the tongue of a teacher,<\/p>\n
that I may know how to sustain <\/p>\n
the weary with a word. <\/p>\n
Morning by morning he wakens– <\/p>\n
wakens my ear <\/p>\n
to listen as those who are
\ntaught. (Isaiah 50:4-9a)<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
Isaiah’s words ring loudly if we take up the challenge to understand our times forthrightly and consider candidly the looming debates within the Church. I humbly pray that we as a Church may be as one who knows how to “sustain the weary with a word.” I pray that we all are awakened daily by the Lord with ears “to listen as those who are taught.”<\/p>\n
We should recognize, even if unable at present to understand, that within Western culture and particularly American culture, we are undergoing a profound, long-term change. This is absolutely true for the Church and Christianity in general, also. One advantage we have in the enduring Christian Church is that we’ve been around for a very long time and have seen this all before. The question is whether we will learn from the past or whether we will simply repeat the past mistakes and be subsumed by the present, temporary, and thin zeitgeist. Change is inevitable, and can be very good, but we have to question and examine the reasons and means for change – why, why now, how, to what degree, what might be the unforeseen consequences?, and so forth.<\/p>\n
One of the current travails within the Church is how to stem the tide of decline so that we might again thrive. One of the aspects of change we are examining for the Church (and here I am speaking specifically of the Episcopal Church, the institutional expression of Anglicanism in the United States) is how to engage younger generations (really, for too many people it revolves are how to “appeal to”) younger generations. One way proposed to <\/s>appeal to younger folks is to remove all assumed “barriers,” including the need for baptism before the reception of Holy Communion, the body and blood of our Lord Jesus Christ. Who are we, after all, to deny them <\/s>something that doesn’t belong to us, anyway, right? The problem is – that plays well with Baby Boomer sentimental thinking, but not particularly well with younger generations in the aggregate. <\/p>\n
So, what follows are some thoughts I have about “communion without baptism” as the issue plays out in the upcoming General Convention<\/a> of <\/p>\n Introduction:<\/b><\/p>\n When dealing with the many theological, sociological, and pedagogical considerations concerning communion of the unbaptized, within the context of Millennials there are additional considerations that need to be taken into account: 1.) The influences of previous generations on the upbringing of this group of people; 2.) The general cultural context that this generation now inhabits and how they function within it; and 3.) The foundation upon which this generation builds its understanding of life, humanity, personhood, and the world and their engagement with it – their default “faith” or worldview. Each of these will be briefly dealt with below.<\/p>\n These additional considerations are couched within the overarching goals of being present with young people within their constantly changing contexts so to be a witness of God’s reconciling and regenerative presence and love, to learn how to translate the enduring,[ii]<\/span><\/a> Finally, over the last ten years, I have repeatedly heard and read from young people that the older “leadership of the Church does not listen to us!” We are continually trying to reconfigure the Church and its worship attempting to be relevant and accessible in ways we presume younger people will like. Yet, they are not impressed, literally. We recognize this by their growing absence. What they are seeking is something worthwhile to live for – something that proves to them that it is important enough, big enough, and hopeful enough for their consideration and devotion.[iii]<\/span><\/a> Many are finding this in other expressions of Christianity, even as studies and anecdotal evidence suggest that the hope and life of historic Anglicanism is primed to take advantage of the spiritual disposition of Millennials.<\/p>\n “The mind of a person with understanding gets knowledge; the wise person listens to learn more.”