The Ward and Mackenzie readings seem to highlight extremes of PT and BT, but if I've understood them, I think are moving towards a merger of PT and BT (and there's some subliminal mention of ST), which I think is where I instinctively would have thought wisdom lies!

The first half of the Ward chapter, I was feeling like something was being missed because surely, in their extremes and in isolation, neither PT nor BT are sufficient... if PT "adapts faith to fit personal exp.", it damages doctrinal truth. If BT maintains doctrinal rigidity w/o tangible experiential impact, it's diminished or not fully understood that doctrine. Our youth leaders' team had a bit of a mantra, "Doctrine leads to delight". If doctrine is cold and isn't having an impact, something's missing.

I found Ward's "straight line" spectrum between experiential and doctrinal forms of theology interesting. Framed that way, it sounds like you have to have less doctrinal formulation in order to connect your theology with experience (and vice versa). But we want both-and, right? As a principle I like his reframing at the end to put Christ as a person at the centre of theology, and doctrinal and experiential theology relative to that.

I found Mackenzie's fourth point about BT ("hermeneutic of consent") helpful in terms of the relationship between experience and revelation. In a sense, we inevitably start with our own experience and questions, but as we bring them to God and what he says in Scripture, those questions are not only answered but also often taken up and reframed in new and bigger theological categories he wants to grow us into.

The church I am at is borne out of a more 'conservative' approach focussed on doctrine more than experience. It is interesting to reflect on how that has changed during my time at the church, with much more experiential PT viewpoints and approaches now being common in how the theology within the church is formed. There's much more of a belief I think within the church that being Christ-centred in our theology is key, as is framed in the Ward chapter, rather than leaning to the 'extremes' of the straight line referred to.

I do still believe though currently that much of how we do things in my church, both within the church organised activities but also within people's own theology and personal studies, is rooted in the church culture as has been established rather than through a particular theological preference or approach. We are trying to ensure within the children and youth that they get a grounding in understanding both the BT approach of the Bible as an overarching narrative of God and the importance of it as a whole text (not just contextless quotations) as well as encouraging the relevance of experience - but it's incredibly hard to do one without then feeling you're lacking focus on the other!

But this does not diminish the truth from the McKenzie article in the section discussing the hermeneutics of consent/trust where scripture is the framework that shapes experience and practice without ruling it out of conversations.

I do find Ward’s answer to say that being Christ centred a bit reductive, as others have noted, yet I do not find that hard to hear as an approach but feel the way he defines it makes it an easier straw man to knock over.

I also wondered how practical theology differs from both applied theology (hopefully any theology should be) and contextualisation (thinking about applying theology into different cultures/context) as it seems there is possibly much crossover?

— Dr Anthony Agbobu

However, culture and pragmatism also play major roles. Ministry approaches are often tailored to local traditions, societal expectations, or logistical constraints. For example, worship styles, leadership structures, or outreach methods may be more about what is culturally familiar or practically effective than theologically driven.

Doctrine takes precedence but must be confirmed and shaped through personal and communal experience helps frame this tension. It suggests that while theology provides the foundation, lived experience—including that of the marginalized or young—is essential for shaping how ministry is actually expressed.

In summary:

• There is a theological rationale in how ministry is done—especially around love, relationality, and justification by faith.

• But cultural and pragmatic concerns often shape the form ministry takes.

• These dimensions can and should be seen as complementary, rather than contradictory, aligning with the holistic view I present. Dr Anthony Agbobu

"Up to the Protestant era,
intergenerationality happened through aspects of ecclesiastical life such as re-
ligious instruction, art, worship, season observances, and life rites (White,
1988, pp. 75-79). But a by-product of the Reformation stress on “The Word”
and the Renaissance (and later) conceptualizations of childhood led to chil-
dren being increasingly marginalized and isolated in the rituals and life of the
congregation (White, 1988, pp. 79-81)."

Trying to understand what he's saying about the stress on "The Word". Is he saying that post-Reformation churches have over-prioritised intellectual understanding and therefore moved children out of the centre of church life until they've learned enough "knowledge"?

If so... what do we think about that??

