The Sheep, the Wolf & the Shepherds

I had another good experience telling a Godly Play style story (really from Young Children and Worship) Sunday.

One child really seems to have grasped who Jesus is in these stories. When the Jesus character is introduced in other terms, like the Good Shepherd, this child is quick to interject, "Jesus!"

One kid had an interesting question: When the Good Shepherd stood between the wolf and the sheep that were scattered, were those sheep his own sheep or the Ordinary Shepherd's sheep?

The issue that resonated strongest with me was that one or two kids wanted to put the wolf (who of course represented danger or worse) in the sheepfold with the sheep. One of them who told their own story with the materials worked it out so that the wolf was friendly and wouldn't hurt the sheep.

Probably this is due to the naivete of the fortunate young who have, thankfully, not yet had to come to terms with much danger, darkness, or evil. But I wonder about the idea that it is a mindset not yet acculturated to so readily dichotomize the world into the good and the bad, us and them; a mindset not so quick to assume and label.

I find it interesting that the natural inclination of these children seems to be to care for the well being of the wolf, while the theological perspective of the story is seemingly otherwise, at least at an adult's first glance.

Of course I don't want to put any children at any sort risk by not applying the wisdom and perspective of an adult to protect them from all kinds of danger. But neither do I like the idea that our Christian agenda might often be to squelch or redirect this caring response of the children.

Likewise I found myself uncomfortable with the Good Shepherd vs Ordinary Shepherd Distinction. In common usage of the term, most of us are more or less ordinary, in ways we don't always identify as bad. Is there something wrong with the ordinary? Is ordinary not good? Is ordinary bad? Is this a statement of human nature as being inherently basically bad, sinful or inadequate? It's not that I approve of the job the Ordinary Shepherd did in letting the sheep scatter or in running away when the wolf came. But is ordinary the best term for these actions of the "Ordinary Shepherd"? Is this what an ordinary shepherd would do? What other terms might be used than ordinary?

At least I think we need to wonder if the children might be onto something that we adults would do well to learn from. I wonder if their responses have anything to do with what the gospel means when it talks about the need to become as little children to enter the kingdom of God.

Godly Play Materials

In response to my comment in a previous post about how well kids are responding to the Godly Play style stories, in spite of materials made with paper & scissors, a reader asked further about the materials. Here are a couple pictures and some info.

This picture includes Jesus (purple figure in center) talking to Zaccheaus in the tree. They are by Jericho (left of the tree) on the way to Jerusalem (on the right end of the purple underlay).

Most of the stories use a felt underlay. I've been making these easily enough.

The figures used in the stories are supposed to be wood. The Young Children and Worship book has patterns for them. Not having the skills to make them of wood, I've compromised by making them of tag board & construction paper, or depending on the item, plain old corrugated cardboard from used boxes. Stories often call for other items as well...special boxes, baskets, candles or other more story specific things.

Last week I used artificial leaves from a stem purchased at a craft store and squares of cloth cut from my stash of scrap material at home. (I knew there would be a use for it sometime, right?)

This week I've managed to use craft store items (wood, paint & modeling clay) to make a table, plate, cup and loaf of bread that I'm pretty happy with.

However I'd say my cardboard "backdrop of the upper room" leaves something to be desired. But, at least on a basic level it will serve the purpose. It doesn't have the beauty & quality probably called for...but it will have to do. (Can somebody who understands this stuff better explain why I can't get an empty line between paragraph above and the one below?!?)

The stories in Young Children & Worship are not all the same as the ones in Godly Play. I have not found the materials for Young Children & Worship available to purchase (even though Godly Play Resources sells the Young Children & Worship Book.) Godly Play does have materials available for purchase. Some of them I think are better obtained in more cost effective ways. Others my sensibilities about expenditures have kept me from ordering for other reasons, though eventually I anticipate I will order some of those that would be the most challenging to make or otherwise obtain.

This Stuff Works!

Again this Sunday I was impressed with the results of using a story from Young Children and Worship or Godly Play. My experience and training in these curricula are limited, my materials are mostly home made out of cardboard and paper...and still I see such interest and response from children!

