Thanks so much for the wonderful feedback on the article last week. Below are just some of your great observations. For clarity, I’ve added a few words in brackets and put key ideas in bold:

• “I was… raised on the mission field… I find myself identifying more with the ‘help’ idea… I never thought of myself as part of a ‘majority’. In a very real sense, I’ve always found my identity more as a Christian than as an American. I remember memorizing portions of Heb 11… and finding security in the concept, with Abraham, that my ‘citizenship’ is not in choosing a culture here, but that I ‘look for a city whose builder and maker is God… The question that comes to my thinking [about halt vs. help] is whether part of this has to do with depth of patriotic identity. My children… appreciate living in this country, and support it, But they also realize God is at work in many countries, and there can be blessings there, also. This more global perspective may have to do with technology and a greater sense of ‘knowing’ people globally. In contrast, I know that my in-laws… who were in the generation that came out of the depression, lived through WWII, etc., seemed to have a view that America is the only country with God’s favor, sort of a new ‘Promised Land’. They had a hard time seeing people in other countries as fully intelligent or having a valid culture. Hence, recent changes in American culture shook their sense of identity deeply.”
• “You see the ‘help vs halt’ being played out in the pro-life movement… The halt theorists are the ones focused on changing laws. The help theorists are the ones focused on changing hearts. And while in the church it’s a generational thing, I think in our movement it’s just a mindset thing. I have several friends my age and younger who are focused on the law – on protesting – on exposing the abortionists… But I’ve found that amongst my friends who are not pro-life (because I myself used to be one of them), they are more inclined to hear me out when I approach the subject from the help mindset. They don’t care how much I know. They want to know how much I care.”
• [As part of the “halt” generation,] “we… focused on behavior and saving our culture from sins that would lead to moral decline. I can see this now with some of the work… we did with… abstinence education. That was the ‘what’ and not the ‘why‘….”
• “I’ve been talking about love being the balancing of truth and compassion, which seems to me that it’s the balancing of halting and helping. Seems to me that’s what Jesus was doing and it’s strange to me that folks would view these as either/or dichotomies where you’re working for either one or the other. I don’t think Jesus gave us that option.”

The “halt vs. help” dynamic is a reminder that truth often exists in tension and we always need to keep things in balance. For example, Martin Luther led the church in a reformation of “creed,” and recently some have pointed out that we now need a reformation of “deed”. Or, another way of saying this is: In our concern for orthodoxy (right doctrine or belief), we can’t forget orthopraxy (right practice or behavior).

Halt is necessary: “Therefore, my brothers and sisters, you whom I love and long for, my joy and crown, stand firm in the Lord…, dear friends!” (Phil. 4:1, NIV)

But so is Help: “What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.” (James 2:14-17, NIV)

So how will you use Chapell’s generational observations? The article would certainly make for a great Sunday School class or small group discussion. To get you thinking, here are two ways I’ve used it in the last two months:

• In a recent training, I had folks break up into small groups to discuss the generational section of the article. We then got back together as a large group and had a point person from each group share observations and insights.
• In the pro-life movement, the average age of our strongest leaders and donors is 60-70. They’re often focused on “halt” more than “help” and our excellent free courses are largely unknown, under-utilized, or under-appreciated by the younger “help” generations. In thinking about the above, I recently changed the name of one of our courses from “Choosing Life” to “Caring for Those Considering Abortion” as a way to better engage millennials.

If you haven’t done so already, consider reading the rest of Chapell’s short article. He goes on to say that the “enemy” that should unite all of us is pluralism. Next week, we’ll look at some fascinating changes in the meaning of this word– changes that should definitely be on your radar.