Learning from the Children @ERBks

This review originally appeared on the Englewood Review of Books and was made possible by a complimentary copy from the publisher.

As a child psychologist with a particular passion and speciality in spirituality, particularly spiritual formation, I was very excited to review Catherine Stonehouse and Scottie May’s Listening to Children on the Spiritual Journey. This book discusses the results from multiple projects exploring childhood Christian spirituality. Before thinking it may be boring, allow me to assure you that it’s not. While it could definitely be used in an academic setting (the publishing house emphasizes that), it really is meant for laity, not academics.

I recently began a spirituality group as part of my organization’s child partial hospitalization program for psychiatric problems. This book was helpful in developing some activities to initiate discussion on spiritual topics. However, it really is meant for a parents and church-based ministries rather than therapists. And it is focused on Christian spirituality. So if you’re looking for ways to explore the spirituality of atheist children, this book is probably not what you’re looking for (although I would also argue it’s techniques could be altered for the appropriate spiritual context).

Stonehouse and May begin their tome by beautifully introducing their passion for developing child spirituality and discussing their research methodology. It’s detailed enough to moderately satisfy those of us with a critical eye on methodology (their more detailed appendix helps), but does not get bogged down in academic technicalities so as to lose readers of the intended audience. They then wisely move into beginning to tell some of the stories of kids’ responses to various prompts. I think it was wise for them to begin this way because it emphasizes that children can and do talk about deep spiritual concepts… when given the opportunity. I can vouch for this in the groups I have run. In fact, as I discussed on my blog, I think children are just as sophisticated as many adults. What often seems to happen is that we, as a society, do not develop children’s spiritualities, so as adults, we are essentially stunted at the childhood developmental level.

Stonehouse and May do not make this argument, but I saw continued evidence for this as I read the stories. The child participants are often more willing to ask questions than most adults. They are also able to more vibrantly verbalize their experiences with God and Christ. In fact, their desire to truly be with God far surpasses the desire of most adults I know (including myself).

From this foundation, they continue to tell stories, weaving in various techniques to stimulate spiritual discussion and also challenge children to grow. These are the techniques that are both useful for research and are incredibly practical for use in homes, churches, youth groups, schools, etc. At the core of many of the practices is a concept of reflective engagement, the idea of letting the children meditate and contemplate spiritual ideas for themselves. Some are done with others, some individually. While some people may think children may not be able to do this, Stonehouse and May’s anecdotes passionately prove otherwise.

While this book is intended to help people develop children’s spirituality, I think it has just as much potential (if not more potential) to help form adult’s spirituality. In fact, several of the reflective engagement practices are conducted with the whole family or in dialogue with adults. It is meant to let everyone experience God together, in a true corporate worship experience. And then seeing the innocent and pure love of Christ cannot not affect the adult hearts that have been hardened by cynicism, pain, and suffering. Truly, we will learn from the children.

Transforming Story @matt_litton @TyndaleHouse @AdamSab

In honor of the 50th anniversary of To Kill a Mockingbird, Matt Litton released The Mockingbird Parables: Transforming Lives Through the Power of Story. This review was made possible through a complimentary copy of the book from Tyndale.

While Mockingbird was not a particular favorite of mine, I was intrigued by Litton's use of a novel to explore spiritual truths. Litton defines parables as "simply stories, and stories are not only a powerful way to deliver meaning--stories are the voice of humanity" (p. 9).

This is a welcome and accurate definition of parable in a world where we hear so much theology and spirituality in terms of discrete "facts," truths, and assertions. Litton's work emphasizes how these truths become so much truer and powerful through the parable of story.

The reader does not need to be familiar with the original novel to benefit from the book. I read Mockingbird in high school and remember only pieces of it. Litton provides enough summary to make his points. And he elaborates on the text remarkably. This book truly is a devotional that not only helps the reader understand the original better, but also God and the Christian life.

His writing style is effective and easy to read. One could read it through very quickly. However, I think a substantial amount of the meaning would be lost. This is a book that going through slowly can really make it into a very effective devotional.

Frankly, it is a more powerful devotional and theological book than most books of those genres I've read. It makes many abstract concepts real and applicable to daily life. This emphasizes the incarnational tradition of Christianity, which I particularly love. Also taking a "secular" book and gleaning spiritual truths from it is an exemplary way of representing incarnational perspectives. Many of the points Litton makes also evidence this viewpoint in understandable, effective, and biblical ways.

