letting the children sing
So this one has been brewing for a while. I was finally provoked into writing by some interesting discussion over at kicked by an elephant. I didn’t see the programme in question, but I’ve been thinking a lot recently about how we pass on our faith to our children without manipulating, brainwashing or indoctrinating them.
For a while there I got pretty squeamish about the whole thing. I was so nervous about the danger of indoctrination that I almost started to think it was my responsibility as a parent to lay out all the options for my kids impartially and let them make their own independent decision.
I soon realised that was a little insane. At what age do I sit down and give Caleb a bluffer’s guide to Islam, Buddhism and secular humanism? And how on earth do I give a fair and balanced account of views I don’t hold?
Some nonreligious people come close to implying that any passing on of the faith from parents to children is brainwashing, no matter how it’s done, and I guess I was buying into that assumption.
Forgive me a little philosophical diversion here. I’m coming to realise that a lot of my anxieties are based on a hopelessly simplistic view of human beings which is a legacy of the Enlightenment and modernist rationalism. This view sees human beings as essentially isolated thinking machines. These thinking machines take in information and data from the world around them and then come to some kind of conclusion about what to believe and how to live. Children are like blank slates, or computers with empty memories, before they start to take in data from their parents and the rest of their environment.
It’s all nonsense of course. Thankfully some wise postmodern thinkers (like Michael Polanyi) have helped us realise that human beings are fundamentally and inescapably relational. We come to all of our beliefs and values within a complex web of relationships, in the context of community. So children don’t look at the world as little objective observers and philosophers. They come at the world from within a particular community. And that’s OK. It’s good.
So I’m learning to relax about this. Children growing up in a Christian home will grow up within a Christian wordview. They’ll sing the songs and hear the stories. They’ll take in a certain way of living and believing, a way of praying, a way of loving and being loved. This isn’t indoctrination – it’s natural and human and organic.
And it’s the same in a Muslim home or a Buddhist home. And yes, even in a secular humanist home (though the songs and stories aren’t quite as good).
The issue of indoctrination kicks in as the child starts to become aware that not everyone lives and believes in the same way as the community they come from. If the parents encourage the children to close their ears and refuse to listen, or to force their own beliefs aggressively on others, then we’re into something dangerous and abusive. But if we teach them to listen with humility and respect, we’re in a very different world. Listening with respect doesn’t mean always agreeing, or thinking all views are equally valid (a form of tolerance which respects nobody). But it does mean expecting that we always have something to learn and we can always be enriched by these encounters.
At some point our children need to become aware that they have a choice to opt out of the community of faith into which they have been born. I hope I’ll have the courage as a parent to help my kids face that choice with honesty and integrity. But I’m increasingly convinced that the choice for our children is to opt out rather than to opt in.
Which, lets face it, can be kind of controversial in our evangelical world, where we’re so obsessed with bringing everyone to a moment of conversion, where they say the prayer and cross the line. I’m more and more convinced that our kids need to be allowed to grow up in a community of faith and soak up the songs and stories, the ways of living and loving and praying. They’ll understand various aspects of Christian doctrine at different points in their journey – God’s love first, later the way of life he invites us into, then maybe sin and forgiveness. At some point they’ll start to understand how the life and death and resurrection of Jesus fits into all this. But at what point in this journey do they become a Christian? The question is a little absurd, a little ugly.
Let them grow up in a community of faith and hope and love. Let them know they belong. Encourage them to engage with those outside the community with humility and generosity. And at some point let them know that the door is open, and they are free to leave if they want.
Of course, if they walk away, it may break our hearts. But there is no value in faith that is coerced and manipulated by guilt or fear. Faith is only faith if it is rooted in freedom and love
QMonkey says:
February 23rd, 2008 at 9:52 am
I agree, I think you take a very realistic and honest view (you sense a ‘but’ don’t you) but actually there isn’t really one.
It’s not indoctrination to bring up a child according to your world view, everyone does it and so they should. We have to accept that it’s ok for a strict brethren family to bring up their kids as such (no digs jabber!), as for a nihilist or a Woodstock free-love hippy family, or an extreme Islamic etc etc. We don’t expect parents to give kids a fair run down every time of all other world views -- kids don’t want/need that…. “daddy, just teach me what’s right!”
I think you’re being very open when you say that for kids it’s a matter of opting out rather than in … your candour throws me a bit, and shows that you don’t mind asking yourself difficult questions -- as you know the implications of that statement. What I would say is that the way church social structures are set up I think I would have found it very hard to opt-out in my teens (not that I wanted to at all!) and still had such a good social life and important friendships. But that’s more of a comment on how good church is as community, and always has been.