<\/i> (Proverbs 18:15)<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Influence of Previous Generations:<\/b><\/p>\n It has been said of Baby-Boomers (born between 1946 to around 1960[iv]<\/span><\/a>) that they are the first generation to reject lessons learned from the past. There was and continues to be a generational suspicion of, if not outright rejection of, established institutions, convention, and what came before them. The generation untethered itself from the past in order to create a new world. A continuing example of this can be seen in TV commercials extolling how the Baby-Boomers are overthrowing traditional thinking and remaking retirement for themselves. Yet, Baby-Boomers were enculturated and formed as children within a society that still valued the sense of continuity and understanding that rests It has been said of Generation X (those born around 1961 through 1981) that they are the first generation to draw meaning from popular culture. They are the “MTV” generation. This seems to be a natural progression from the Baby-Boomer rejection of lessons learned from past generations and their values. Where else are GenX’ers to find meaning, if the past is moot and untrustworthy – even dangerous? They find meaning from what is – now. Of course, the “now” is constantly morphing, particularly when considering the advent of the Internet and the continual re-framing of what is and can be known as true or final or valid – all ideas, all theories, and all concepts are equal on the Internet. Generation X is the first generation to be raised with the growing sense of being unconnected to anything sure and trustworthy.<\/p>\n Research reveals that the Millennial Generation (those born after around 1982 until somewhere from 2001through 2004) is the first generation where social networking and technology predominate in their everyday lives. They have access to more information and the ability for connectivity than any other generation. Members express a strong sense of abandonment by adults.<\/span><\/a> As a result, Millennials have created for themselves a hidden subculture that Consider that in the aggregate, the parents of Millennials Consider that even for the Millennials who are being raised Consider that Millennials report having very good and Adults rarely perceive their engagement with young people in Questions that might be helpful to ponder: Have parents <\/p>\n The Cultural Dynamic:<\/b><\/p>\n The cultural environment within which Millennials have and We are all enculturated from birth into ways of thinking and The reality we face as Christians living in the second Taking into account the coming and going of various We are well past the “Seeker\/Church Growth Movement” of the Among Millennials, we are realizing the phenomenon of the The questions to ponder within current cultural contexts are <\/p>\n The Default Faith of The “National Study of Youth and Religion”[xi]<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a> Regrettably, the authors write that this default “faith” of Consider that with respect to religious or spiritual Questions to ponder as we think about faith development <\/p>\n Final Considerations:<\/b><\/p>\n Consider that there is a difference between respectful Consider, too, that there is a difference between giving the Consider that notions that emerging generations are not Could it be that we no longer listen to learn, effectively? <\/p>\n Conclusion: Bringing The churches in which I grew up considered both baptism and Most all indicators among younger people point in a We know that there is an increasing sense of loneliness and Millennials are seeking something that is not bound by the Changing the Canons and teaching of this Church to provide By providing an open invitation to come and explore this radical (Special thanks to The Rev. Amy Coultas for the beginning summation!)<\/p>\n Respectfully submitted for consideration by: [i]<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a> By using the term “emerging,” there is recognition [ii]<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a> By using the word “enduring,” there is the [iii]<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a> Research studies are numerous, but consider the [iv]<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a> Dates based on Strauss-Howe Generational Theory. See [v]<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a> See the research findings reported in the books: [vi]<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a> Ibid.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n [vii]<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a> See below for a fuller explanation of this default [viii]<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a> See the report from the Barna Research Group: [ix]<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a> For our purposes, we are defining: “Post-Christendom” [x]<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a> See the article: “When Are We Going to Grow Up? The [xi]<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a> NSYR website: http:\/\/www.youthandreligion.org\/<\/a> (Last [xii]<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a> See – Dean, Kenda Creasey (2010). Almost Christian: What the Faith of Our [xiii]<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a>Marche, S. (May 2012). The Millennial generation does not imagine they are accepting or rejecting the Christian Faith–they imagine they are entering into formation for a new way of life, and they expect the Church to initiate, guide, teach, equip, and send them. What … Continue reading
