THE LUTHERAN THEOLOGICAL SEMINARY AT PHILADELPHIA

CHILDREN AND CREATION:A CHANCE TO GO OUTSIDE

SUBMITTED TO DR. KAREN BLOOMQUISTIN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF

ICS 100 THE CHURCH IN SOCIETY

BYKATHERINE STEINLY

MAY 10, 2013

1

CHILDREN AND CREATION:

A CHANCE TO GO OUTSIDE

Two incidents sparked the writing of this paper. The first

was my mother telling me how our church childcare program had

remodeled the small natural space available for the children by

removing the tree and replacing the grass with plastic sod. As a

childcare provider, my mother was indignant that they had taken

what she saw as a green learning environment and turned it into a

sterile plastic playground. The second incident was my reading

George E. “Tink” Tinker’s American Indian Liberation: A Theology of

Sovereignty. In this book, Tinker critiques the notion of Western

society that it is “enough to replant a few trees or to add

nutrients to the soil.”1 He insists that, to reverse the current

ecological crisis, human beings must engage in a relationship of

reciprocity with nature. Reciprocity is an Indian American way of

life that involves “maintaining a balance [with nature] and

tempering the negative effects of basic human survival

1 George E. “Tink” Tinker, American Indian Liberation: A Theology of Sovereignty, (Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2008), 70.

2

techniques.”2 It requires a change that is deeper than a few

discrete actions, i.e. planting a tree, and instead demands a

change of perspective. In this paper, I wish to investigate how a

change of perspective such as Tinker envisions could happen by

changing the way that children engage with nature.

The urgency of this problem is demonstrated by the

development in our culture of the ailment diagnosed by Richard

Louv as nature-deficit disorder, that is, “the human costs of

alienation from nature, among them: diminished use of the senses,

attention difficulties, and higher rates of physical and

emotional illnesses.”3 The problem not only affects children and

youth in the United States. Louv cites research from England,

Japan, Israel, and the Netherlands, which indicates that today’s

children are engaging with nature less than generations past.4 In

one specific Israeli study, “researchers revealed that nearly all

adults surveyed indicated that natural outdoor areas were the

most significant environments of their childhood, while less than

2 Ibid.3

Richard Louv, Last Child in the Woods: Saving Our Children from Nature-Deficit Disorder, (Chapel Hill, NC: Algonquin Books of Chapel Hill, 2008), 36.4 Ibid., 33.

3

half of children ages eight to eleven shared that view.”5 Today,

nature is less likely to be an important part of children’s

lives; this has potentially harmful consequences for children’s

health.

Louv demonstrates the far-reaching effects of nature-deficit

disorder by citing various studies that show how exposure to

nature impacts child development. In terms of mental health,

studies indicate “that exposure to nature may reduce the symptoms

of Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD) and…can

improve all children’s cognitive abilities and resistance to

negative stresses and depression.”6 Nature also contributes to

healthier physical development. In Norway and Sweden, studies of

preschool-age children demonstrated that, after playing in

natural settings for a year, children tested better than their

cohorts in motor fitness.7 Robin Moore, who studies postmodern

childhood play, argues that “a rich, open environment [such as

nature] will continuously present alternative choices for

5 Ibid.

6 Ibid., 35.

7 Ibid., 49.

4

creative engagement. A rigid, bland environment will limit

healthy growth and development.”8 Nature stimulates children’s

intellectual creativity. Overall, exposure to nature can help

children to be more emotionally balanced, mentally focused,

physically fit, and intellectually creative and engaged.

The need for attention to these areas of development is

apparent in our society. One current issue that concerns

children’s health is the child obesity epidemic. While many

factors contribute to the epidemic, three contributors have been

prominent in public debate: television, junk food, and lack of

exercise. Many people have pointed to sports as an answer to the

problem, but Louv notes that “the obesity epidemic coincides with

the greatest increase in organized children’s sports in

history.”9 Another disturbing trend in children’s health was

exposed in a survey completed in 2003 and published by Psychiatric

Services which shows that “the rate at which American children are

prescribed antidepressants almost doubled in five years; the

steepest increase—66 percent—was among preschool children.”10 A 8 Ibid., 66.

9 Ibid., 48.

10 Ibid., 49.5

reevaluation of the relationship of today’s children with nature

could reverse some of these disturbing trends; however, cultural

and religious obstacles stand in the way.