My problem comes with Sunday school… teaching mumbo jumbo (or metaphor) as fact. That’s the real indoctrination. The problem is that parents who believe that he bible or the Koran is self referential evidence, why shouldn’t they teach noah, adam or jonah along side Churchill, Drake and Ghandi. For whatever religion or denomination, I think this is abusive.
confused dot com says:
February 24th, 2008 at 12:49 pm
For a minute there I thought you’d out-questioned the question monkey! But no…
I’m a little confused. (Easy done) “It’s not indoctrination to bring up a child according to your world view, everyone does it and so they should”, but then its “abusive” to teach stories from whatever text the worldview is based on?
Rach says:
February 24th, 2008 at 2:48 pm
Yeah, I was a bit confused too by the Q Monkey’s last paragraph. Is your objection to Sunday school because it is ‘teaching’, and you think the stories are not fact and thus shouldn’t be taught? And where would Ghandi come into it, would he be taught in Sunday school too, even though he’s not part of the Christian worldview?
That confusion aside, I found your comments interesting, and I loved the post jayber. It’s an issue I’ve thought a lot about, and I think kids/teenageers need to be made an important part of any community, including churches. Your comments summed up what I’ve always instinctively thought about children and faith, but every so often the desire to be ‘fair’ and openminded makes me doubt that.
The whole opt in or opt out thing has got me thinking – I’ve heard similar comments before as reasons for infant baptism. I’m not really sure what I think – a big part of me thinks there has to be a conscious choice to follow Christ, though I don’t think that choice has to be a one moment of conversion type thing.
At the minute I sometimes ‘mediate’ between my parents and my youngest sister who wants to opt out – not out of faith in God, but out of their church because it’s not cool, there are no other girls her age etc. My parents are quite hurt by this, just as they were 12/13 years ago when I opted out of their church for the same reasons.
There’s a Cecil Day Lewis poem called Walking Away which I love, and the last 2 lines are:
How selfhood begins with the walking away,
and love is proved in the letting go.
For me, those 2 lines encapsulate what it means to be a parent, and what it means to be involved in children’s/youth ministry in churches – it’s not easy though.
QMonkey says:
February 24th, 2008 at 6:39 pm
hmm.. im humble enough (i think) to admit my last paragrpah is confusing… and i actualy don’t know what i mean.
I guess if your world view is that god lives in fairies at the bottom of your garden or that Ra threw the stars in the space in a fit of anger… then teach your kids that…. yeah?
Youth ministry to OTHER kids from non christian families worries me a lot though … i guess its for their parents to decide to let them go though
jaybercrow says:
February 24th, 2008 at 7:08 pm
I really appreciate all your comments.
On baptism, for the record, I’m still leaning towards the view that it makes more sense at the stage when a child has become aware that they have the freedom to walk away, and consciously chooses to stay.
But I guess I’ve become persuaded that we shouldn’t be pushing young children towards a momentary conversion decision. I agree that faith involves a conscious choice, but the traditional say-a-prayer and get-them-saved approach implies that the choice is momentary, and primarily intellectual (i.e. it’s about believing certain things are true). Rather than a gradual journey involving all dimensions of heart and life as well as mind…
Vox O'Malley says:
February 24th, 2008 at 10:55 pm
I love Deuteoronomy chapter 6, right at the heart of an Orthodox Jew’s most sacred of chapters these words appear:
20 In the future, when your son asks you, “What is the meaning of the stipulations, decrees and laws the LORD our God has commanded you?” 21 tell him: “We were slaves of Pharaoh in Egypt, but the LORD brought us out of Egypt with a mighty hand. 22
a. The sons question implies and therefore sanctions the next generation asking “WTF?”
b. the answer begins with neither the imposition of authority nor the bland setting out of ‘all the other options’ rather, the “meta story”, the imaginative matrix of redemption that will capture their heart.
I await someone crucifying me for using the word imaginative.
Don’t bother.
QMonkey says:
February 25th, 2008 at 8:20 am
It’s not surprising that a religious text says that you should teach that text to your children -- it-would-say-that-wouldn’t-it? E.g… Maybe if they hadn’t been so dogmatic about the literal creation story it wouldn’t have taken thousands of years for evolution to be theorised. By telling the kids of the Israelites that the LORD brought them out of slavery… it makes heretics of their young imagination that dares to think that maybe HE didn’t.
http://maryquitecontrary.wordpress.com/2008/02/24/faith-as-default/
Van Peebles says:
February 25th, 2008 at 10:05 am
Talking of Cecil Day-Lewis, wasn’t it great to see his son, Daniel, winning the Oscar last night?
Now HE’S bringing up his kids in an interesting home. On one side their granddad is a poet laureate, and their mum’s dad is Arthur Miller. What a crucible!
mark mck says:
February 25th, 2008 at 10:26 am
‘opting out rather than opting in’ is that not covenant theology? Just a short step to infant baptism now jaber! Your earlier comment it noted!
QMonkey says:
February 25th, 2008 at 10:53 am
It’s the nature of the virus. I can’t think of a successful religion which doesn’t indoctrinate it’s children. Occasionally bystanders catch ‘faith’ as well, but by and large it’s contracted from father to son. Once contracted its almost impossible to shake… and a life time of post rationalisations ensue wrapped in a warm blanket of faith and support groups. Perhaps.
