Reading: Chapter 8: The Divine Imprint

Chapter 8

THE DIVINE IMPRINT

“AND GOD MADE MANKIND IN HIS IMAGE...”

There can be no doubt about it: Children are special in the kingdom of God.

People were bringing little children to Jesus for him to place his hands on them, but the disciples rebuked them. When Jesus saw this, he was indignant. He said to them, “Let the little children come to me, and do not hinder them, for the kingdom of God belongs to such as these. Truly I tell you, anyone who will not receive the kingdom of God like a little child will never enter it.” And he took the children in his arms, placed his hands on them and blessed them (Mark 10:13-16).

For followers of Jesus, though they may have struggled to understand at first, stories and sayings about children became important and instructive. The child was a metaphor for discipleship and Kingdom character. Divine power, Jesus asserts, emerges from weakness; true greatness lies in becoming least of all for Jesus’ sake (see Mark 10:41-45). The phrases “such as these” and “like a little child” point to the childlike character necessary for entrance into the kingdom of God.

Passages like these also draw attention to the esteemed position children hold within Christendom. One commentator writes: “Jesus was one of the first ever to see how essentially precious any person is, particularly a young child. A concern for children was not invented by the welfare state: it goes back to the teaching of Jesus.”¹ In the previous chapter, we explored the challenges of growing up urban. Youth residing in inner-city communities are labeled “at-risk” because of the surrounding dangers and pressures to conform to destructive patterns of behavior in order to survive. It can be argued that all children are at-risk simply because they are children. Their fate lies outside their control—with adults who may or may not care for them, and a broader society that may or may not protect them.

Now let’s consider the Greek society of Jesus’ day, in which children were treated as property to be kept or discarded at a father’s discretion:

An infant could be abandoned without penalty or social stigma for many reasons, including an anomalous appearance, being an illegitimate child or grandchild or a child of infidelity, family poverty, parental conflict. . . or being one of too many children. Sometimes [they] were given to friends, but more often than not they were abandoned to the elements, and death resulted from hypoglycemia and hypothermia. Sometimes the infant was devoured by the dogs that scavenged public places. It was likely, however, that [they] were rescued from these fates and picked up by slavers. Abandonment generally occurred in a public place, where it was hoped that the infant could be taken up by some wealthy person.

If picked up by wealthy persons, the child could become a slave, a play companion for another child, a pet, or a prostitute; it could be sold for begging purposes after mutilation or become a truly adopted child, a treasured alumnus.²

While modern Western societies generally value children, today’s urban child has been “abandoned” to the code of the street. For these children, despair and hopelessness show up at a young age. Education specialist Jawanza Kunjufu describes what he calls the Fourth Grade Failure Syndrome: By the time black boys reach the fourth grade, their natural excitement about life fades into a lethargic sense of hopelessness.³ Children are highly perceptive. It was an arresting moment when a five-year-old boy said to his father: “Dad, do I have to be black? It’s better to be white.”

“How do we build incentive in inner-city youth? How can youth within broken families and communities be motivated toward Christ and a life of meaning and purpose? What will it take to do that?”The question John Perkins posed years ago still cries out for answers. What is the Christian response to the conforming power and identity-shaping influence of the ghetto?

“In the beginning . . .”—before there were ghettos and street codes—“. . . God created the heavens and the earth.” Could it be that God has already spoken on this subject? At first glance, Genesis 1:1 seems too simplistic a response to an issue of such magnitude as the controlling influence of ghetto life. And yet, treated seriously, the impact of creation on motivating at-risk youth is significant.

The realities of creation gradually informed my response to John Perkins’s question and brought a new perspective to the urban challenge. The conditions of the Kobayashi Maru had changed.

This did not happen overnight. Many assisted in my journey toward discovery. One of my guides was Maria Montessori.

The Absorbent Mind

“The child is endowed with unknown powers, which can guide [mankind] to a radiant future.”⁴ This was a core belief of Maria Montessori, founder of the educational method that bears her name. Montessori believed that children are born with the drive and capacity to absorb the culture surrounding them. The book titled The Absorbent Mind is a compilation of Montessori’s lectures describing her education model.

Ours was a house for children, rather than a real school. We had prepared a place for children where a diffused culture could be assimilated from the environment, without any need for direct instruction. The children who came were from the humblest social levels, and their parents were illiterate. Yet these children learned to read and write before they were five, and no one had given them any lessons. If visitors asked them, “Who taught you to write?” they often answered with astonishment: “Taught me? No one has taught me!”⁵

Parents often take credit for teaching their children to walk and talk. From Montessori’s perspective, parents do not teach— they guide. Children do not need convincing; they are relentlessly motivated to walk and talk. They were created that way!