Several trends in recent years have resulted in the

estrangement of children from nature. One trend is a replacement

of experience with theory. Louv notes that today’s children have

a greater intellectual awareness of ecological crises than

children of previous generations but spend less time actually in

nature.11 Another trend that estranges children from nature is

their disconnection from food sources. Louv writes that, “In less

than a half century, the culture has moved from a time when small

family farms dominated the countryside…to a transitional time

when many suburban families’ vegetable gardens provided little

more than recreation, to the current age of shrink-wrapped, lab-

produced food.”12 Yet another factor is the elimination of

natural space to accommodate urban and suburban expansion. A

young girl, whom Louv interviewed and who identified as a poet,

spoke evocatively of a neighborhood wood where she used to play;

11 Ibid., 1.

12 Ibid., 21. 6

when it was cut down, she said, “It was like they cut down a part

of me.”13 A final factor that has estranged children from nature

is what Louv calls the “the criminalization of natural play.”14

Louv tells one story of a neighborhood where children were first

banned from fishing in a local pond, then banned from

skateboarding on their sidewalks, and finally forced to build a

skate park ten miles away.15 In her book, Breathing Space: A Spiritual

Journey in the South Bronx, Heidi Neumark tells a related story of an

immigrant community who attempts to plant a tree in her community

as a sign of thanks to the church and is unable to do so because

of stringent city ordinances.16 All of these factors contribute

to children’s estrangement from nature: physically, mentally, and

emotionally.

Underlying these factors are deeper cultural and religious

mindsets and realities. Fear is a major obstacle which divides

children from nature. Some of this fear is the parents’ fear:

13 Ibid., 13-14.

14 Ibid., 27.

15 Ibid., 27-28.

16 Heidi B. Neumark, Breathing Space: A Spiritual Journey in the South Bronx, (Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 2003), 101-102.

7

fear of letting their children outside without an escort and fear

of not knowing where their children are at all times.17 An

abstract by the Children and Nature Network includes studies from

England and Australia that indicate parents limit their

children’s access to nature based on concerns for safety,

including street traffic, gangs, and strangers.18 Some of the

fear is also the children’s fear, especially those who have

experienced violence. For them, nature is associated “with war,

with hiding,…with the neighborhood park, which is controlled by

gangs.”19 Underneath this mindset of fear is the reality that

people in poor, especially urban, neighborhoods are more likely

to be estranged from clean, safe natural space, while the power

to address this inaccessibility lies with those who have access

to such spaces.

The reality is that children in certain areas lack access to

any kind of clean, safe space, much less clean, safe natural

space. Ivone Gebara, an ecofeminist scholar who ties abuses of 17 Louv, Last Child in the Woods, 125.

18 Cheryl Charles and Keith Wheeler eds, “Children & Nature Worldwide: An Exploration of Children’s Experiences of the Outdoors and Nature with Associated Risks and Benefits,” Children and Nature Network (2012): 27-30, http://www.childrenandnature.org/downloads/CECCNNWorldwideResearch.pdf.19 Louv, Last Child in the Woods, 145.

8

the earth with abuses of the female body, writes about her native

Brazil and notes that the spaces of the rich are kept clean by

the poor while the rich dispose of their waste in the spaces of

the poor, producing health hazards.20 Neumark writes of a similar

situation in the South Bronx in New York City where the garbage

of the city pollutes the neighborhood of her church and adversely

affects the health of its inhabitants.21 This “environmental

racism” has resulted in abnormally high death rates by asthma for

the children of the South Bronx.22 Neumark sarcastically notes

that “someone did tree research and discovered that locust trees

can be planted…in the area because they are resistant to

pollution. Unfortunately, a breed of resistant children has not

yet been discovered.”23 In unsafe and polluted urban areas like

these, the challenge of putting children in contact with nature

is extremely difficult.

20

Ivone Gebara, Longing for Running Water: Ecofeminism and Liberation, (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1999), 3.

21 Neumark, Breathing Space, 7-8.

22 Ibid., 7.

23 Ibid., 9. 9

Another underlying factor in the separation of today’s

society and its children, from nature is individualistic and

anthropocentric cultural values. In a society that values

personal gain and human beings above all else, nature becomes a

commodity to be sacrificed or ignored for the sake of

consumerism. Louv describes a car commercial where a family

drives past beautiful natural vistas, and the children sit in the

back seat completely mesmerized by a television.24 In an

interview with elementary age children, Louv recalls a boy who

told him that “computers were more important than nature, because

computers are where the jobs are.”25 This disregard for nature is

rooted in prioritizing the needs of the individual and human

beings over the earth. The reality, however, as I already

discussed is that human disregard for the creation, ultimately

impacts the well-being of humanity.