\nthe Episcopal Church USA<\/a> this summer.<\/p>\n![\"communion](\"http:\/\/www.hypersync.net\/mt\/assets_c\/2012\/06\/communion%20from%20the%20cup2-thumb-300x305-29.jpg\")
<\/a>The focus of this commentary deals with how the debate within the Episcopal Church over “communion without baptism” may be conceived of within the cultural melee experienced by “emerging generations”[i]<\/span><\/a> and the place, needs, and hopes of younger people. The demographic we are primarily considering is the generation known as the “Millennials” or “Generation Y” – those who are roughly 11-29 years-of-age. This is a complex generation, and even while we are all still figuring out what makes them a coherent generation, there are reliable generational characteristics that can be generalized.<\/p>\n
\nliving Christian Faith in ways that will resonate with them, and to discover the best means for bringing the emerging generation into the mystical Body of Christ and ultimately the parish community.<\/p>\n
\nwith tradition and elder-wisdom. There was a collective rejection of how they were raised.<\/p>\n
\nmost adults do not see or understand.[vi]<\/span><\/a> Their lives revolve around fast changing, capricious, and often-manipulative fads perpetuated through a pervasive media. Underneath all the hype and hoopla, our young people are weary and wary even as they express hope for the future.<\/p>\n
\n(generally Baby-Boomers) are not raising their children in any particular kind
\nof faith. <\/span>Many parents do not want their
\nkids to be unduly influenced by what they consider to be antiquated and
\nconfining past religious expectations. This generational sensibility continues
\nto compel adults to want young people to develop their own personal religious
\nfaith in their own time, if any religious belief at all. Yet, parents do not
\ngive much guidance or instruction to their children with respect to spiritual
\ndevelopment generally or Christian formation specifically. A consequence is
\nthat adolescents without any formal religious education or experience arrive on
\ncollege campuses or into the adult world without an understanding for making
\nsound judgments of what is a legitimate faith expression or what is cultic,
\nspiritually manipulative, or emotionally harmful. Thus, it is reasonable that a
\ndefault, culturally generated faith such as “Moralistic, Therapeutic, Deism”[vii]<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a>
\nhas developed to fill the void.<\/p>\n
\nwithin institutional religious settings, particularly Mainline Protestantism,
\nthe general zeitgeist compels parents and adults to attempt to be more like
\ncoordinators who want to help young people discover their own beliefs rather
\nthan teachers of an enduring, consistent Christian faith. For their own good,
\nwe make our children take music lessons or attend athletic practices, but we do
\nnot make them be a part of the church. Thus, the example set by Baby-Boomer
\nparents and adults generally does not convey to young people that this
\nChristian Faith is important enough to teach and pass-on to the next
\ngeneration. They believe Christian life is, therefore, not worthy enough for
\ntheir consideration and involvement.<\/p>\n
\nimportant relationships with their parents. They believe in a positive future
\nand have a sense of confidence in their abilities. They believe that the
\nexistence of the institutional Church is good and important, yet they do not
\nbelieve that the Church has any relevance for their own lives. Ironically, part
\nof the reason for this is that young people do not believe that most of those
\nwho go to church are in fact particularly Christian.[viii]<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a><\/p>\n
\nthese ways, but this is what younger people generally report experiencing.<\/p>\n
\nabandoned their responsibility to be engaged as the primary movers in the
\nspiritual formation of their children? Has the institutional Church relinquished
\nits obligation to teach the enduring Christian Faith handed down from
\ngeneration to generation? Has the institutional Church itself been overwhelmed
\nand usurped by prevailing culture? <\/span>Why
\ndo we find ourselves in a situation where fewer people among the emerging
\ngenerations find any relevance or alternative within the Church to what they
\nexperience in the world? <\/span><\/p>\n
\nare growing up is substantially different than any other generation in the
\nhistory of the U.S. Family dynamics, the ubiquitous use of technology that
\nenables instantaneous access to entertainment and communication, relationships
\nthat are not bound by geography or tactile presence, and the omnipresence of
\ninformation and opinion are but a few significant considerations. There is the
\nextension of the “latch-key” phenomenon of the 1980’s and 90’s where parents