Montessori studied philosophy and psychology, graduating from Rome University medical school as the first female Italian physician in 1896. Five years later, she became director of a small school for “challenged” youth. She insisted that her staff recognize each patient’s need for stimulation, purposeful activity and self-esteem. She became convinced that children were capable of sustained concentration; they enjoyed order and preferred work to play. She went on to design a program that taught young children how to care for themselves and their environment. Her methods were experimental, but they produced seemingly miraculous results.

In 1907, Montessori opened a day care center, the Casa dei Bambini (Children’s House), where she applied her theories and methods of child education. The Casa dei Bambini’s students came from the slums of Rome and were generally described as disadvantaged.

The original Children’s House and those that followed were designed to provide a stimulating environment for children to live, learn, and take responsibility for themselves. An emphasis was placed on self-determination and self-realization. This entailed developing a concern for others and discipline; to do this, children engaged in exercises in daily living. These and other exercises were to function like a ladder—allowing children to pick up the challenge and to judge their progress. “The essential thing is for the task to arouse such an interest that it engages the child’s whole personality.”⁶

Children entering Montessori’s program were deemed “wild and unruly.” Yet they responded to her teaching methods. Amazing things began to happen. Children younger than three years of age would “absorb” not just reading and writing, but also subjects like botany, zoology, mathematics and geography. They did this naturally, spontaneously and tirelessly.

The child’s innate capacity to absorb knowledge, Montessori deduced, is fueled by a natural drive toward independence, as evidenced by children’s incessant questioning and their inability to stop talking once they start. This impacts the role of the adult educator. The child—the absorbent mind—requires an environment conducive to discovery and growth. This, Montessori asserts, is true for all children, including the “deviated” child, whose natural desire for work and discovery has been corrupted.

The environment must be rich in motives which lend interest to activity and invite the child to conduct his own experiences. These are principles dictated by life and by nature, which help the deviated child who has acquired regressive characteristics, to pass from the tendency to laziness to the desire for work, from lethargy and inertia to activity, from a state of fear (which shows itself sometimes in excessive attachment to people from whom the child cannot be separated) to a joyous freedom, the freedom to begin the conquest of life.

From inertia to work! This is the path of cure, just as it is the path of development for the normal child.⁷

I was first exposed to the Montessori method when our local elementary school (the school my children would later attend) became a Montessori magnet school. The classroom was fascinating to watch: children moving freely among various activity stations, focused on learning, listening intently to their teacher, highly self-motivated.

Montessori, I discovered, had been fascinated by the intricacies of creation. While acknowledging the evolutionary nature of embryonic development, she noted innate learning capacities unique to mankind. Her language at times sounded New Age (e.g., her use of the phrase “psychic power”), yet her ideas flowed out of a Judeo-Christian framework.

Dr. Scottie May, Assistant Professor of Christian Formation and Ministry at Wheaton College, affirms this:

As a young practitioner, Montessori was essentially a freethinker, especially when it came to the doctrines of the church. Mario Montessori (her son) gave a series of lectures in London in 1961 in which he described part of her spiritual journey: The more Maria worked with children, the more she saw the creative presence of God within them. A subtitle of a chapter in The Child in the Church(Montessori, 1965, 4) reads, “God Created The Child More Admirable Than We Think.”⁸

Montessori had discovered a link between creation and motivation. That discovery birthed a new approach to child education. “What am I looking at?” I asked while observing the Montessori method in action. “Is there something here that can help me understand how to motivate urban youth?”

Clues

I was a journeyman in search of an undiscovered country. What is the key to motivating inner-city youth? Montessori had presented a clue—one I struggled to understand. Where is God in this picture? What needs to be understood about human behavior? What can cause youth without hope to hope again?

Over the years, I listened and observed and tried to connect dots. As in the Montessori classroom, clues were right in front of me, embodied in the behaviors and responses of the kids in our ministry. Gradually I learned how to “read” them. Interviews with now-adult alums of Neighborhood Ministries highlight the discoveries that took place over time.

Consider these reflections from a young man named Glen:

In the community, we’d go off from house to house, to Kenny’s, Harold’s. . . and their parents would be like our parents: “Yeah, get on, get on . . .” [They] wasn’t willing to listen. We had something to say! But it was foolish to the adult ears. Now your presence on the scene, as an adult, showed me that if you’re willing to spend time with us, and not run us off. . . willin’ to communicate with us, let us have our freedom? That was a big plus for us.