I was able to give a couple kids a lot of time to work with the story materials themselves after I told the story about Zacheaus. They are eager to do this. One child used the materials to work through the story again without using the words. The other child largely made up new scenarios with the materials. The most poignant of these in my mind was when the child had someone say to Zacheaus: "Do you know why people don't like you? Go that way," pointing toward Jesus, "There is a man who will love you."

When Can We Hear the Story?

I was pleased that when my kids missed a session of the progressive Godly Play Advent/Christmas/Epiphany story, they asked when I would tell it to them! They even brought it up more than once!

I was also pleased to hear that another family liked the stories enough that they became a topic of conversation at their house Sunday evenings.

Something good was going on there.

Godly Play Question

Note: I blog not just for the sake of talking, but for conversation. When I say question in the title of this post, I mean I'm interested in your response.

One of the things done in Godly Play is to snuff a candle in a way such that smoke builds up in a snuffer and can be seen wafting into the room. The language that goes with this action talks about the light being changed so that instead of being in just one place the light can be in every place. One is to notice the smoke getting thinner & thinner, filling the room, saying that even when the light can not be seen, it is there.

A lot of the concept behind that I understand and like.

But I can't come to terms with part of it that seems so contradictory as to be ineffective at best, with the potential to be damagingly counterproductive at worst.

As far as my common sense or admittedly limited scientific knowledge tells me, when you put the candle out, the light is NOT there, neither is it everywhere. The smoke is there and is dissipating through the room. But the smoke is not the light. The light is gone, done, dead, out. To claim that it is still there, only changed, and now everywhere, or filling the room seems just bogus. This seems so obvious to me, that I don't understand how we expect to claim otherwise and have people (mostly children in this case) believe it or use the image as an effective spiritual symbol.

What do you think? For those of you more experienced in Godly Play, what do you make of this? Am I misunderstanding something? Does this bother you? How have kids you've worked with responded to this?

I've taken the liberty to adapt what I say a bit. (I hope this doesn't leave experienced practitioners too aghast.) But I'm not fully satisfied with my adaptation either...I could explain why, but this post is a bit long already. Let me know if anyone is interested enough and I'll say more about that in another post.

Thanks for any insight.

More on the King

Each week's Godly Play Advent story involves retelling part of the story from each previous week of Advent.

My training in Godly Play is quite limited. I'm not sure if I did it right or not, but in the 2nd week of Advent I didn't repeat the part from Advent I about the king.

The child who included the king in their drawing last week asked why I hadn't told about the king.

Obiously the part about the king made a significant impression. Wow. Interesting, again!

Drawing the Story

I told the Godly Play story for Advent I on Sunday.

One child present made a drawing. It included representations of the materials used to tell the story and a picture of the king (with crown).

As I wrote that, I just put it together with the fact that this child had been a king for Halloween. Interesting.

Anyway, I was excited to see the evidence of engagement I think the picture represented.

What a Response!

There were lots of kids in Sunday School today that weren't there last week when I did the Godly Play Good Shepherd presentation. I ended up doing it again.

Wow, what a response. Great responses to some of the wondering questions were coming faster than I could comprehend or acknowledge them.

I have to try to do more of this.

Godly Play Experiment

Lasts week's Scripture readings were just too perfect a fit for the Godly Play presentation of the Good Shepherd not to use it, since I've been wanting to work into Godly Play anyway.

So, I made myself a set of materials as close as I could come to what I was supposed to have, practiced the story & did it. I was amazed at how well my kids responded to the materials when I was working with them at home, and how they paid attention during the presentation. Well, most of the time anyway. I do have to admit that one kid (yes, my own) degenerated into potty mouth talk at one point.

They wanted to work with the materials. They had ideas about how they should be arranged. It almost seemed like they were already familiar with the sheep & shepherd story. My kids each attended a year of Catechesis of the Good Shepherd at another church so I asked about if they had heard about the topic before and if so where. The answer wasn't very clear....something like "I can't really explain it." So, I conclude either this is stuff that is very graspable, or more likely, they absorbed it previously without really being able to identify when and where. Of course this is happening to them all the time, but its interesting to see likely evidence of it. I only hope they are absorbing as little bad or troublesome stuff as possible and and lots of good and helpful stuff.