In Christian theology, one story that would need to be re-

appropriated to change this callous and manipulative view of

creation is the creation story, specifically the creation story

24 Louv, Last Child in the Woods, 2.

25 Ibid., 13.

10

in Genesis 1. In his book, Creation and Reality, Michael Welker

analyzes the problematic verse, Genesis 1:28: “God blessed them,

and God said to them, ‘Be fruitful and multiply, and fill the

earth and subdue it; and have dominion over the fish of the sea

and over the birds of the air and over every living thing that

moves upon the earth.’”26 In this verse, God speaks to human

beings, describing to them how they are to be in relationship

with the earth and its creatures. In this divine instruction,

scholars have problematized the Hebrew verbs, ׁׁׁ ׁ, which means

subjugate, and, ׁׁׁ, which means subjugate or trample under.27

Elsewhere in Scripture, these verbs apply to slaves or conquered

land and could be interpreted here to mean that humanity has an

abusive relationship with the earth. Welker contextualizes the

verse and argues that, in Genesis 1:27, “God’s image” modifies

how human beings are to “have dominion” over animals and that, in

Genesis 1:29, God places human beings and animals in a

“vegetarian community of solidarity.”28 For Welker, the dominion

26 Gen. 1:28 NRSV

27 Michael Welker, Creation and Reality, (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1999), 62.

28 Ibid., 71.

11

that humanity is to exercise is demonstrated in the Noah story in

which Noah’s duty as a human being is to “[preserve] the life of

the endangered animal world.”29 Welker reinterprets the

traditional understanding of this text to demonstrate that

humanity is differentiated from yet responsible to the creation

and its creatures.

Welker draws the line at “imagining a community of

solidarity with animals that would make it possible to confuse

children and housepets,”30 but Tinker is willing to take a step

further in leveling the hierarchical relationship between

humanity and the earth. Speaking from his perspective as an

American Indian of the Osage nation, Tinker argues for a

relationship of interrelatedness between humanity and the rest of

creation, which begins with the American Indian spiritual

proclamation that “all life is sacred and therefore I am sacred

as a part of the created whole.”31 American Indians understand

the animals to be their relatives; a relationship which is

29 Ibid., 72.

30 Ibid.

31 Tinker, American Indian Liberation, 43.

12

represented symbolically in the circle: “There is no hierarchy in

our cultural context, even of species, because the circle has no

beginning or end. Hence, all createds participate together, each

in their own way, to preserve the wholeness of the circle.”32

Gebara writes of a similar concept, which she describes not as a

deconstruction of the individual but as attentiveness to the

“Greater Body.”33 She confirms that relatedness is a “cosmic

condition,” which requires us to “welcome the cosmos as our body,

and thus to recognize it as a ‘subject’ and not merely as an

object subordinate to our will to conquer.”34 This theology takes

Welker’s argument and goes a step further: seeing creation not

just as an object, for which human beings are to care, but as an

subject, which is an extension of our very selves and thus a part

of us.

Another Christian mindset that contributes to human

objectification of and disregard for the earth is the dichotomy

made between heaven and the earth. Gebara writes that as

Christians, we traditionally “think of ourselves first and 32 Ibid., 48.

33 Gebara, Longing for Running Water, 52.

34 Ibid., 92.13

foremost as citizens of heaven. The earth is just one planet

among many.”35 To overcome this mindset, Welker offers an

alternative framework in which “according to the biblical

creation accounts, the heavens are in tune with the earth,

ordered in relation to the earth, created in reaction to earthly

creatures.”36 This framework attempts to overcome the

heaven/earth dichotomy by emphasizing the harmonious relationship

envisioned in Genesis. Another framework that can overcome this

mindset is to emphasize God’s relationship with the earth via the

Incarnation. In its social statement on the environment, the

Evangelical Lutheran Church in America makes reference to Romans

8:18–25, which emphasizes that “in Christ, the Word is made

flesh, with saving significance for an entire creation that longs

for fulfillment.”37 All of creation is impacted by God’s saving

presence via the Incarnation. Gebara also values the Incarnation

for its creation implications but goes in a different direction

than the ELCA, envisioning an “earthly Jesus”: 35 Ibid., 89.