I mean, takin’ a chance, comin’ into the neighborhood? You was a straight stranger, Ted, even as a black man! I mean, when you hit 34th Avenue, and came down into the Black Hole. . . an adult, taking time for us? Something our parents wouldn’t do?

And the fact that you’d get us and take us out. . .  .

We knew what to look forward to when you brought us back. But the fact that you’d give us that time out. and everybody needs a time out. That’s what you brought to the table.

Glen was a “founding member” of Neighborhood Ministries. My work with Youth for Christ involved getting referrals from juvenile probation. One of those referrals was Kelly, Glen’s older brother. You may recall my mentioning Kelly before—he was the one who exercised his leadership potential by being the best thief on the block. “Hey, Ted, can I invite some friends to join us?” Kelly asked one day. Overnight a boys club was formed, and Glen was part of that fledgling group.

In those days I had two agendas. One was to do my job—to fulfill my responsibilities as a staff member of a Christian organization. But I also looked beyond the status quo, searching for more effective ways to reach urban youth. One of my first discoveries was that youth need a safe space—a place where they can be real without fear of retaliation or judgment.

I grew up in a neighborhood similar to Glen’s, but I was never a “street” kid. Like all urban youth, I learned to threat-assess, but beyond that I was not street-wise. Imagine my embarrassment when Glen shared how my naiveté had turned into something good:

There was a lot of kids we went to school with [there was bussing at the time] who lived on the other side of Colorado Boulevard. That was like a no-no for us; we roamed around the Cole neighborhood, but the other side of Colorado Boulevard—that was their territory.

So when you’d gather us up, and we’d travel ’cross Colorado Boulevard [beginning to laugh] we’d do this [ducking down]! We knew you didn’t know! [laughter]... Yeah, we’d “scooch” down!... What happened was, once they realized who we was... we [declared] a truce. When we saw each other in school, it was on then. But at club? There was something about your ministry that penetrated the minds of the youngsters—the children of the neighborhood—that made us want to “cease fire.”

Here I was, putting lives in danger, and did not know it! Yet something wonderful had happened. Rival youth had discovered a place not bound by gang or neighborhood codes of behavior. In club they could be themselves, ask any question, and discuss things they would not dare talk about anywhere else. That freedom was worth declaring a “cease fire.”

I did not know about the ministry-related truce at the time. I only sensed the freedom of the young people in our group. Club was a place filled with the free exchange of ideas. That established an openness that traveled both ways: eagerness to speak and willingness to listen. Club grew into an ideal setting in which to talk about the good news of God in Jesus Christ, and to address misconceptions regarding the Christian faith.

This was an important piece to motivating urban youth. It was a clue.

Then there was Jimmy. In response to his serious interest in Christian ministry, I brought him on staff. Soon he took charge of the middle and high school clubs. Here’s how he recalls that experience:

I remember [when] you handed things off to me. It was exciting, and it was scary, but it was exciting because, to me, it was a sign of trust; it was also a sign of growth, which, in the ’hood, there was very little of that. People didn’t trust who you are a lot, and people weren’t really willing to give you a chance to grow, because you had already been labeled. So, because of that, people usually wrote you off....

My time with Neighborhood... did not just prepare me for ministry; it prepared me for life. A lot of the lessons that were learned there.  the life examples that was modeled by many people. I look back on how much of life has been affected by the people we dealt with. I learned a lot of valuable lessons that helped me not only in my ministry life but in my personal life.

Through Jimmy, I began to connect expressions of personal desire with God’s design. Jimmy’s heartfelt desire was to work with kids. Where was that coming from, and how was I to respond? My role as his mentor gave me significant influence over the direction of his life. Had I ignored his desires, or taken advantage of his skills without concern for his future, he might have advanced through other means. But God had placed him into my care. What was I to do?

“Whoever is under a leader’s direction should be under his protection.”9 In matters of urban discipleship, a leader’s first responsibility is to his young emerging leaders and their growth and development. There was more to Jimmy than his “label.” Beneath his street savviness lay deeper aptitudes, the source of which was tied to creation—the work of God.

The psalmist says: “Take delight in the Lord, and he will give you the desires of your heart” (Psalm 37:4). Jimmy was delighting in the Lord. His desire to influence kids motivated him to serve and grow. This was another clue.

