Review of Ivy Beckwith's "Postmodern Children's Ministry"

Ivy Beckwith confronts what I believe to be the most important issue of any time: the generational transmission of cultural knowledge and wisdom, and the preparation of children for a meaningful and truly human life. Beckwith recognizes that the cultural, communal and familial project of raising children is both ontological (spiritual) and epistemological (educational). Thus, with inspiring grace and beauty, Beckwith approaches the topic of children's ministry as central to the life of a church community. In other words, Beckwith challenges Christians and Christian communities to be what they believe and to live what they teach. This, simply, is what postmodern children's ministry means to Beckwith. Beckwith begins by describing the idea of modern and postmodern as a process of cultural transition. Our culture and society is going through a transition from modern to postmodern that is lasting generations. There is no single point in time or event in which a shift from something called modern to something called postmodern occurred, occurs, or will occur. Nonetheless, Beckwith suggests that the youngest generations, especially the post 9/11 generation now entering school, is much more postmodern in sensibilities than previous generations. A strength of this book is Beckwith's explanation of modern and postmodern and exactly what she means with her description of the newest generation as one with "postmodern sensibilities." Simply, Beckwith suggests that the newest generations use information, process and think about knowledge, and communicate in new, unpredictable, and postmodern ways. Within this postmodern milieu, however, we still understand the psychosocial and spiritual development of children. Beckwith cites and uses the work of Eric Erikson and James Fowler to explain the development of identify and spiritual understanding of children. Key to successful child spiritual development is community. Beckwith states, "All churches are some kind of social community, but it takes thought, intent, and hard work to become a biblical community of faith that is foundational to the spiritual development not only of its children, but also of all its members" (72-73). Later, she continues, "Faith is not something that develops in a vacuum. Having faith, understanding faith, exploring faith, and questioning faith are not solo activities. These things are meant to be done with others who are on the same path or looking for the same path. These things are meant to be done with people older than us, the same age as us, and younger than us. These things are meant to be done with people who look, think, and live differently than we do" (74). From this foundational assumption, Beckwith proceeds to provide practical advice and wisdom on how to engage children in full community participation, the role of family in community and the spiritual growth of children and community, how to engage children in a living and meaningful Bible, and how to involve and include children in worship. The power of this work partially stems, I believe, from Beckwith's knowledge and experience as an educator. Simply, Beckwith is able to integrate strong professional knowledge of curriculum and pedagogy with spiritual development. One could, in fact, substitute the term "education" for "spiritual/religious development" and the work would remain nonetheless valid. Beckwith declares that the development of children into caring, productive, and world transforming adults is a community activity and responsibility. It is not a product bought from and delivered by an educational service provider in an isolated classroom or institution. This is true whether in a Sunday school classroom, a church, or a public or private school.

Contra Dancer

3-Day Pictures

Team Mel: Rachel, Anita, Missy, Charlotte, Ann, and Doug
Anita and I taking a break on day three.

Why I Walk

I just completed my fourth sixty mile 3-Day Breast Cancer Walk in memory of my wife Melanie (Melanie Crane Davis, 1964-2001). That is one of Melanie's best friends (Libby Distad--second from the left cheering us on as a member of "sweeper crew) during the 2005 walk. Although the 3-Day is a bit corporate for my tastes, I remain committed to participating in these walks for as long as I am able. The 3-Day experience is unique. Most importantly, the 3-Day demands much from the walkers and crew. Raising the necessary donations is the easy part. Participants must train many hours a week for months. I approach the event itself as a voluntary sacrifice in honor of people living with cancer and in memory of those lost to cancer. I leave my wallet in my bag, my cell phone at home, and avoid reading newspapers and other forms of popular media. I carry as little as possible with me. I spend 6-8 hours of each of the three days walking. I get blisters, sore feet, muscles and joints, sun burned, and exhausted. The weather is often hot, windy, wet or cold (sometimes all on the same day!). I get to camp and pitch a small tent, shower in a semi trailer, and eat in a mess tent. I share porta potties with 2,500 other walkers and crew members. I go to sleep at 8:00 and wake up at 4:00. Last weekend, there was a frost on Friday night and a steady rain on Saturday night. Why do I do all of this?
1. To keep Melanie alive in my heart.
2. Because I told Melanie I would keep walking.
3. Because the 3-Day is a whole lot of fun.
4. Because I learn so much.
5. Because the 3-Day connects me to things that matter most.
6. Because 3-Day people are loving.
7. Because I, for a brief moment, focus on something much greater than myself.
8. Because the 3-Day suggests that a different form of community is possible.
9. Because the money raised makes a difference in research and providing care for women in need.
10. Because of the people I meet and the friends I make.
11. Because the 3-Day strengthens the relationships I have with my friends and loved-ones on Team Mel.
12. Because the 3-Day is the right thing to do.