36 Welker, Creation and Reality, 39.

37 ELCA, “Caring for Creation: Vision, Hope, and Justice,” Social Statement, ELCA (August 29, 1993), 2.

14

Within this perspective, Jesus does not come to us in the name of a ‘superior will’ that sent him; rather, he comes from here: from this earth, this body, this flesh, from the evolutionary process that is present both yesterday and today in this Sacred Body within which love resides.38

These paradigms fight against a cultural and theological

perspective that values a heavenly salvation and otherworldly God

and instead encourage a perspective that values a deeper

relationship with the earth and imagines a this-worldly God.

To live out such a perspective, the church needs to take

action by helping to put children in contact with nature in a

purposeful and healthy way. Louv doubts that environmental scare

tactics, which use the grim picture of our potential future as

leverage to change behavior, will remain effective.39 The

majority of today’s environmentalists were not scared into their

work but inspired by particularly memorable experiences in

nature.40 One study demonstrates a direct relationship between

child participation in “wild nature activities” before the age of

eleven and positive adult attitudes towards the environment.41 To38 Gebara, Longing for Running Water, 190.39 Louv, Last Child in the Woods, 147.

40 Ibid., 150.

41 Ibid., 150-151.

15

develop a healthy relationship with the earth, children need a

balance of “free play” (non-adult directed activity) and mentored

time in nature.42 Today’s children do not need theoretical

education about the hole in the ozone layer: they need to go

outside.

One way that the church can help children go outside is by

making summer church camps more accessible. In the action section

of the ELCA’s social statement on the environment, the church

“commends” to congregations “camps and outdoor ministries,” but

does not elaborate on the accessibility of such camps.43

Interestingly, in the ELCA’s social statement on education, the

church again recommends that children, youth, and adults “take

part in this church’s outdoor ministries” and again does not

elaborate on how or what role such camps play in fostering a

healthy relationship between children and the environment.44 In

an interview with my mother as a childcare provider and leader in

42 Ibid., 151.

43 ELCA, “Caring for Creation: Vision, Hope, and Justice,” Social Statement, ELCA (August 29, 1993), 9.

44 ELCA, “Our Calling in Education,” Social Statement, ELCA (August 10, 2007),18.

16

our church’s Christian education ministry, she mentioned that

children are often able to attend church camp programs only with

the help of scholarships they receive from the congregation.45 I

went on the website of our local camp, Bear Creek Camp, and

discovered that, while its mission is laudable: “to help

individuals explore, celebrate and grow in God’s creation,”46 the

prices are indeed steep: the cheapest experience is nearly $300

for four days at camp, and the programs are not available to

children any younger than first grade.47 Significant financial

assistance is practically dependent on congregations.48 While the

ELCA recommends camps and outdoor ministries, it does little to

make them accessible and has even withdrawn funding from the

organization, Lutheran Outdoors Ministry, which provides

45 JoAnn Steinly, Phone conversation with author, Sellersville, PA, May 5, 2013.

46 “About/Mission.” Bear Creek Camp. http://www.bearcreekcamp.org/about-mission/ (accessed May 9, 2013).

47 “The Experience.” Bear Creek Camp. http://www.bearcreekcamp.org/the-experience/ (accessed May 9, 2013).

48 “Financial Assistance.” Bear Creek Camp. http://www.bearcreekcamp.org/financial-assistance/ (accessed May 9, 2013).

17

education for camp and outdoor ministry leadership.49 While

congregations can continue to provide funding for children to

attend camp programs, I recommend that they look to provide

opportunities for nature experiences to more children: children

in the community who will not necessarily be able to afford or

attain a scholarship for camp and children younger than the age

of seven.

How can churches do this? One way that churches can do this

is to partner with or help form a local chapter of the

organization, Children and Nature Network, which seeks “to

connect all children, their families and communities to nature

through innovative ideas, evidence-based resources and tools,

broad-based collaboration and support of grassroots

leadership.”50 A group formed with the help of this network could

take on issues within the local community that are barriers to

children of all ages engaging with nature. The aim of these local

chapters is to unite already existent local groups and

49 “History of LOM.” Lutheran Outdoor Ministries. http://www.lomnetwork.org/about_us/history/ (accessed May 9, 2013).

50 “About Us.” Children and Nature Network. http://www.childrenandnature.org/about/contact/ (accessed May 9, 2013).

18

individuals who could be advocates for nature opportunities for

children. Partnering with a local chapter of this network, a

congregation can advocate for outdoor experiences to become a

more integrated part of children’s lives and can empower children

and youth to be advocates for nature experiences.

The ELCA social statement on education identifies children

as both “models and teachers of faith” and “orphans, neighbors,

and strangers in need of justice and compassion.”51 Children are

not only future leaders, they are leaders in their own right.

