![\"\"](\"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dminlgp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/01\/Unknown.jpeg\")
and comfortable with Church culture and language, at least in the United States, that is simply not the case for emerging generations. While many will point to movements like \u2018Passion\u2019 and Christian \u2018rock stars\u2019 like Louie Giglio, Francis Chan, Christine Kane, David Crowder etc. as remaining attractive to young people, these student movements represent a small minority of the generation and are potentially nothing more than a coalescing of young people from various backgrounds and denominations into a semi-unified Christian young adult event.<\/p>\nThe church\u2019s efforts in evangelism (for those that haven’t completely given up) would make sense if there was a universally applicable world view and everyone sought meaning in the same manner. But, this is neither realistic nor accurate. Even before Smith begins to unpack Taylor\u2019s work he lays the groundwork for understanding the perspective shift that has occurred in the secular culture. He states, \u201c\u2026your \u2018secular\u2019 neighbors aren\u2019t looking for answers \u2013 for some bit of information that is missing from their mental maps. To the contrary, they have completely different maps<\/em>.\u201d Further, In the early 1990s I was driving Tony Campolo (at the time one of the bigger personalities on the evangelical speaking circuit) around parts of New Zealand on a speaking tour. He was there at the invitation of Youth for Christ to present the Gospel at large town hall meetings and an outdoor<\/p>\n Christian music festival. He questioned me relentlessly about New Zealand culture and the transcendent desires of young people of that nation. After several long discussions he pointedly asked me, \u201cWhy would a New Zealand young person want to know Jesus?<\/em>\u201d Realizing that he was not asking for patented \u2018Sunday School\u2019 answers, I reflected for some minutes before I got up the nerve to respond, \u201cThey wouldn\u2019t<\/em>.\u201d[2]<\/a>\u00a0In living and working in Christian ministry with New Zealand young people for several years I realized that the vast majority had constructed completely different purposes for existence and felt no great need or desire to fill their \u2018God shaped hole\u2019. Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to New Zealand or the post-Christian era. That mentality has unequivocally penetrated the culture of the United States, and if Taylor\/Smith are to be believed its impact is felt both within as much as outside Christian culture.<\/p>\n What has changed? Certainly, skeptics and naysayers are not a new threat to Christianity. These have existed from the inception of the faith. What has changed is the freedom people sense in being able to express these doubts and \u201cthe default assumptions about what is believable<\/em>.\u201d[3]<\/a> What Taylor calls a \u2018self-sufficient humanism\u2019 has become a strong default position and has enough satisfactory intellectual integrity to be sustainable in the secular age.[4]<\/a><\/p>\n However, this \u2018self-sufficient humanism\u2019 is no monolithic construct either, as much as secular humanists would like it to be so. Where once meaning was found in a limited array of options, largely centered around transcendence and divinity, there are now myriad options for meaning. Taylor designates this the \u2018Nova Affect\u2019.[5]<\/a> Meaning is now determined by the individual for themselves and not dictated by some external institution. The options are almost limitless.<\/p>\n It is also erroneous to suggest that this shift in thought toward secular humanism has left the Christian faith unscathed. \u201cTaylor\u2019s account of the secular is often an illuminating lens through which to see changes within<\/strong>\u00a0religious communities, not just the expansion of the areligious<\/em>.\u201d[6]<\/a> Whether it be the consumer age that envelops us, the search for authenticity or the ardent individualism in Western culture, the Church is fully immersed in secularism and it continues While this may leave many either running for the exits or building up an arsenal in preparation for the war to come, a reminder is in order. \u201cThe secular age is a level playing field. We\u2019re all trying to make sense of where we are, even why we are, and it\u2019s not easy for any of us<\/em>.\u201d[7]<\/a> There is no need to be defensive or to remain entrenched in modernist and oft antiquated modes of apologetics. The Perhaps we would do well to relearn the communication style of Jesus who, \u201cwas short on sermons, long on conversations; short on answers, long on questions; short on abstractions and propositions, long on stories and parables; short on telling others what to think, long on challenging people to think for themselves; short on condemning the irreligious, long on confronting the religious<\/em>.\u201d[9]<\/a> That is as good a place to begin evangelism and this semester as any.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n [1]<\/a>Smith, James K. A.\u00a0How (not) to Be Secular: Reading Charles Taylor<\/em>. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2015. P. VII<\/p>\n [2]<\/a>“Conversations with Tony Campolo.” Interview by author. February 1991.<\/p>\n [3]<\/a>Smith, James K. A.\u00a0How (not) to Be Secular: Reading Charles Taylor<\/em>. Grand Rapids, MI: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company, 2015. P. 19<\/p>\n [4]<\/a>Ibid. P. 23<\/p>\n [5]<\/a>Ibid. P. 62<\/p>\n [6]<\/a>Ibid. P. 88 \u2013 emphasis in the original<\/p>\n [7]<\/a>Ibid. P. 120<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dminlgp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/01\/lifechoice-300x123.jpg\")
\u201c\u2026they have constructed webs of meaning that provide almost all the significance they need in their lives<\/em>.\u201d And finally, \u201c\u2026it seems that many have managed to construct a world of significance that isn\u2019t at all bothered by questions of the divine<\/em>.\u201d[1]<\/a> While these secular constructs may be the antithesis of what constitutes Christian orthodoxy it must be acknowledged that they function adequately enough to eliminate almost all lingering doubts or longing for something more transcendent.<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dminlgp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/01\/thumbRNSBAPTISTSDIVERSE-300x201.jpg\")
<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dminlgp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/01\/Unknown-1.jpeg\")
to transform faith and practice. (Case in point \u2013 my \u2018Roomie\u2019, Jay Forseth is studying the impact of Dave Ramsey\u2019s teaching on the Church and giving. Someone producing \u2018Christian\u2019 teaching from this economic perspective could not have existed in the era prior to the establishment of secular thought or the acceptance of consumerism by the wider church. Ramsey is part of the \u2018Nova Effect\u2019 evident in Christian thinking.)<\/p>\n![\"\"](\"https:\/\/blogs.georgefox.edu\/dminlgp\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/01\/maxresdefault-300x169.jpg\")
Christian faith is not a hill that needs to be defended against an evil onslaught. As Rob Bell points out in \u2018Velvet Elvis\u2019, The Christian faith should be more like a trampoline than a wall. Walls require defense and protection but, \u201cyou rarely defend a trampoline. You invite people to jump on it with you<\/em>\u2026..You rarely defend the things you love. You enjoy them and tell others about them and invite others to enjoy them with you<\/em>.\u201d[8]<\/a> Charles Taylor, (thankfully explained and clarified by James K.A. Smith) provides an understanding of the processes that have led to this point and gives opportunity to acknowledge their ramifications, opening up opportunities for civil discourse and inviting others to join us on the ‘trampoline’.<\/p>\n