Average User Rating: 
By Rick Lawrence
9/8/2008
In the two decades I’ve been editor of group, I’ve only given over my column space one time. Make this #2. I’ve known Christian Smith a long time—he’s the brilliant director of the National Study of Youth and Religion, and is now a professor of sociology at Notre Dame...Today, out of the blue, Chris sent me what you’re about to read—he does a better job explaining my eccentric, totally unreasonable anti-student ravings than I could.
It seems like every couple months there's another big terminology deal pushed somewhere on the web: workers vs. volunteers, pastor vs. minister, director vs. coordinator, etc. Sometimes I feel like we're making a mountain out of a molehill. Are we not ALL students? Throughout our entire lives we are all learning from each other, the church and God's Word. But if you want to get technical, in most of my conversations, students identify themselves more as a student than a youth. Plus, culturally speaking, some studies argue that the "youth" demographic now extends into the early 20s. (Every retired adult in our church would agree at people in their 40s are still young!) "Youth" is relative.
Tim Schmoyer 1:11:34pm on 11/03/2008
OffensiveChristians, regardles of age, should be students!
Ken Todd 9:10:38am on 10/14/2008
OffensiveI have to agree with most of what everyone else is saying. The article sounded very nice, but when I really thought about it, it was a bit far-fetched. My title is Student Pastor, but I use the words 'teenagers', 'youth group', 'community', 'guys', 'students', and who knows what else. I agree that labels can be a bad thing. But seriously? Of all the articles I've read in this magazine, I've not disagreed with one as much as I do this one. Maybe some articles don't apply to me or seem irrelevant...but this one was ridiculous. I'm sure it was written with good intentions, but it definitely seemed like an attempt to persuade us to adopt an opinion that was based on a lot of exaggerations. With all due respect to Rick & to Dr.Smith, I found no real reasons to conform to this idea, if anything I hate the term "youth" more than before.
T.J. Woodard 2:10:01pm on 10/09/2008
OffensiveI understand Dr Smith’s concern about how we address our groups. For years I rallied the adults in my church to consider changing their labeling of the kids (their language) to students (my language). These individuals were in the midst of life change as they left children’s ministry and entered into student ministry, especially in light of middle school ministry. Considering what Dr. Smith says, our youth groups of middle school and high school are groups of students, they all attend school. For me I see little need to change the language for these groups. But as I look at college ministries I understand that the language falls short. In college and career groups we do need to examine the language we use to call our groups. Calling this group “youth” falls short, similar to the change we see as an individual moves from children’s ministry into middle school ministry. I agree that calling this group “students” falls short too since many may not be attending school any longer. I also have concerns with labeling this group as “young adults” because this seems to convey a sense of less than a “real” adult. Isn’t that some of the same issues many are feeling in their churches currently? I do not profess to have the answer. But what I do know is that as we lay out these arguments for and against a specific label we are showing that there are divisions in our churches. If you are at a certain age you are here or there, but few churches move beyond this to encourage all groups to come together in worship. While the children’s ministry and the student ministry are having their group time, adults are gathered for their group time. There is disconnect. Many college and career groups meet separately on Saturday or Sunday night, these individuals may help with student ministry but they do not meet with congregation. There is still disconnect from the gathered body of the church. I am reminded of Paul’s words in 1 Corinthians 12:14 the body is not made up of one part but of many. (24) But God has combined the members of the body and has given greater honor to the parts that lacked it, (25) so that there should be no division in the body, but that its parts should have equal concern for each other. Let’s consider ways to unite the many parts of the church into one body.