And then there was Raquel:

Neighborhood gave me a place to feel safe; it was the one place I could go to where I knew I’d be in a healthy environment, around healthy people. I think that Neighborhood allowed me to let down my guard, when I knew that I couldn’t do that just hanging out in the neighborhood, or even hanging out at home.    [Outside Neighborhood]

I was never comfortable being “Raquel”; you always had to be a tough person who is ready to fight for whatever, for whatever reason. I knew that I didn’t have to do that at Neighborhood. I felt safe. There were people around me willing to be patient and help me learn, and even patient through that process [of learning] with me....

Just hearing people say that you can do this, “I see it in you.” I mean it goes a long way I didn’t think those things about myself.... I’d always think of the kids who did work at Summer Program and think, “Oh, I don’t think I have the skill or the capacity or the personality or whatever it takes,” something like that.

But after being here, being around it for a while, after becoming a Christian and being more committed to my walk with Christ. . . that, in and of itself, was a huge transformation that happened within me.

We had known Raquel since she was seven years old. Her mother was one of the first members of the Mothers of Pre-Schoolers (MOPS) chapter Shelly had started years before. We had walked with her mom through the nightmare of a violent and dysfunctional marriage. The effects on Raquel were devastating. With her older brother engulfed in gang life, Raquel took on the role of surrogate mom to her younger siblings. During this time, she experienced the horrors of child abuse and a brutal stabbing. By the age of 16, she was a recluse—a school dropout who would not leave home except when accompanied by her mother.

At Shelly’s urging, Raquel took a job with Neighborhood Ministries as a receptionist. Over time, she branched out into other ministry areas. She coordinated children’s programs and assisted with middle and high school activities. At 19, as mentioned earlier, she directed the summer day camp and was instrumental in forming the Emerging Leaders Initiative, Neighborhood’s high school leadership program.

Raquel responded to safety and a nurturing environment. She experienced the freedom to be “Raquel.” She also drank in the opportunity to grow into her true self. The more at home she became with her identity (who God had made her to be), the stronger she grew.

Raquel completed her GED and finished college. Today she is a successful events planner for a major firm. Jimmy continues to work with kids in the Denver area, and Glen serves as a local pastor.

There are others with similar stories—young people who responded to the safe and nurturing environment Neighborhood Ministries provided. As we observed them growing and flourishing, we began to figure out where God was in the motivation question. “In the beginning . . .”—before youth were ignored or labeled or pressed by the code of the street—“. . . God created the heavens and the earth.”

What is the secret to motivating urban youth? Tapping into their divine imprint—the image of God.

God’s Creation

The historical narrative of Genesis 1-2 represents the beginning of the earliest accounts of salvation history; it provides insight into the nature of God and His creation in general, and the purpose of man as set apart from the rest of creation in particular. Key phrases inform our understanding of the text. The introductory verse (1:1) clearly introduces God as starting point: the central figure in history and the author of creation. What follows is a day-by-day accounting of God’s creative activity, with each day’s work being framed by the phrases “and God said” and “there was evening, and there was morning” (1:2-23). With each creative act, God sees, reasons, evaluates and measures (“And God saw that it was good” [vv. 10, 12, 18, 21, 25]).

On the sixth day, the language abruptly changes as the focus shifts to creating mankind (1:26). With all else, God simply declares; with man, He deliberates with Himself (“Let us make mankind in our image”). Man is set apart as a unique image-bearer and responsible caretaker for the rest of creation; they (man and woman) are blessed (endowed with favor) to fill and rule the earth (see 1:28). The remainder of the narrative segment (2:4b-22) provides a more detailed description of man’s creation. Mankind becomes God’s primary object; creation now serves as a setting in which God interacts with humanity. The theological center of the passage is Genesis 1:27—the declaration of man as image-bearer of God:

So God created mankind in his own image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.

For Job, sharing God’s image was a defining and motivational key to righteous interaction with others.

Whoever heard me spoke well of me, and those who saw me commended me, because I rescued the poor who cried for help, and the fatherless who had none to assist them. The one who was dying blessed me; I made the widow’s heart sing. I put on righteousness as my clothing; justice was my robe and my turban. I was eyes to the blind and feet to the lame. I was a father to the needy; I took up the case of the stranger. I broke the fangs of the wicked and snatched the victims from their teeth (Job 29:11-17).

If I have denied justice to any of my servants, whether male or female, when they had a grievance against me, what will I do when God confronts me? What will I answer when called to account? Did not he who made me in the womb make them? Did not the same one form us both within our mothers? (Job 31:13-15).

