to stumble. Flawed teaching on gender and sexuality is causing our children to sin.

So about that millstone…Does it belong to our secular officials who desire to control the future by discipling our children into their faith? Does it belong to the teachers who abuse their positions to poison the minds of children with depravity? Does it belong to parents who fail to follow God’s law to impress God’s laws on their children day and night (Deuteronomy 6:6-9), or does it belong to the shepherds who see the children in their flock falling away from the faith but say nothing?

What will it take for Christian leaders to wake up, grab their weapons and start protecting the flock? When will we hear a sermon about the importance of training our children in the Christian faith and protecting them from the evil one? When will we hear our pastors calling all families to remove their children from the perils of secular education?

Will the recent news of the proposed Conversion Therapy ban wake our pastors up from their slumber? Will pulpits throughout the land warn parents that they are in danger of losing their children? Kris Faafoi on Newstalk ZB was asked whether it was ‘cool with him’ for parents to tell their children they can’t go on hormone blockers. He said, “No it’s not.” Of this law, Family First writes, “Shockingly, parents would be criminalised and potentially liable up to five years in jail simply for affirming that their sons are boys and their daughters are girls. These bans will lock children into transgenderism.” As a teacher with knowledge of the school system in New Zealand, I can assure my readers that this degeneracy is already being promoted by many schools and teachers. Too many naive parents think secular schools are only there to teach Maths and English. Unfortunately, that is about the only thing they are not getting. These must make way for the all-important secular indoctrination programme you see. A law like this is only going to make things worse. Godless teachers will turn children against parents and make them aware of their ‘rights’. The only protection will be removing our children from these godless pagans. Will pastors protect their sheep by saying this? That remains to be seen. If not, God help us.

How The West Lost God

I have had my eye on this book for some time, and when a friend kindly gave me money to purchase a book, I snapped this up quick smart. The central thesis of the book is that just as religious decline leads to a decline in the family, so too, the decline in the two-parent nuclear family contributes to the decline of the church. Eberstadt describes family and faith as ’the invisible double helix of society – two spirals that when linked to one another can effectively reproduce, but whose strength and momentum depend on one another.’

In the first chapter, Eberstadt turns her attention to whether there has been a decline in Christianity in the West. There are some who argue this decline is itself an illusion. Although I didn’t need convincing of this fact, she argues fairly convincingly that there really has been a decline.

Eberstadt moves on to outline the conventional views regarding how the West lost God. The first view she investigates is that people stopped needing the imaginary comforts of religion. She spends time reviewing this theory but dismisses it because the demands of Christianity do not make it some crutch that makes life easier.

The second view she deals with is that Science, the Enlightenment and rationalism caused secularization. This is an extremely widely held view, but it just doesn’t fit the evidence. Christianity does not wax and wane in the way this theory predicts it should. Interestingly, in this section of the book, she highlights some interesting research on education and faith. The Enlightenment theory teaches us to expect that the more educated and wealthy people are, the less likely they are to have faith in God. This is precisely the opposite of what we see in a number of cases, and ‘contrary to popular belief, literacy and money do not drive secularism.’

Next, she moves onto the theory that the two world wars caused secularization. This is the view of Peter Hitchens in “Rage Against God”. While admitting this theory is not totally wrong, she highlights the fact that nations with disproportionate burdens of wartime all experienced a decline – Switzerland along with Germany and Great Britain. Furthermore, she wonders why later generations have not returned to the faith since they have known nothing by postwar prosperity. The next theory she addresses is that material progress caused us to realise we didn’t need God any more. But this theory is contradicted by the fact that religion seems to increase as the social ladder is climbed as mentioned earlier. Furthermore, faith has existed with great wealth throughout the ages. Why should this change now?

It seems that the believers of the secularization theory assumed faith was on its way out. They didn’t believe religion could wax as well as wane. It clearly has and does, so a theory is needed that can take this into account. This leads Eberstadt to explore the circumstantial evidence for her theory in chapter 3. She points out that sociologists have assumed that secularization and human development impact negatively human fertility rates. But this is an assumption. Perhaps the relationship goes the other way.

She notes that married people with children are more likely to go to church and be religious than single people. But why is this? Does faith drive family, or does family drive faith? Again she points to a link between faith and fertility. Those who are religious tend to have more children than those who are not. Eberstadt argues that instead of this being a one way street with faith driving family, at least some of the time, family drives faith, and sometimes this makes better sense of the facts.

Next, in chapter 4, Eberstadt moves on to consider some snapshots in the demographic record. Here she shows that family decline accompanies religious decline. Secondly, she notes that the trends of industrialization and urbanization mesh nicely with the decline of the family and faith. Both of these trends led to family decline, which in turn caused people to reject faith. The third piece of data she points to is the clear link between the most irreligious parts of the West and those that have the smallest, weakest and fewest natural families. A final and most interesting piece of evidence she investigates is the link between ‘family boomlets’ and ‘religious boomlets’. One example she highlights is the post-war mini religious boom, which overlay the better known post-war baby boom.

In chapter 5, she demonstrates how her theory answers the problems that the current theories of secularization have been unable to answer. It answers the problem of ‘American exceptionalism’. Why is America so religious, despite being one of the most advanced nations on earth? In America, there are more families following the traditional model, more marriages, and more children per woman than there are in Europe. According to Eberstadt, it also explains the male/female religious gender gap. She speculates that perhaps ‘women who are mothers tend to be more religious because the act of participating in creation, i.e., birth, is more immediate for them than that of men. Perhaps that fact inclines women “to be more open to the possibility of something greater than themselves.” The family factor also helps explain why 1960s was a pivotal year in secularization. The birth control pill approval changed relations between the sexes – and thus altered the natural family. Extramarital sex became much easier, and that has had a seismic impact on family formation and strength.

The Church has not helped, and according to Eberstadt has participated in its own downfall by ignoring the family factor. Here she explores reformist efforts in the church which made divorce more acceptable and allowed contraception and homosexuality. She sees these efforts as undermining the very thing the church relies on – strong families.

Chapter 7 ties all that she has written together. She points out that the experience of the natural family drives some people to religion. In addition, the Christian story is itself told through the prism of the family – without family, it makes less sense. For instance, God himself is described as our Heavenly Father. But for those who have not had a dedicated and loving father, this makes little sense. Moreover, the Christian code ‘becomes a lightning rod for criticism’. None of us like to be told that the way we do things is wrong. In an age of non-traditional and anti-traditional families, more and more people will take offence at the Christian message and its teachings on the family.

The book concludes with two chapters on the future. The first is a case for pessimism. Here we see that fewer people are getting married and having children. Fewer of those who are having children sustain a two-parent home. This is bound to negatively impact the church. But in chapter 9, we are presented the case for optimism. In essence, great catastrophes often lead to religious revival. The situation of the Western world, might be the decline necessary for faith to rise from the ashes. Secure and wealthy societies have been able to bankroll the decline of the family, but this might not be able to go on indefinitely.