\nexert less and less formal oversight of and casual engagement with their
\nchildren. For many Millennials, the parental project of raising their children
\nand instilling an ethical system has been turned over to the schools. This same
\ndynamic is occurring as parents turn over the Christian formation of their
\nchildren to the institutional Church, if they engage any religious practice at
\nall. Children are less likely to have family traditions, generational wisdom,
\nor religious beliefs passed on to them by their parents. Finally, constant
\nchange has bred a sense of being disconnected to anything sure and a chaos that
\nseems to rule their lives.<\/p>\n
\nbeing within our social environs and within common culture. Enculturation
\nnormally occurs unconsciously as the prevailing social norms and expectations
\nare conveyed through media, educational systems, family influence, and peer
\nrelationships. Religious institutions are playing far less of a positive role
\nthan in the past. Enculturation can “form” us positively and negatively. We are
\n“formed” unknowingly, but for the Christian a process of intentional
\n“re-formation” is important in order to identify and heal those aspects of
\nenculturation that are negative and harmful to our individual and social good. <\/p>\n
\ndecade of 21st<\/sup> Century America is that young people are “formed” by
\naspects of popular culture that work contrary to their spiritual health – the
\nway of life we are called to by Jesus Christ that enables a sustainable society
\nfull of beauty and at peace. This is most significant because they lack basic
\nunderstandings of Christian truths formerly communicated through the common
\nculture of Christendom that mitigated aspects of negative enculturation.<\/p>\n
\nChristian movements over the past sixty-odd years, we have seen great change in
\nAmerican Christianity. We are now reaping the results of Mainline Protestantism
\nof the ’60’s through 70’s and American-Evangelicalism of the 1980’s with the
\nresulting politicization and polarization of religion coupled with the ending
\nof Christendom.[ix]<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a> <\/span>Church practice has developed into a kind of “therapy” church – within the churches it has become more important to try to
\nmake people feel good about themselves (and the Church) than to teach the enduring
\nFaith tradition or challenge people to strive for the amendment of life through
\nChrist. This kind of “church” has resulted in little Christian growth and
\nmaturation.[x]<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a>\n<\/p>\n
\n1990’s as a phenomenon primarily among Baby-Boomers with its reaction against
\ninstitutional Christianity and tradition. We are now beyond the “Emergent
\nMovement” coming into its own during the 2000’s, which was and continues to be
\na phenomenon among primarily GenX ‘ers engaged in figuring out how to be the
\nChurch within Postmodernism, which among other things opens again an acceptance
\nof mystery. <\/span><\/p>\n
\nend of the “Constantinian-Era” of Western Christianity – a “Post-Constantinianism.”
\nAside from changes in technology and some social structures, we have entered
\ninto a social construct that has much in common with the way early Christians
\nexperienced life within prevailing cultures that were at best indifferent and
\nat worst hostile to Christian faith and life.<\/p>\n
\nthese: How does the Church respond within a culture that no longer supports
\nChristian notions of the human being, of ethics, of our world, and of our place
\nin the world? <\/span>How does the Church
\nrespond to a generation of which the majority of members have no formal
\nreligious education and very little meaningful religious experience? How should
\nthe Church respond to younger people who seek a kind of “spirituality,” but
\nhave little notion of what that means or how to attain it outside of cultural
\ntrend, whim, or fickle personal feelings?<\/p>\n
\nthe Millennials:<\/b><\/p>\n
\nreveals that younger people have developed a sense of spirituality that the
\nauthors define as “Moralistic, Therapeutic, Deism.” This is not just another
\nvariant of the Christian Faith, the authors stress. It is an uncritical
\nsomething-else that has developed among younger people as a result of their enculturation.
\nThey are usually not able to coherently articulate this as a spiritual
\nbelief-system, yet it well describes their sense of a supreme-being and how
\nthey engage with such a supreme-being and how that supreme-being engages them,
\nincluding how they are to behave. This god is out there somewhere, doesn’t
\nreally have concern for human affairs, but is expected to hopefully bail us out
\nof trouble when we need it, and the highest moral ideal is to be nice (which is
\nnot the same as loving your neighbor as yourself).<\/p>\n
\nyounger people is not a result of churches teaching the Christian Faith badly.
