The key question here is, “How are you, as a leader of children, going to follow the words of Jesus?”  Is it possible to “let” the children come without engaging in forms of coercion?  I believe it is.  I come full circle back to the original quote that inspired my study of the approach to altar calls and children.  Sam Doherty wrote, “I never ask children to raise their hands, or look at me, or stand up, or come to the front if they want to be saved – or if they want to help them.  This can easily result in a quick and emotional response which has not been thought through, or there might even be the possibility of following the leader, when children do what they see others doing.”  This generates the question, “can an altar call be given without application of psychological, social, or spiritual coercion? 

Sam proposes that rather than altar calls, the children’s worker give invitations.  He suggests that the leader invite the child to come and seek counsel after the meeting is over.  “This allows them time to think about what they are doing and to come on their own initiative – rather than being influenced by others.” 

I am not suggesting that the children’s leader give up the tradition of the altar call.  What I am suggesting is that we utilize this important juncture in any service to impart an invitation to children.  This invitation may or may not include the children coming forward in response.  Whether this invitation includes an immediate public response or not is the leader’s prerogative.  It must carry with it authority without pushiness and spirituality without overzealousness.   

The altar call or invitation must not water down the basic gospel message.  Tony Kummer, Baptist Children’s Pastor blogs, “Being overzealous to give a child assurance of heaven can result in a false assurance. Repentance is a biblical component of conversion.”  Sound teaching on basic salvation doctrine is demonstrated through the life of the teacher then acted upon by the child.  This suggests more of an ongoing process rather than a onetime instant occurrence. Lawrence Richards expound upon this saying, “Ultimately, our assurance of a relationship with God does not come because we remember when we made a verbal commitment, but because we increasingly commit ourselves to live for Him, and discover a growing trust and love.  It would be wrong to deny the possibility of childhood conversion.”  He writes further, “The real challenge in ministry with boys and girls is to provide that context in which the first step can be taken…and then a whole lifetime of growth be supported.”

Perhaps the coercion related to altar time would cease if leaders began to look at salvation in the lives of children as more of a process than a singular decision.  This process will be marked by various decision points as a child grows in his cognitive ability to grasp the abstracts like love and eternity.  Lois Lebar writes,

“If we provide small children frequent opportunities to say, “yes” to Christ in accordance with their limited comprehension of Him, we shall never err by hindering them from coming to the Savior, nor by being responsible for their making a mere profession before the Spirit has prepared the heart.  We shall never be guilty of going to either extreme if we give our groups of children numerous occasions to confess their love of Christ, and then deal individually with those who seek salvation, a miracle which happens once for all time and eternity.” 

Sometime in a childhood blessed by consistent exposure to the Christian message, the child will experience this once and for all miracle.  It may be at an altar or on a playground.  It may happen with adult supervision or not.  My son Aaron announced one morning at breakfast that he had asked Jesus to come into his heart.  It was his first “public” confession of faith and I understood that at age four, he didn’t comprehend the implications of his announcement.  But my wife and I encouraged him anyway.  We continued to nurture his faith at home and through the church.  He prayed at altars on many occasions through the childhood years.  Each experience only served to solidify his spiritual commitment that began before that breakfast table pronouncement.  Barna states, “Anyone who wishes to have significant influence on the development of a person’s moral and spiritual foundations had better exert that influence while the person is still open-minded and impressionable – in other words, while the person is still young.”

What Barna and I are explaining here is a process of letting children come to Jesus.  Many times the methods used in formal children’s ministry settings can limit a child’s true response to the gospel.  This occurs any time the child is put in a position of feeling that he must respond in order to please teacher.  Hayes writes, “All of this discussion is meant to demonstrate the fact that when we seek to integrate a doctrine of salvation with a behavioral concept of evangelistic methodology, we encounter difficulty.”  Our particular behavioral concept of evangelistic methodology may then be responsible for causing difficulty in producing clearly authentic faith response in young children.

Our ethical response to the possibility that this is true must be to step back and assess the dynamics of what we are doing.  We cannot continue with business as usual if that form of business is offending little ones.  Jesus said, “And whoever welcomes a little child like this in my name welcomes me.  But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea.”  Our ethical response is to adjust what we are doing so that children will be welcomed to Jesus without offense.

Conclusion

Edward Hayes wrote, “Giving an invitation is a natural and normal part of the gospel presentation. How it is done is quite another thing. Teachers are wise not to force or push for decisions. The gospel, rightly presented, has its own appeal. The Savior has His own drawing power. This is the divine work of the Holy Spirit in wedding human need and response to the winsomeness of Christ.”  The children’s worker in today’s evangelistic setting must be willing to accept this “divine work of the Holy Spirit.”  Altar times cannot be forced, pressure-filled, events in the lives of children.

In this paper we began by looking at an ethical response to the age of accountability.  This was followed by three segments addressing: (1) Faith or Fear; Setting aside scare tactics and letting God be God, (2) Pressure or Pleasure; Relaxing the altar time so that children can enjoy the presence of God, and (3) Let or Limit; Allowing children to come to Jesus rather than engaging in psycho-spiritual coercion.

Considering the length and depth of this work, all aspects of each segment allow for further study.  Questions will continue to arise each time an altar call is given.  Our “Christian” ethics based in part on Christ’s character, demand that we question, evaluate, and, if need be, adjust our approach when giving altar calls to children.  In this world of confusion, ethical foundations such as compassion, integrity, and faith continue to stand rock solid.  While the storms of ego, impatience, and unbelief assail us, our godly ethics will stand.  With the Lord’s help, I believe that anyone involved in leading children to Christ can consider the arguments stated in this paper and better serve the children and Jesus when altar time comes.

Filed under: Articles