Rick Ellis 8:10:55pm on 10/08/2008
OffensiveIn response to the article I think the author misses several key points: 1-Students who are drop-outs are not “label” or “rule and social norm following” kind of people anyway. The term “student” would not be a deterrent. 2-Students are FAR less concerned with this terminology than church leadership. In student ministry it’s about WHO is there..not WHAT is going on or what it’s called. 3-The change from “youth” to “student” was a marketing strategy. The term “youth” is generally associated with young children (i.e. Youth baseball and Youth sizes) or negative parts of student culture (i.e. Youth detention facility). Overall the word YOUTH, to the average student, seems outdated and another function of an outdated church. 4-The term “student” isn’t much better in terms of marketing, but I don’t think using a term associated with a “government institution” is nearly as menacing as the author would have you believe, particularly when it is that institution that defines the majority of the child’s daily activity for his or her entire childhood. 5- The author says: Student ministry subtly (and oddly) singles out teenagers from the whole people of God. But I don’t see how the term “youth ministry” does any better. Why not throw out Children’s ministry, Singles ministry, Senior adult ministry? Do they also divide the body of believers? The problem that this author is addressing is a problem of value, not a problem of nomenclature. Despite claims that students/youth are the “church of today”, you can look at the pay, level of authority, and level of respect of any youth/student minister compared to that of his non-youth colleagues and see otherwise. You’ll find comparable discrepancies in many church budgets. The truth is we pay for what we value and most churches simply do not value students or student ministries as a vital part of the church body and mission. And for what it’s worth, we emergent-types are no better than the traditional in this area. Negative? Maybe. 6. “Unlike most of the rest of society, we understand and value you in the fullness of who you are. Here among God’s people we know you as real human persons—you don’t have to perform to be accepted here. Please be your real selves.” Well that just sounds lovely, but how many churches practice this, no matter what they call their teenagers? Again, I think the author has wrongly drawn a cause and effect relationship. Honestly, is he really suggesting that changing the name would solve these problems of value and worldview??? I would be thrilled to call my teens just about anything if I could find a church who truly accepts them where they are and targets their worldview BEFORE their behavior. 7. Bottom line-I think the name should change often. Student culture changes ALL THE TIME and student ministry should reflect this constant reinvention, not in theology but in methodology. If we really strive to be All things to all people, then we must be all things to all teenagers and sometimes that even means changing our name. :)
Crystal 2:10:36pm on 10/08/2008
OffensiveI have to admit, I don't see what all the fuss is about either. I rarely feel compelled to write responses, but I have to say that this article feels like a heep of guilt on something that is not worth feeling guilty over. I think youth and students could equally be considered offensive to teens, depending on who you ask. I agree with the values put forth in the article, such as honoring a teens place in the body of Christ and not nailing them down to one particular role in society. I also agree that Jesus is for all teens and people, not just "students". However, I think this is really much ado about nothing.
Jim Shultz 3:10:09pm on 10/07/2008
OffensiveRick, please take your column back. While I know that Dr Smith is well regarded, I found his arguments really minor and too caught up in political correct thinking. I think Albert Semper Fi stated the real reason why we changed to "student" language to begin with. Most teens (and some of us adults) shiver with disgust when they are labeled "the young people's group" (as they are at our church) or even "the youth". I really like the way Jesus refers to the disciples, which were probably young men about the age we might have in our groups, as students (Matt 10:24-25). So while the word "student" may address the public school setting where our teens make most of their impact, I think it is a bit rash for those of us in ministry to chase down this road..."Freedom Fries!"
timbo 10:09:35pm on 9/23/2008
OffensiveIn my "Studentz" group, yes we spell it that way, they do not enjoy being called "Youth" it makes them feel childish, therefore they prefer the term "Studentz". Why can't a home schooled "youth" be referred to as a student? What is a student? According to Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary A student Is 1: scholar, learner; especially : one who attends a school2: one who studies : an attentive and systematic observer. They are teenagers. They are systematically observing everything we do as adults, so i consider them to be students. What are we doing while they are in our care? We are to disciple them. So to me that would make them students in that aspect.
Albert Semper Fi 10:09:57pm on 9/10/2008
Offensiveinteresting....what then would be a good alternative??
jason biggs 1:09:17pm on 9/09/2008
Offensive
GROUP MAGAZINE OFFER
Free Trial Issue! Subscribe Today. Click here to sign up.
* = required field