Vox O'Malley says:
February 25th, 2008 at 1:43 pm
I can’t think of a succesful idea that isn’t passed from generation to generation. No matter what variety.
QMonkey says:
February 25th, 2008 at 3:24 pm
There is zero argument, that christianity is a sucessfull idea. I thought you were maybe claiming something more (resurections and stuff)
jaybercrow says:
February 26th, 2008 at 5:51 am
Vox – your imaginative matrix of redemption is welcome here anytime.
Mark – just don’t say it too loudly.
QMonkey – allow me to be a little cheeky in response to your cheekiness. Do you think that a child brought up by parents who regard all religious belief as a virus (!) might experience a degree of emotional confusion and psychological pain if they ever made the choice to be baptised as a Christian??
I think the risk of that kind of pain is not a result of religious faith – it is unavoidable if parents have strong convictions of any kind, and yet allow their children the freedom to make their own choice. We can diminish the pain by being gentle and gracious, encouraging honest discussion, and treating alternative views with respect – but we can’t avoid it.
The only way to avoid the risk of pain is to hold no strong convictions at all, or to use guilt etc to prevent them choosing to leave. Neither option seems better to me than the approach I’ve outlined in the original post (remember that?).
I’m struck by the thought that in the Christian-version-of-things we believe that God himself decided it was better to create children who were free to walk away, rather than children who were forced to conform to his way – even though he knew their walking away would cause him the deepest kind of pain. Where there’s genuine love and genuine freedom, there is the risk of pain…
Peace.
QMonkey says:
February 26th, 2008 at 9:57 am
Apologies for cheekiness…it’s a reasonable point you make … I concur that, eg to a stanchly communist family… their son standing as a Tory candidate is as much of a slap in the face. Vox, I would maybe argue that it’s ok to pass down ideas and philosophies (love thy neighbour, pay it forward, workers unite etc)… but it’s a bit different to teach as proven fact that Lenin made the blind man see (or something). What does it meant to believe something like the resurrection as historical fact, when in fact you have never ‘not’ believed it? Your opt-in / opt-out comments are very interesting I think, and it rings true for me.
Peace and enlightenment.
wylie says:
March 1st, 2008 at 10:17 am
I’m so excited by this post jayber, brilliant stuff! the choice is to opt out not in. this makes so much sense, and if its true then it changes so much of how we live! i need to go and think about this a lot.
QMonkey says:
September 4th, 2008 at 10:17 am
Awww. This one still rankles with me. How can you let the cat out of the bag that children of Christian kids OPT OUT rather than OPT IN… yet still look at the New Testament as the word of a loving god?
I do (contrary to how it looks) respect your apologetics a lot. But with this one it seems you’ve taken a look at, well, what’s obvious to me.. admitted it… then ran away from it a bit.
An AHRC research project found that only one in twelve adults have a fundamentally different religious world view to their parents. Furthermore, those who did have a differing view had predominately taken up the prevailing religion/denomination in their society. Whilst I’m always skeptical of statistics, I think most would say that those figures are reasonably self evident.
So does god love my son less than yours? What has yours done to inherit the kingdom of god other than been lucky enough to have you as a dad?
Mine will grow up with an agnostic father who’ll tell him that there’s probably no god and he should be careful to be taken in by charlatans, cults and deluded religious types. To keep an open mind but assume that miracles and magic don’t/didn’t happen unless there is loads of evidence.. and not make sure he’s not manipulated by his hopes and his fears.
Your son’s daddy will tell him that Jesus loves him and he needs to reach out and accept the gift of life. He’ll probably ‘do the right thing’ when he’s old enough to realize what he’s meant to do. He’ll ask Jesus to look after mummy and daddy he’ll ‘ask him into her heart’. With zero effort on his part he’ll be ’saved’, as you were, as your dad was and (I imagine) your grandfather was. My son probably won’t do this, and in fact if we lived in turkey and he turned out to be the 1 in 12, he’d probably be a Mohammad believer rather than a Jesus believer.
This is the reality of how religion exists and trickles through our society and always has. Does this seem fair? Does it point to an interventionist/loving god? Does this self-evident circumstance indicate that the new testament narrative of accepting Jesus rings true?
Of course, if you are a believer then the rationale is that although this is troubling the Jesus stuff needs to be better understood and that are small minds are inadequate to understand the wonder of god etc etc. But surely its hard to imagine that if you step outside of your world view for a while (maybe had a memory loss) and traveled the world studying the major faiths, that would honestly be convinced that the Bible was reliable enough reportage to base your integral world view upon. So much so that you’d teach it to your kids as sure as any other historical event.
(this doesn’t count as spamming! as I’m sure no one else will be drilling down to this post so long after the post)