“Because children have abounding vitality, because they are in spirit fierce and free, therefore they want things repeated and unchanged. They always say, "Do it again"; and the grown-up person does it again until he is nearly dead. For grown-up people are not strong enough to exult in monotony. But perhaps God is strong enough to exult in monotony. It is possible that God says every morning, "Do it again" to the sun; and every evening, "Do it again" to the moon. It may not be automatic necessity that makes all daisies alike; it may be that God makes every daisy separately, but has never got tired of making them. It may be that He has the eternal appetite of infancy; for we have sinned and grown old, and our Father is younger than we.”

There's so much that insight gives me excitement for the New Creation, etc., but since having a child, this has shaped my thinking a lot! Whenever I am "nearly dead" with playing things over and over, I try to remember that my son is teaching me more about the nature of God. In this way, he is living out godliness in a way I have 'lost'. In infancy, he shows me more of who God is than I could express.

(from Tom)

Watching this video gave me such a greater understanding of what Scottie May may be talking about in describing the bringing to life of a scripture story. I was surprised by just how captivated I was by watching the video (and the Exodus one) and by the telling of the story. There was beautiful creation of a picture and use of hand movements and actions.

The skill used in adding details to bring the story to life, e.g. what it’s like to live in a desert, although this commentary isn’t necessarily in the Bible, contributed to the feeling of captivation.

I particularly loved watching the children interact in ‘The Sower’ godly play session. They were so engaged - full of comments and questions and the adult responded in such a lovely, gentle and unjudgmental way.

I was also interested in the ‘I wonder’ approach – once again surprised at the potential it gives for using the imagination and giving space to consider the story – something children are probably naturally much better at than adults. However it did strike me that when the adult said ‘I wonder if there is a parable in here’, I am pretty confident our kids would respond with something like ‘well obviously there is because we got it from the parable bookcase!’. There was a definite innocence and gentleness about these children…!

However the main pit fall of this approach does seem to be the total lack of explanation of the story – the exploration and wondering is beautiful but how does it contribute to the children growing in their knowledge and love of our wonderful God, and exploring what it is to live for him. There seems a particular irony in watching a parable be ‘taught’ like this given Jesus’ explanation that parables are difficult to understand! How does this match up with passages like Ephesians 4?

As has been referenced in today's lecture, I do feel there's a lack of ensuring we are helping children to get to Biblical truth - it feels like when she's asking the questions towards the end of the video that if a child came up with the response, "the answer is obviously to try to collect the most stuff!" there's no mechanism within this to guide and suggest another route. The reading goes further down this I feel concerning road by stating that the play leader listens and accepts all comments - accepting them without comment surely gives some implicit agreement, at least to some?

Another reflection, this on the Berryman reading, is that his definition of 'play' notes "play has no extrinsic goals. It is played for itself." Does this not put it at odds with the idea of a specifically crafted activity designed to do certain things, as the story section is?

Standard developmental models suggest a linear progression for humans, particularly the ego. However, the spirit is not subject to this. We would be capable of spending a lifetime never truly developing, but through the spirit the timelines we subscribe to are changed and therefore the past can be healed, the present can be filled with a Christ in Me worship both individually and together and the future is time to spend with God. Or I've completely got the wrong end of it. If that's the case then we can add it to the list of many things we'll look at tomorrow!

• Great to have a 3D format to tell the story / visualise things.

• Such a great resource to have a room full of stories. That continuous provision has so much potential.

• I liked how she teed up the "wonderings" and invited them to think (even if the questions were wishy-washy)

• ...

Maybe I've totally missed the point but I can't lie... I found the Godly Play session unrealistic and really dull. Some questions I had watching were:

• Since when do kids arrive one by one and sit down calmly without being asked? For a child-led, bottom-up ethos, that feels more indoctrinated by top-down...?

• For all the rhetoric around 'play', the children are not playing... they're watching an adult play... is that really engaging? Where's the play element, movement and interaction, for the children? If I was a kid (with ADHD or SEND needs), I'd be going mad sitting still for 20mins watching someone else play tactilely!

• Where's the fun? Conversation was whispered and hushed like it was a group therapy session. Two kids had their chin in their hands and were slumped forward for most of the session.