pmeducator

pmeducator

Review of:

Smith, J. K. A. (2006). Who's afriad of postmodernism? taking Derrida, Lyotard, and Foucault to Church. Grand Rapids, MI: Baker Academic.

I am not a theologian but rather a scholar in philosophy of education. Like much of the Christian church, institutional education is deeply connected to modern epistemology. A few educational scholars have attempted to challenge the modern educational hegemony and have received some attention in the academy; nonetheless, outside of some influence on curriculum, postmodern thinking has yet to have much influence on educational practice (the systemic provision of pre-determined knowledge). In most cases, postmodern educational scholarship is simply dismissed through some version of what I call the "negative social consequences argument." That is, critics of postmodernism claim it should be resisted because the concurrent nihilism and relativism will result in social harm. James K. A. Smith's book clearly and effectively turns this argument on its head. In other words, Smith in a way that is lucid and concise, effectively argues and illustrates how modernism leads to negative social consequences. Smith builds this argument on one of the easiest to understand explanations of postmodernism I have read. Smith uses film as a medium to illustrate the meaning of postmodern thinking. More importantly, however, Smith articulates the empowering elements of postmodernism. Above all other aspects, the truly remarkable gift of postmodernism is that it is regenerative and re-creative. Freed from the chains of any false appeal to objective knowledge, human societies are liberated to become creative and more truly human. Thank you James Smith for this work--I could not put it down!

pmeducator

pmeducator I spent seven years teaching high school social studies in Louisiana prior to receiving my PhD and entering the academy. During my ten years as a scholarly writer, I have criticized modern education using "postmodern" (the paratheses reflect my discomfort in using this label) philosophy. There are many "postmodern" writers in my field (William Foster, Spencer Maxcy, Fenwick English, Catherine Marshall, Gary Anderson, Chuck Fazarro--just to name a few) who have brilliantly deconstructed modern schooling. Today, the problem for me is that schools are in a condition that I hope is an apex of modernity. That is, under the bureaucratic weight of the takeover of education by the Federal government, schools and schooling has never been so completely modern. Bureaucrtic systems are being increased and embedded with increased power to control everything that happens in schools. The impact of this state-of-affairs for students, teachers, and parents is nothing less than a cult of measurement. For any bureacracy to function, the productive output of the system must be measured.

Six weeks ago, I became aware of the postmodern theological movement of emergent Christianity. In reading, learning, and participating in dicussion with members of this movement, I have tried to understand how these thinkers are using postmodern philosophy to stimulate and promote institutional change. I have many ideas and thoughts I would like to explore; however, I have come to the realization that the current modern educational system must be, top to bottom, deconstructed and reconstructed in ways that does not reify truth and power. Given this, I hope this blog will provide a space to for discussion and suggestions on:

1. Using postmodern thinking as a catalyst for grassroots change in the way we do schooling.
2. Consideration of the relationship between emergent conversations and goals to education--are changes in education necessary for the
development of an emergent society?
3. Encouraging discussion in ways to engage in and meaningfully influence educational politics.
4. The creation of conversations, and joint scholarship, between emergent theological scholars and postmodern and critical educational
scholars.