\nThis is, in fact, the “faith” that primarily Mainline Protestantism is now
\nteaching by example to its young people.[xii]<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a>
\nAs a priest recently said, “My church is full of unconverted people.” It is
\nvery difficult for those who do not effectively know the Christian Faith and
\nthe life resulting from such a Faith to instill in the emerging generation a
\nmeaningful and consequential Christian understanding and experience. We are
\ncollectively living a deficient form of Christianity, and young people know it.<\/p>\n
\nbeliefs, an understanding of the self, and knowledge of Christian faith and
\npraxis among emerging generations, research reveals the dire need for clear and
\nconsistent teaching from the Church. We need to reengage our teaching ministry
\n– the process of catechetical formation among people who know little about the
\nFaith. In these days, an institution that cannot clearly articulate its
\nbeliefs, its purpose, and its uniqueness will quickly lose the interest of
\nyounger people. Too many other things are gaming for their attention.<\/p>\n
\namong younger people: If the culturally inspired, default spiritual
\nunderstanding of a growing majority of Millennials is no longer built upon a
\nfoundation of historic Christian thought and practice, how must the Church
\nrespond? What is the teaching responsibility of the Church when approached by
\nthose who know little or nothing about the Christian understanding of humanity,
\nthe world, and God’s call to us? How do we live in ways that bear witness to a
\nGod who is personal and comes among us, who is engaged with us through history,
\nand who desires us to come into the fullness of Christ?<\/p>\n
\nlistening so to learn how to better engage and teach emerging generations and,
\nalternately, a kind of listening that ends up relinquishing the obligation to
\nteach so to avoid controversy or perceived affront. It is always easier and
\nless controversial to be an impassive spiritual guild rather than a forthright
\nteacher. <\/span>We tend to think that being
\nless demanding and more vague will mean more interest and participation. This
\nway of thinking is continually shown to be false.<\/p>\n
\nconsecrated elements of Holy Communion to unbaptized people for pastoral
\nreasons and the giving of the elements to unbaptized people as a matter of
\ncourse for reasons surrounding hospitality or inclusivity. As is evident in the
\naggregate, that emerging generations are not responding to an increased focus
\non “hospitality” and “inclusivity.” There is a desire for community,
\nfellowship, and diverse environments assuredly, but these things are not
\nunderstood by Millennials within the same concept of “hospitality” or
\n“inclusivity” that is proffered by many leaders within the Church at this time.<\/p>\n
\ninterested in their spiritual lives, in church attendance, or learning about
\nthe enduring Christian Faith are all simply myth, often used by leadership to
\nmake excuses for the absence of young people from the Church. There are a
\nplethora of churches and Christian groups that are growing and thriving among
\nMillennials. The problem is that our Church, along with many, have all lost the
\ncollective ability to not only experience the fullness of the Life in Christ
\namong present members, but have relinquished the project of learning how to
\ntranslate and pass on the enduring Christian Faith and practice to the next
\ngeneration in ways that resonate with them.<\/p>\n
\nCould it be that we no longer are able to give comfort with a word in ways that
\nemerging generations can receive?<\/p>\n
\nit all together –<\/b><\/p>\n
\nthe Lord’s Supper to be only symbolic. We were baptized at an age of
\naccountability only as an outward sign of a decision already made. We received
\ncommunion crackers and grape juice only as a remembrance of Jesus’ sacrifice
\nand resurrection. There was no sacramental understanding and no “means of
\ngrace” held within the elements. The church in which I spent eight years as a
\nlay campus pastor before becoming an Episcopalian is growing with over a
\nmillion more members in the U.S. than the Episcopal Church (with probably two
\nmillion more showing up on Sundays) and approximately 70 million members
\nworldwide – nearly as large as the entire Anglican Communion. Yet I can say
\nauthoritatively that the continued growth in these kinds of churches is not
\nbecause people have a warm feeling of welcome as a result of being allowed to
\ntake communion regardless of where they are in their personal or spiritual
\nlives. And, these are not churches where the members leave their brains at the
\ndoor.<\/p>\n
\ndirection where clear teaching, rigorous yet fair expectation, and deeply held
\nbeliefs-proven-over-time are what they are seeking. They do not want to be told
\nwhat to believe out-of-hand. This can help explain their declining interest in
\nEvangelical and Roman churches. Yet, they seek something efficacious by which
\nto be challenged – not just the same, old thing they experience in a wearying
\ncommon culture. <\/p>\n
\nnarcissism among emerging generations.[xiii]<\/span><\/span><\/span><\/span><\/a>
\nTechnology is pass\u00e9. Moving forward, an important ministry of the Church will
\nbe to re-teach in word and by example how to have and maintain low-tech,
\ntactile, supportive, and multigenerational relationships.<\/p>\n
\nchaos of constant change. Those who are truly trying to find God and develop a
\nspiritual understanding of life are seeking examples of real alternatives to
\nthe morass of prevailing culture among people who claim this enduring Faith.