• I found the leader's questions a bit strange - all the stuff about being child-centred felt slightly undermined by a lot of her questions finishing with, "...isn't it?" Is she being directive / leading or allowing them to say anything?

• Was the box an allegory? Why?

• Where was the Bible? I'm not sure it was even mentioned that's where the parable came from..?

• Where was God?

• Where was Jesus? He told the parable and wasn't given a look in. She even said, "shall we make a parable?"

• Her questions:

  • "How did [the Sower] feel when all the birds ate the seeds?" (Okay... some potential there...)

  • How did the birds feel? (Jesus later explains they represent the devil... interesting territory)

  • How did the seeds feel? (Err... many confusing things).

• The 'play' session for the kids was called 'work' (???) and whilst all the boxes around the room have the potential for continuous provision revisiting embedded learning... if all the sessions were like that, they haven't embedded or learned much to revisit! As far as I can tell, all they learned was the difference between "sow" and "sew".

That wasn't what I was expecting Godly Play to look like...!

A few reflections...

When the welcomer asks the children if they are ready I can imagine that if it's a child's first time that would be a strange question for them to answer, they wouldn't know what they were supposed to be ready for. I wonder how they would respond if a child said they were not ready. Is it ready to encounter Jesus, ready to think, ready to learn?

I appreciate the calm and when I have watched videos about Montessori or Steiner education before there has been a calmness there too.

I love the moment with the liturgical calendar. Children, like adults are creatures of rhythm and routine and this helps them to visually see where they are in the year.

I think that telling a Bible story like this, with props, is good. My question is whether it should be read directly from scripture or whether a paraphrasing is okay, particularly if this is the only Bible content they are going to get.

What was interesting was that when it came to the wondering questions the storyteller did say at one point something like, "oh that's a bit of a silly answer" which I thought was against the general aim of what the wonderings was supposed to be like.

Is the 'work' seen as the children's worship?

Overall this video left me feeling like these children have been short changed. There is so much that could have been drawn out about this passage and little it seems for them to actually wonder at as the parable wasn't explained to them and there was even some confusion for instance with the sew/sow instance and if the boy hadn't said about it, he would have walked away with a wrong understanding of the passage.

Godly Play Response

Every child welcome, valued, heard LOVE

She didn't finish the story!!!

JESUS EXPLAINS what each soil means regarding the word being understood!!!!

It felt like it was a choice not to say Jesus' name as the story teller and they concluded Mr snail was probably who was sowing seeds.

Questioning so irrelevant to any kind of meaning to the story such a wasted opportunity...

If teaching was occurring in a middle ground bible centered way:

I wonder what the seeds were representing?

I wonder how they grow?

I wonder who makes them grow?

I wonder why they are planting them?

I wonder why Jesus tells us this story?

No reason you couldn't do this as a pause like the disciples experienced; then explain "well Jesus explained it to the disciples because they didn't understand what this parable was about..."

I wonder if we are able to be sowers?

I wonder what Jesus wants us to use our ears?

We recently did this parable with our kids (age3-7):

We did a game where we threw a bean bag on the four different soils (colored mats) and modelled making the connection of telling people about Jesus/ the gospel = the seed .

e.g. oh dear it landed on the path the birds gobbled it up they didn't realise Jesus loves them, lets keep sowing, YAY it landed on the good soil, this person heard and believed Jesus, this one will grow and bear fruit!

They grasped this concept so well that one prayer as we ended from a pretty contemplative 5 year old was: "please help me to not give up telling people about Jesus."

Also how much did it cost to resource that classroom-- none of those things are cheap even though the implication is cardboard, felt, sand and simple natural things are all you need! Is it all a money making scheme? Ark and the Temple – Godly Play Resources Creation - Small – Godly Play Resources

Sorry for the rant!

Roxi

Positives

-            Very respectful of children and their views – whether silly or not – repetition as a way of valuing people which feels important for discussion/moving deeper

-            Great props/visuals – and with space to match – it did seem to be calm in a way that I was surprised how peaceful/uninterrupted it was

-            Wonder questions – useful part of wider teaching I would think

Negatives

-            I did not hear Jesus name mentioned once in connection to the parable (somehow!?) but talked around Him.