Maria Montessori is an Italian physician and educator who changed

the face of education by empowering children to be agents in

their education. Her philosophy forms the foundation for

contemporary practices like “free play,” which allows children to

have an active role in their learning environment and encourages

teachers to “notice” and respond to the interests and

observations of children.52 In her book, The Montessori Method,

Montessori lists a number of concrete benefits that result from

using nature as a learning environment for children, and, as a 51 ELCA. “Our Calling in Education.” Social Statement. ELCA (August 10, 2007),15-16.

52 JoAnn Steinly. Phone conversation with author, Sellersville, PA, May 5, 2013.

19

postscript, tells a nature story from her first “Children’s

House” school in Rome. At this school, the children cultivated a

portion of land that was previously polluted by residents of a

nearby tenement:

The inhabitants of the house, therefore, had the habit of throwing from those windows every kind of offal, and at the beginning our garden was thus contaminated. But, little by little, without any exhortation on our part, solely through respect born in the people’s mind for the children’s labour,nothing more fell from the windows, except the loving glances and smiles of the mothers upon the soil which was the beloved possession of their little children.53

In this situation, Montessori, as a teacher, provided the

opportunity for the children to “fall in love” with the earth

and, by their actions, they in turn taught their parents to

respect the earth.

As the church, we need to provide children an opportunity to

“fall in love” with the earth and to become leaders in a

desperately needed movement to transform our current utilitarian,

consumerist, and dominating relationship with creation. This will

not only benefit the earth, but, because we are a part of the

earth, it will benefit us, yielding healthier more balanced

53 Maria Montessori, The Montessori Method, (Radford, VA: Wilder Publications, 2008), 128.

20

children and communities. By giving children opportunities to be

in nature through camp and local networking, the church will take

another step to ushering in a kingdom where all have access to

clean air, clean water, and a safe place to go outside.

21

BIBLIOGRAPHY

“About/Mission.” Bear Creek Camp. http://www.bearcreekcamp.org/about-mission/ (accessed May 9, 2013).

“About Us.” Children and Nature Network. http://www.childrenandnature.org/about/contact/ (accessed May 9, 2013).

Charles, Cheryl and Keith Wheeler eds. “Children & Nature Worldwide: An Exploration of Children’s Experiences of the Outdoors and Nature with Associated Risks and Benefits.” Abstract. Children and Nature Network (2012) http://www.childrenandnature.org/downloads/CECCNNWorldwideResearch.pdf (accessed May 9, 2013).

ELCA. “Caring for Creation: Vision, Hope, and Justice.” Social Statement. ELCA (August 29, 1993) http://www.elca.org/What-We-Believe/Social-Issues/Social-Statements/Environment.aspx (accessed May 5, 2013).

ELCA. “Our Calling in Education.” Social Statement. ELCA (August 10, 2007) http://www.elca.org/What-We-Believe/Social-Issues/Social-Statements/Education.aspx (accessed May 5, 2013).

“The Experience.” Bear Creek Camp. http://www.bearcreekcamp.org/the-experience/ (accessed May 9, 2013).

“Financial Assistance.” Bear Creek Camp. http://www.bearcreekcamp.org/financial-assistance/ (accessed May 9, 2013).

22

Gebara, Ivone. Longing for Running Water: Ecofeminism and Liberation. Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1999.

“History of LOM.” Lutheran Outdoor Ministries. http://www.lomnetwork.org/about_us/history/ (accessed May 9, 2013).

Louv, Richard. Last Child in the Woods: Saving Our Children from Nature-Deficit Disorder. Chapel Hill, NC: Algonquin Books of Chapel Hill, 2008.

Montessori, Maria. The Montessori Method. Radford, VA: Wilder Publications, 2008.

Neumark, Heidi B. Breathing Space: A Spiritual Journey in the South Bronx. Boston, MA: Beacon Press, 2003.

“Outdoor Ministry: The Church in a Time and Place Apart.” Evangelical Lutheran Church in America. http://www.elca.org/Growing-In-Faith/Ministry/Outdoor-Ministry.aspx (accessed May 9, 2013).

Steinly, JoAnn. Phone conversation with author, Sellersville, PA,May 5, 2013.

Tinker, George E. “Tink.” American Indian Liberation: A Theology of Sovereignty. Maryknoll, NY: Orbis Books, 2008.

Wallis, Jim. The Great Awakening: Seven Ways to Change the World. New York, N.Y.: HarperOne, 2008.

Welker, Michael. Creation and Reality. Minneapolis: Fortress Press,

1999.

23