The Myth of Innocence

The innocence of children has become an accepted mantra of modern society, an idea challenged by recent incidents such as the shooting of a man in Sydney by a 15 year old boy. We believe children are incapable of doing or thinking evil in our culture that promotes the idea all children are innocent.

Yet the case of James Bulger showed just how optimistic such an idea is. James was murdered on 12 February 1993, at the age of two. He was abducted from a shopping centre and murdered by two ten-year-old boys. In some ways it woke society out of its slumber but not entirely so. As we often do with gross tragedies society demonises the perpetrators, using words such as monsters, mentally ill, evil, rarely is children, child or other terms used to describe an ordinary person who committed and extraordinary crime.

As a result we see those responsible for such acts as aberrations and continue to highlight the innocence of children as the norm. Anyone who has spent a few weeks in a school playground can assure you this is not so. Bullying, name-calling, interpersonal violence, isolation and other demeaning activities are on show for all to see. And, yes, your children and grandchildren are no more innocent than anybody else’s. They all have the tendency to do evil.

Children are often cute but rarely innocent.

Which brings us to Mark10:14-16 from the Living Bible:

¹⁴ But when Jesus saw what was happening he was very much displeased with his disciples and said to them, “Let the children come to me, for the Kingdom of God belongs to such as they. Don’t send them away! ¹⁵ I tell you as seriously as I know how that anyone who refuses to come to God as a little child will never be allowed into his Kingdom.”

¹⁶ Then he took the children into his arms and placed his hands on their heads and he blessed them.

A danger in reading the Bible is to translate the stories directly into our culture. These are stories written to address situations pertinent to a particular place and time. Jesus is not addressing a situation occurring in downtown Ashburton or Glen iris, but in relation to the way young people were treated in his time.

Children were seen neither as innocent or deserving of special treatment. They were not hovered over by mothers and fathers who worked to ensure that their child received the best, became the best and was not discriminated against by others. This story is not about my child being special, more special than anything else.

In Jesus’ time, children were completely dependent upon their relationship with their father for their life and place in the family. The father decided whether the child would even be accepted into the family. Children belonged to their father and remained subject to his authority even as adults. The saying "to receive the kingdom like a child," which most scholars treat as originally independent of the scene about accepting children, must, therefore, refer to the radical dependence of the child on the father for any status, inheritance, or, in families where children might be abandoned, for life itself. It warns the disciples that they are radically dependent upon God's grace -- they cannot set the conditions for entering the kingdom.

Now isn’t that interesting? Jesus takes a practice or a circumstance, common to his age but out of sync with our own, to introduce the concept of grace. Children had no special right to their place in the family. There was nothing they could do to ensure that they received a place or had first place. Birthplace in the family hierarchy, gender or ability did not guarantee them a place. They were simply to be children.

Old Testament stories of the battle for supremacy in families, Cain and Abel, Joseph, Esau and more reinforce graphically the scheming and conniving that went on to gain the father’s favour and to get your hands on the coveted position of power. The Father held the upper hand and unless you were chosen you missed out, and perhaps, were left out of the family all together. You relied completely on the father’s generosity.

Jesus seems to take this patriarchal system and remind us we are dependent on God’s grace for all the good things that come our way, particularly our acceptance into heaven. We cannot connive or scheme our way into heaven. We simply have to be obedient to what we understand is the will of God and to leave the rest up to God. Like the children Jesus referred to who had to trust their father, we are to trust God.

Is this fair or is Jesus out of line by making such a connection? Isn’t this idea disempowering? Why can’t children be whatever they want to be, do what ever they want to do and be entitled to be treated as innocent and precious, someone whose every wish is pampered to?

Is it fair Jesus asks to give up our own wilful decision making processes to rely completely on the grace of God? Shouldn’t we have some say in what we do and how we go about securing our eternal future? Perhaps Jesus response would be: “Well, we did give you free will; so how did that turn out for you?”

Grace is a gift and a decision. It is God’s gift of unconditional empowerment freely given to those who decide to be open to the possibility of unlimited empowerment.

Grace cannot be bestowed if we are looking the other way. If we are committed to doing things our way (thanks Frank), dictating the terms of the relationship (if you do…then I will…), designing what it looks like (God, let me win X Factor or Lotto, or the grand-final), then we block the presence of God’s grace in our lives.

The children Jesus was referring to had to make a decision to trust the Father. The Father was not exempt of responsibility. Jesus was challenging Fathers to give good things to their children. They were not to be tyrants, dictators, and manipulators of the children. This was a relationship of mutual giving and decision-making. The fathers were to be gracious in their treatment of their children. Neither were to abuse the relationship. Both were to respect each other and to allow what would be to be. What happens when they don’t? See the Prodigal son for more details.

What a challenge for us as we reflect on our personal relationships, and particularly our relationship with God; to give ourselves completely to God, open to the unlimited empowerment available to us and deciding to let go of our impulse to control and to manage the outcomes according to our will. This applies to our relationship with partners; children and those we work with as well as the ultimate relationship on which all else is developed.

Are we, as a church able to give up our concerns and our fears, our preferred outcomes and dreams for our parish; and to give ourselves entirely to the grace of God? The children Jesus was referring to trusted the outcome to the generosity of empowerment; are we able to do so here?

It does not mean we are exempt of responsibility of hard work, effort, prayer and obedience. On the contrary that is what is expected of us. We are to work as if everything relies upon our efforts, while at the same time knowing we are completely dependent upon God’s grace.

This is not a story of childish innocence. It is a realistic story of the facts of life. To welcome children and to be welcomed as children is about the gift of mutual respect and responsibility. We are empowered to the doing of great deeds by the fact the outcome doesn’t rely on us. God has got us covered.