-            There was some control by story teller in ignoring a couple of answers and continuing with wonder questions. Is it truly/entirely bottom up in that sense?

-            Questions lacked enough scaffolding/purpose

-            Still felt like information delivered in a useful way with children discussion but without clarity on what is true.

-            I feel some of the most instruction given was explaining the difference between sewing (with yarn) and sowing (with seeds). This is not what I would hope to see in any teaching ministry I ever observed, especially with such an important parable with such weight and depth.

-            Receiving a blessing when leaving also feels like the story teller is performing a priestly role here, which also makes me uncomfortable.

I think that what he is getting at is that it seems completely illogical to become a believer in terms of putting ego and self in a lower position.

The self would never seek forgiveness and reconciliation. That only the Holy Spirit is able to open the eyes to ultimate wisdom - in line with Ephesians 2?

His referrals to Helen's parallels with Augustine's experience of conversion were helpful and I think saying:

1. awakening - God does this, not something that can be manufactured, become aware that there in an abyss between us and God, an awareness of sin (not yet a believer in what Christ has done, just know there is a problem)

2. purgation - eager realisation and passion to move into relationship with God, and a pursuit of knowledge of God because of a new awareness of his love for you - e.g. reading scripture and perhaps believing it

3. illumination - aha moment: he did it for ME. He loves ME. GRACE understood and received with a thankful heart

4. toward unification - the stronger and more complete our understanding of Christ's love for us the more fully we can unify with Christ and become like Him.

   
   

   Because of the journey the Holy spirit leads us on in understanding (we are not brainwashed or asked to put reason aside) we are able to submit the ego and something akin to 'evolutionary self-defensive instincts' in order to be able to forgive, love the enemy and face persecution rejoicing and other counter-intuitive things.

The world says faith is illogical - its wrong.

Reaction:

This was definitely my personal experience, but it seem extreme to assume it works in all contexts? Is this happening in our children? What does that look like?

Do our children get a chance to seek for themselves or just when they are youth or in their 20s?

Bible back up potentially:

Seek me with all of your heart and you will find me Jeremiah 29:13 verse?

Draw near to God and he will draw near to you James 4:8

Roxi

Note: the exodus one has no kids and only includes the storytelling bit.

Likes:

• I loved the props and the actions. As others have commented, it's very engaging, and drew me into the story really well. Captivating.

• I appreciated the wonder questions - as part of your toolkit I can see these as really great opening questions to get kids thinking. I expect you need the engaging story time first for this to work well.

• He drew attention to what the people in the story might have felt crossing the Red Sea. It was all speculative, but would be a good way of beginning to think about application if carefully thought through.

• I can see this working really well in schools. I do an after school club for kids at a secondary school. They are mostly sort of semi-literate and they have zero knowledge of the Bible (who is Adam? -- that kind of thing). This kind of engaging storytelling would be GREAT for them.

Dislikes:

• As others have mentioned, this was pretty light on Bible teaching. Absolutely massive amounts of the story were missing (the plagues?! Birth & call of Moses? Burning bush? Almost all the events of and commemoration of passover?). How do they choose what to cut? Especially when other more trivial details were included.

• Weirdly, despite missing most of the actual story of the Exodus, it also covered a massive sweep of the book. chs1-15 in a single sweep is ambitious.

• Missed basically every important textual detail I could imagine. Almost none of the actual language of the Bible was used, which massively flattened the story and made whatever angle the person doing the story choose was important the only thing that the kids would get. I suppose that's the same in how we might do things, but we would try to get our idea from the actual words in the Bible.

• God not really mentioned.

• No sense of wider story / context.

Nancy is very softly spoken, with an even and inviting tone throughout her delivery. Her pose and direction would not be out of place in a yoga class.

The introduction of scripture here is somewhat lacking, but I am not surprised that there is no reverence for the word of God, and much like the book of Esther, God is not even mentioned in this video.

Nancy delivers in her soft lilt that these are stories, told around campfires in the desert, told in families, written on leather, then paper... (drastic cut in the video) Then the printing press (is this a nod to the Reformation?).