I highly recommend this book for people who love To Kill a Mockingbird, those who love story, and individuals who want to see God in everyday life. It's clearly organized structure also lends itself well to being used with groups.

Don't Waste Your Life @JohnPiper @christianaudio @caReviewers

John Piper is a prolific writer who people seem to either love or hate. In December, I had the opportunity to review his latest book (in audiobook format), which made me into a non-fan of Piper. I cross-post my reviews on other sites, including Amazon. It was quite interesting to see how passionately people defended Piper in response to my review. And how they review the usefulness of a review and people's comments based on their agreement with them.


Another of Piper's books became available in christianaudio's reviewers program (with a complimentary copy), so I decided to take the opportunity to give Piper another chance. Don't Waste Your Life is actually an older book of Piper's (from 2006), and it definitely gave me a more positive view of Piper.


I'm still not a Piper fan, but he presented a much more balanced view of life in this book. As the title suggests, he is encouraging people to not waste their lives. In short, we need to live for Christ and not for the materialism of the world in order to not waste our lives. He gives an excellent story from his childhood that his father would frequently tell people about an older man who died feeling like his life was wasted on "worldly" endeavors.


I agree with this viewpoint. We need meaning and purpose in life, and the only way to get true meaning is by loving others through Christ (or more accurately, letting Christ love others through us). I also appreciated that Piper acknowledged the various ways people can enhance the Kingdom--not always through explicit ministry. He did an excellent job of supporting an incarnational view of spreading the Gospel, as he noted the critical need of people to do "mundane, secular" jobs.


He illustrates these points with nice stories, anecdotes, and metaphors. At the same time, it would have probably been easy to make a more concise version of the book.


In his eagerness to emphasize the tragedy of a wasted life, Piper also invalidates other life tragedies. He explicitly states that people getting cancer and dying in accidents are not tragedies. I greatly and passionately disagree. These are all tragedies; just different types.


Further, there was still too much emphasis on sin and leading a holy (meaning morally pure) life. From my post Wednesday: "While we do need to combat sin and move toward moral purity, this is something that is impossible in this world. And it's not the primary goal of the Gospel or what God wants, in my opinion. He wants a relationship with us. And battling sin can get in the way of that. If we are always beating ourselves up in order to repent, we are ignoring God's redemption and therefore ignoring God."


Different Christian traditions emphasize the roles of repentance and redemption to varying degrees. Piper clearly comes from one that sees the role of continual repentance as central. I think we need to emphasize redemption more.

The Centrality of the Resurrection

I have lately heard many people emphasize the importance of the resurrection in their theology. They have said that if Christ did not rise from the tomb, their whole faith would be lost.

Honestly, I don't really understand this.

Is the resurrection central to Christianity? Of course. Is it a defining variable? I'm not so sure.

It's distinctive, but how different is Christianity from ancient, pre-Christ Judaism? In specific practices and culture, it's of course different. And people could argue a focus on the law. However, a focus on the law was really within certain Jewish traditions. And there's plenty of Christian traditions that focus on the law just as much.

In my studies, I have seen a rich and vital faith in ancient (and modern) Judaism that really connects with God, seeing God transforming lives. God is involved in the present, changing lives now.

However, that is often not as emphasized in a lot of modern Judaism. There is a big trend of seeing God less involved. That is a power of Christ--Christ came to bring life. Not just in the future, but now.

When we forget about the now, we only focus on life in the future (i.e. eternity). And if there is no resurrection, then of course we should be afraid of our life after death. However, when we see our faith and experience with God transcending more than just death, then we can value many more things than just the resurrection.

Would the absence of the resurrection make my faith different? Probably, and likely in ways I don't even realize. However, my faith is also not rooted in historial facts. It's rooted in faith. Belief that God exists and transcends not only death, but life itself. I have experienced that. And if someday I find out the resurrection did not historically occur, I think (and hope) I would still have a vibrant faith in God...

The Sin of Holiness

According to Richard Foster in Streams of Living Water, the holiness stream is a focus on the virtuous life, as in right living and purity from sin. This perspective develops from the Wesleyan holiness movement that focuses on sanctification by avoiding sin and being morally pure.


Is this perspective in the Bible. Absolutely. God wants us to avoid sin. However, being morally pure does not guarantee that we are close with God. Just read the Gospels regarding the Pharisees and Paul's writings.