\nThey are seeking something that is not trite or superficial and something that
\nproves to be profoundly consequential.<\/p>\n
\nas normative communion without baptism will have profound consequence concerning
\nwhat this Church has taught and lived for centuries as part of the One Holy
\nCatholic and Apostolic Church and for our ecumenical relationships, but such
\nchange will not cause a re-engagement of Millennials with this Church. It will
\nnot provide for younger people collectively an example of vibrant and
\nsignificant belief. It will have little consequence for the Church as it tries
\nto attract a new generation of faithful Christians.<\/p>\n
\nChristian reality, we give young people who have little real knowledge of
\nChristian belief and practice the freedom to seek and question and wrestle with
\nthe implications of this Faith. When they believe themselves ready to heed the
\ncall of Jesus to enter into more formal relationships with God and other
\nparishioners in the context of the mystical Body of Christ, we make available
\nto them baptism – the initiation into the Church. Finally, when they believe
\nthat they are ready to take upon themselves the profound significance of
\nChrist’s death and resurrection through the reception of the consecrated
\nelements of Holy Communion, they have a good understanding of what they are getting
\nthemselves into. They have then determined for themselves that this life in
\nChrist is truly what they seek. <\/span>This is
\nnot an effort to usher them into an exclusive club, but to meet them where they
\nare as they seek that which remains sure and true over time and demonstrates a
\nway of being that is life altering, with immense and eternal consequences. Centered
\non Christ, this is a word that sustains the weary.<\/p>\n
The Rev. Robert Griffith, SCP
Imago Dei Initiative<\/a>
Brooklyn, NY<\/p>\n
<\/p>\n
\n
\nand expectation that the process of understanding a new generation is forever a
\nprocess in flux, always emerging along with the young people who are growing
\nup.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n
\nrecognition that within the deep and ancient stream of Christian Tradition are
\naspects that remain constant over time, through trial and persecution, within a
\nplethora of cultures and languages, and that always inspire the worship of and
\nrelationship with Almighty God.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n
\n“National Study of Youth and Religion” (NSYR) and the Barna Research Group
\nfindings as examples. For a brief list of research organizations and for a
\nshort bibliography of articles and books pertaining to changing culture and
\nemerging generations, see http:\/\/imagodeiinitiative.org\/inquiry<\/a>. <\/span>(Last accessed April 19, 2012)<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n
\nfor more information: http:\/\/en.wikipedia.org\/wiki\/Strauss-Howe_generational_theory<\/a>
\n(Last accessed April 19, 2012)<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n
\nClark, Chap (2005). Hurt: Inside the
\nWorld of Today’s Teenagers;<\/i> and (2011) Hurt
\n2.0.<\/i> Grand Rapids: Backer Academic.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n
\n“faith.”<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n
\nKinnaman, David, & Lyons, Gabe (2007).
\n<\/span>unChristian: What a New Generation
\nReally Thinks about Christianity and Why It Matters<\/i>. Grand Rapids: Baker
\nBooks. See: http:\/\/www.unchristian.com\/<\/a> (Last accessed April 19, 2012)<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n
\nas the end of official social institutions supporting and encouraging a
\nChristian worldview; “Postmodernism” as the philosophical system that has come
\nto predominate educational and social understanding, but more specifically
\nexpressed on-the-ground and within everyday life; and “Post-Constantinianism”
\nis recognized when even the culture and social-fabric no longer support or encourage
\na Christian worldview and when within local contexts Christianity becomes the
\nminority belief system.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n
\nJuvenilization of American Christianity,” Christianity Today Online; posted
\nJune 8, 2012. <\/a><\/span>http:\/\/www.christianitytoday.com\/ct\/2012\/june\/when-are-we-going-to-grow-up.html?utm_source=connection-html&utm_medium=Newsletter&utm_term=2407189&utm_content=128084430&utm_campaign=2012<\/a>
\n<\/span>(Last accessed 6\/16\/12)<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n
\naccessed Apirl 19, 2012)<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n
\nTeenagers Is Telling the American Church<\/i>. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
\nFor more information: http:\/\/kendadean.com\/almost-christian\/ <\/a>(Last accessed April
\n19, 2012)<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n
\n<\/span>Is Facebook Making Us Lonely? Atlantic
\nMagazine<\/i>. Retrieved April 13, 2012, from <\/span>http:\/\/www.theatlantic.com\/magazine\/archive\/2012\/05\/is-facebook-making-us-lonely\/8930\/<\/span><\/a><\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n![\"\"](\"http:\/\/img.zemanta.com\/pixy.gif?x-id=8803b446-529c-4825-8776-58c2cb760fb0\")
<\/div>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"