Nancy engages the Children's attention to the content of the book by stating the Holy Bible has a front and back door, in this room we use both. She then proceeds to flick through the book, releasing all the stories into the room.

There is a further emphasis placed on stories told the old way and new information. The bible is just for you.

The Children are invited to read it or have someone read it to them.

An activity is suggested, you can make a bookmark to go with your story and place it in the bible so you can find it.

Nancy moves the lesson into the open wandering stage of Godly play, she reflects and wonders out loud. Her questions are:

• What part of the story do you like the best?

• Which is most important?

• Which part is especially for you?

• Which stories can we leave out and still have all the story we need?

The Children are then directed to their work. Again, open-ended choices are offered to do something new or resume anything else.

THE VIDEO ENDS - this would be followed by the change in direction to stop, put away in your own time and gather for the feast. Prayers and Goodbye.

IN REFLECTION:

Nancy is calm and constant in her delivery, her leading is clear, gentle and considerate of the needs of the Child, allowing space for their own individual spiritual discovery of the mystery around them.

She fails to give any direction (nor would she intend to) about how God has revealed himself to his people, wants to speak to his people and communicate the truth of his love for them.

The postmodern realisation of self-expression and individual experience is the most concerning factor, and ensuring that they will be the best child they can be, because they are already and need to realise this.

Nancy would not be welcome to lead any bible study or Children's ministry in my Church context, we teach through the whole of scripture without leaving out any parts that might upset or concern us.

The thing I would take from this and would consider putting into an activity is flicking through the Bible and releasing all the stories. This could be great fun to hunt them down, re-order and get the Children to tell the story of God's love and plan to save his people from their sin.

If my memory serves, there is a "magic" bible picture book that I have seen a similar idea been done, while flicking through the pages, the content returns to the bible and the Gospel is presented while engaging.

I watched the exodus video and it covered a huge sweep (Exodus 1-15) without using many of the actual words in the section, while skipping important and long bits (Birth and call of Moses, plagues, institution and commemoration of passover).

I liked some of the questions and think the wondering questions are good for starter-Qs in Bible studies to get them engaging and thinking deeply and not just in a basic way. And the questions at the end were a good start to thinking about application.

I would definitely use elements of this (and have, if in a less elaborate way), and I can see the use of it in schools. But not as the primary diet for our kids in church.

Spiritual development is:

• An ongoing, deepening process

• Of relationship with Jesus - making Christ in us more the centre of our identity

• By a death -> resurrection shaped kind of process.

-> Basically Mark 8:34 but Jesus said it better (and far, far clearer).

This whole process is one of supplanting our identity as centred around me with one that is centred around Christ.

This is a death -> resurrection pattern in the shape of something like APIU. APIU are phases that we go through over and over and kind of spiral (upward? more deeply?) in our spiritual development / union with God rather than fixed steps that you pass out through.

Loder reacts against the mystical guys (classical APIU) as too vague and too linear and neat, and so he tries to nail down what's going on and explain it in identity language (ego).

He reacts against the sciency biology psychology guys (human development life cycle) as not theological enough, relying too much on psychology, and denying the basic reality of death.

He uses Hannah as a case study to describe how he sees this process in action. I found it gripping and emotive when he was applying his model of this process to her life, even as I found the language intolerably unclear. It felt like translating from some arcane pseudo-English, which was laborious (if, ultimately, rewarding).

Much of what has already been written.

Fantastic, creative re-telling of the Bible story with interesting props in engaging way.

Real potential through wonder questions to "break open" the meaning of the passage.

Frustrating lack of respect for Scripture, Jesus' own words and explanations.

Demonstrated format - Totally impractical depending on your context. Last year I had an average of 35 children aged 5-8 in my Sunday morning group. The format demonstrated would likely descend into silly chaos.

Hopefully helpful in unpacking this "earning the right" language Gough picks up on.

https://youtu.be/fUuhs3P839w

My playlist for this evening reading to get into the zone

Feeds into the remembering the feeling not what they were taught and the church kid group vibe

·        Who is it for?

·        What’s our theology of those people?

·        What’s our theology of the church

·        So what’s the aim?

·        Is it achieving that end?