Being holy is not the same as being morally pure. Sacred is a better synonym with holy.


To be holy or sacred is to be made special for God. We can be set apart by being morally pure. However, God, through Christ, makes us holy. Regardless of our behavior.


As I also discussed in yesterday's post on confession, we often focus too much on sin and not enough on moving closer to God. There, of course, is a balance, as sin and God don't do well together. However, as Christ did many times on earth, he will also come to us in the midst of sin. And frankly, that's when we experience God the most. Christ physically came to those who were sinning. He didn't come to those who were pure.


Of course that doesn't mean we should sin in order to be with God. However, in many attempts to remain pure, we often blind ourselves to experiencing God, as was my experiencing with fasting. As we seek to do things for God, we often forget to be with God. While we do need to combat sin and move toward moral purity, this is something that is impossible in this world. And it's not the primary goal of the Gospel or what God wants, in my opinion. He wants a relationship with us. And battling sin can get in the way of that. If we are always beating ourselves up in order to repent, we are ignoring God's redemption and therefore ignoring God.


So I think in our aim to be holy we may actually lose our holiness by participating in life with God less.

Confession

The word confession can bring up a lot of feelings in people, often negative ones. That's usually because it's associated with sin. I most frequently hear people use the term confession to be synonymous with saying something they've done wrong.

However, that is not always true. While to confess can be to acknowledge one's sins, it can also mean to acknowledge and profess one's faith or beliefs (don't believe me, here's some definitions). This is actually how the term was used quite frequently in early church writings.

These uses actually work quite well together. We can confess a sin while confess our faith. However, in society today, we focus on the first half, usually associated with shame. We like to tear ourselves and others down. God gives us the opportunity to build ourselves and each other back up through a confession of faith.

What would happen if we started using the term confession to emphasize the building up of people rather than their tearing down? How does this affect our theology when approaching the concept of confession?

Reflection on Fasting

Last week I engaged in my first intentional fast from food for spiritual purposes. My wife and I were going to a church meeting, and they had asked us to fast from noon until we ate together that night. I thought it was reasonable and not too long, so I went for it.

Now some backstory on fasting. I haven't fasted before because I've never felt called nor any passion to fast. I understood the theoretical/theological idea of fasting, but also didn't think it was a universal standard (specifically fasting from food). The idea of fasting is to focus on God and give something up that's important to you. Food is clearly important to life, and the hunger pangs are supposed to remind us to focus on God. And we can use the time we would prepare food and eat to pray and be with God.

Fair enough. Except that I can relatively easily skip a meal by simply being busy and forgetting. Fasting is supposed to be a sort of sacrifice. Food fasting isn't that much for me. Other things (i.e. email, internet, etc.) would be much more so.

But getting back to the present story, I thought this would be a good opportunity to try out a food fast. So I did. I made it to the end of the work day without too much problem. In fact, skipping lunch fed right into my tendency to just work more without thinking. Frankly, I don't spend much time making food or eating. I multitask the whole time.

At 6PM, my wife and I get to the meeting, and I'm thinking we'll eat within the next hour, which will definitely be good. Well, I was wrong. We didn't eat until 8 or 8:30. There were messages and times for reflection. By this point, I was VERY hungry. So much so that I was critical of almost everything the speakers said and had extreme difficult focusing on the reflective tasks. My mood was sour and my energy level was almost non-existant.

During the last reflective exercise, food was set out on all tables. We came back and there was a little more talking while everyone was really more focused on the food we couldn't touch. This was the most meaningful time of the fast, as I contemplated how we "needed" this food NOW since so many of us hadn't eaten for 12 or so hours. What about the people who only eat a couple of times a WEEK and nothing close to meal we were having?

We ate, and I could quickly feel my mood brighten and my energy level return. I suddenly saw utility and God's presence in the speakers' words. Honestly, this experience verified my bias that food fasts are not helpful to all people. For me, it actually seemed to bring me farther from God.

Again, there have been fasts from other things that have been much more effective. And I think that's biblical. In a group discussion on the spiritual discipline of fasting, we were exploring how biblical times people really didn't have much else to give up besides food. So a fast truly was synonymous with food. In today's time, we have the luxury of giving up many things. And frankly, we put many things as more valuable than food.

I usually approach food as simply body fuel. Without my body functioning, I can't connect to God spiritually. There are other things that definitely impeded my connection to God, though, that a fast would aid in our relationship.

What about you? What would be useful for you to fast from?