Abstract
Children’s Perception of the Role of Biblical Narratives in Their Spiritual Formation
Annie George, Carlisle, UK: Langham Monographs, 2017, $34.99 pbk, ISBN 978-1-78368-236-2, 280 pp.
Sharing biblical stories is central to the spiritual nurture of children in most Christian traditions. Children’s ministries, Christian parenting, and Christian education are informed by the beliefs that children should know the Bible, hear its stories, and eventually read it for themselves as they grow in faith.
Despite these commitments, it is rare that children are asked about how these processes are shaping them. Much of what is done with children is planned, presented, and assessed by adults. Melody Briggs and Annie George offer two research studies that ask how interactions with the children and the biblical text might be informed and enriched by respectful listening to children’s perspectives.
Melody Briggs explores in her dissertation how children read the biblical text when allowed to do so independently, without adult direction. She asserts that “the concern often appears to be determining what child readers ought to take from the Biblical text, rather than asking the more basic question of what happens when the Bible and the child meet, free of any imposed oughts” (p. 3). In her research, she explored what happens when children read without these predetermined “oughts,” but rather were invited to make their own meaning of texts.
Informed by transactional reading theory—the perspective that reading is a transaction between the text and the reader, with both contributing to the meaning-making process—Briggs explored her question with a group of 31 children, aged 11 to 14. Because of children’s familiarity with Bible stories, a narrative text was chosen, specifically the book of Luke.
Luke is described as a “storied” text that invites the reader to meet Jesus through the narrative world in which worldview and plot are inseparable. The text itself has a role in how it is read. The reader also brings experiences, memories, feelings, and questions to this holistic transaction between reader and text, filling in gaps of the narrative that invite dynamic and imaginative meaning-making. Briggs wondered what might happen if children engaged in this participatory, interactive reading process with the biblical text.
While recognizing the developmental perspectives that children bring to the reading, Briggs offered valid critique of developmental stage theories that can lead to a devaluing of children’s perspectives. She argues that if children and adolescents are designated as functioning at lower stages, their contributions to the interpretive task are often devalued. Though their interpretations may be different, they are not inconsequential. Her respect for the child’s capacity to read the text meaningfully guided her inquiry and is evident throughout the book.
Briggs used purposive sampling to identify her 31 readers (15 female and 16 male) whose experiences and abilities aligned with her research questions. Because participants would be asked to read the book of Luke independently, she chose children between the ages 11 to 14. All attended the same school, were “churched,” and viewed themselves as readers. The children completed a reader profile in which they designated their personal faith affiliation and responded to a series of questions about their own reading attitudes and practices. Those chosen were identified as “willing” readers, indicating in the profile that they had voluntarily read at least six books per year. None had previously read the entire book of Luke.
Each child was interviewed individually after completing an independent reading of the book of Luke. These interviews were conducted over a 2-year period. Following this 2-year process, she conducted two types of focus groups: Interviewee Focus Groups (IFGs) and Respondent Validation Groups (RVGs). Both were conducted during 1 month at the close of the 2-year reading/interview period.
Twenty-two of the original readers participated in the IFGs. The purpose was to validate the themes that emerged through analysis of the interview data. Though the process of member checking is a vital aspect of this kind of qualitative research, the time gap between reading, interviews, and focus groups is a methodological weakness of the study. Much change can occur in a 1- to 2-year period, particularly for children in this age range.
In addition to the IFGs, Briggs conducted RVGs with 162 children who attended the same school as the original 31 readers. During normal instructional periods of the school day, she read short passages from Luke aloud to six classes. After the readings, children responded to questions in a quantitative format, including Likert scales and closed responses. As would be expected, this process provided very little to enhance or validate the findings that emerged from the original interviews. This process also seemed inconsistent with the originally stated research paradigm.
Five major themes emerged from the interviews and were validated by the IFGs: reading Luke as a story, reading by imagining, reading with empathy, seeking the sense of the text, and plot-driven reading. Each of these themes is discussed in separate chapters of the book with rich description of the children’s thoughts, often using their words to bring their processing alive. These young readers “used interpretive strategies that were both cognitive and affective, that involved both their heads and their hearts. For these children, reading Luke was not merely an intellectual exercise but an act of wrestling with the text, sometimes embracing it, and sometimes rejecting it” (p. 131).
Readers will find that children can think deeply and meaningfully about the biblical text and discover that the child reader may have something to teach us all—providing adult readers with new ways to enter the story. However, because of the book’s decidedly academic voice, potential impact is limited. I hope the author will translate her work into language that is still credible to the scholar, but accessible to children’s pastors, parents, and teachers. These children have meaningful things to share with those outside of the academy seeking to join children in deep reading of the Bible. As one child participant stated, “every time you read something like Luke, you get a little more out of it” (p. 245).
Annie George’s study was supported by the Langham Partnership as part of their mission to provide the global church with accessible research. She explored children’s perceptions of the role of biblical narratives in their own spiritual formation. In contrast to Briggs, she wondered how children interpret the stories that they are told by adults, primarily Sunday school teachers in their Pentecostal congregations. Five additional questions were formulated to guide her inquiry:
Who tells biblical stories to children? Where do they hear stories? Why do these storytellers tell biblical stories to children? When do children recall biblical stories? Does recalling or listening to biblical stories impact the life situations they face? If so, how? How do these children’s perceptions of the role of biblical stories in their spiritual formation compare with the dimensions of relational consciousness in Hay and Nye’s study in the United Kingdom: I–Thou, I–self, I–other, and I–world? Are there other important insights from the proposed study that challenge or go beyond the model developed by Hay and Nye?
To frame the study for the reader, George provides a helpful review of the research on children’s spirituality and storytelling in religious and secular traditions. In particular, the review of research on children’s spirituality, primarily but not exclusively from a Christian perspective, provides practitioners and beginning scholars an accessible introduction to the key research in this growing area of inquiry. And more experienced scholars will find it a helpful reminder.
The research team included George as lead researcher and three assistants who had experience working with children and were either pursuing or had completed a seminary degree. They approached their inquiry with the assumption that children are active meaning makers and innately spiritual. They hope that the study will “challenge the view that adult’s experiences and perceptions are the norm to evaluate children’s spirituality” (p. 242).
The study included 29 children aged 9–11 from seven Pentecostal churches in Kerala, India. Purposive sampling was used to identify participants. Children selected had been part of Pentecostal churches for at least 2 years, regularly attending worship and weekly meetings with at least one parent. They attended Sunday schools at least three times per month, and listened to biblical stories at home and at church.
The children (with parent support and permission) committed to participate in 6 weeks of 2-hour classes held at the Faith Theological Seminary, Kerala. The seminary was a common site for interchurch events for adults and children. As such, it was both a neutral and familiar location. Each meeting began with a time of welcome and refreshments, followed by storytelling, songs, activities, and discussion, using the India Sunday School Union’s textbook, God Our Security. Six stories from the life of Jesus were presented in a variety of ways, including puppets, dramatizations, and visual enhancements.
The research team assessed the children’s story-related activities, maintained a research diary, and recorded field notes. Following the completion of the weekly meetings, six same-gender focus-group interviews were completed with a minimum of three children and maximum of six in each. Focus-group conversations were recorded and transcribed for analysis.
George described her research as participant observation. This designation is problematic. Participant observation requires extensive engagement in an existing setting, allowing the researcher to truly become an insider. This study took place in an artificial setting for 6 weeks—a total of 12 hours. Despite this limitation, the research team utilized strategies to make the children feel comfortable, and it implemented sound research methods to ensure trustworthy results.
Researchers utilized informal member checking throughout interviews. Formal member checking took place in five follow-up interviews with selected groups of children. Findings were also discussed with Faith Theological Seminary faculty and students involved in children’s ministry. Data were coded utilizing recognized methods in qualitative research.
The children’s responses revealed I–Thou, I–self, I–other, and I–evil awareness. Missing from their responses was an I-world awareness. It is possible that the Pentecostal “de-emphasis of the world with an emphasis on the eternal life” created a deficit in the children’s capacity to sense God’s presence in the natural world (p. 234).
I–Thou perspectives were clearly connected to particular stories. From Jonah, they find a God who will punish disobedience. From David, they learn God does punish, but also restores. The life of Joseph reveals, “God will fulfill the vision that he gives” (p. 183).
Responses to the extraordinary actions of biblical characters demonstrated I–other awareness as well. Children “felt awe, wonder and appreciation towards these individuals and their actions” and valued the characters’ relationships with God (p. 188). I–other awareness was also demonstrated as the children became storytellers themselves, sharing Bible stories with friends to save them from sin and bring them to salvation.
These children saw themselves as children of God, capable of following God and sharing God’s truths. Their I–self-awareness informed their response to peer pressure and influenced “their behavior and their desire to be change agents in their friends’ lives” (p. 233).
I–evil was an additional spiritual category that emerged. The children spoke frequently about sin and the need for salvation. These children are part of a Christian tradition that places a strong emphasis on evangelism and salvation from sin through a born-again experience. Context clearly informed their understandings.
Space does not allow inclusion of the extensive examples of children’s responses from either study. Both authors place the voices of children at the center. This alone recommends these books to the reader. And though the biblical text requires adults to “teach these things” to children, these authors call us to listen to the “little ones” as we take the journey together. As such, both studies are worthy additions to the growing conversation about Christian perspectives on children’s spirituality.