Marveling at God’s creation is a privilege Christian doctors, scientists and educators have enjoyed, as did the psalmist long ago:

For you created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother’s womb. I praise you because I am fearfully and wonderfully made; your works are wonderful, I know that full well. My frame was not hidden from you when I was made in the secret place, when I was woven together in the depths of the earth. Your eyes saw my unformed body (Psalm 139:13-16a).

At one time, Christians embraced “worm theology,” believing that self-abasement was necessary to receive divine mercy. A focus on the depravity of humanity and phrases like “but I am a worm and not a man” (Psalm 22:6) fed this perspective. It was reflected, so it was perceived, in Isaac Watts’s hymn, “Alas! And Did My Savior Bleed,” which asked the question, “Would He devote that sacred head for such a worm as I?”¹⁰

While worm theology no longer dominates the shaping of Christian identity and practice, neither—sadly—does the imago Dei. At a time when at-risk youth struggle to define themselves and to recognize their inherent value, Tom Skinner’s take on Psalm 139:13-16 should resound throughout the urban community: “You are the crowning achievement of God’s creation; there is no one in heaven or earth like you!”

The Image of God

What exactly is the image of God? The image of God distinguishes mankind from all other animals and manifests the family resemblance to our Creator and heavenly Father. While some may use the terms “image” and “likeness” to refer to different categories, they both emphasize and clarify this same central idea.

According to author and apologist Peter May, the image of God is seen in six distinctive characteristics of humanity:

• Creative. Mankind reflects the creative capacity of God. Human creativity is of a different order, as mankind lacks God’s power, intelligence and artistry. But mankind is capable of original and creative ideas.
• Intelligent. The mind of God that lies behind the creation is reflected, albeit in very small measure, in mankind’s capacity for understanding and rational thought. Man is capable, unlike the animals, of pondering the meaning of existence, the significance of actions and the prospects of destiny. As May notes: “The extraordinary Mind behind the Universe has given us minds to inquire, to reason and, as Kepler put it, ‘to think God’s thoughts after him.’”
• Aesthetic. God is not only a great artist who has fashioned a beautiful creation, but He has also given mankind the capacity to appreciate great beauty.
• Moral. While animals may suffer from fear, they have no natural sense of guilt or awareness of good and evil. Yet the human conscience is a major aspect of humanity. Paul’s description of the internal dilemma of battling good and evil (see Romans 7) is a distinctive human phenomenon. Mankind wrestles with moral choices.
• Relational. One has only to read novels or watch soap operas to realize that the dominant theme of human existence is relationships. Life, in a word, is about love. Mankind struggles to understand the source and meaning of love, which can only be found in God through Christ.
• Spiritual. Mankind is incurably religious.

The power of imagery is in what it reflects. Images may be hazy or clear, distorted or accurate, but whatever their attributes, they do not exist on their own. Beyond the image lies a reality—in this case the reality of God. As May notes, the image of God in mankind not only helps self-perception, but it also reveals God to us.¹¹

Much can be gleaned from the condensed yet excellent treatise on the image of God in an article by the biblical scholar Charles Lee Feinberg. Of all the relevant passages, Feinberg asserts, the Genesis account is key. Feinberg raises three questions: (1) Of what specifically does the image of God consist? (2) What effect did sin and the fall of man have on this image? (3) What effect does the redemptive work of Christ have on the image of God?

May’s observations address the first question. In Genesis 1:26, we find that man is the apex of all creation, possesses a special nature far superior to and never duplicated in lower animals, and is distinctive in his dominion over the rest of creation.

As to the second question, Feinberg notes that nowhere does the Bible indicate that divine image and likeness are lost due to sin. Man’s nature still reflects the work and creation of God (see Deut. 32:6; Isa. 45:11; 54:5; 64:8; Acts 17:25; Rev. 4:11; Job 10:8-12; Ps.

139:14-16). Fallen man is still man; while marred, corrupted and in an impaired state, mankind has not been shorn of its humanity. With regard to the third question, when the New Testament refers to the new creation, it speaks of the restoration of the image (see 1 Cor. 15:49, 2 Cor. 3:18). This is the central emphasis in Pau- line anthropology. Regeneration and sanctification renew the believer after the image of his or her Creator. God has predestined the redeemed to be conformed to the image of Christ (see Rom. 8:29).12 Of all the potential motivating drivers in life, arguably none is more powerful than to be who you were created to be, experiencing in your person the fullness of God’s creation. As disciples, we are being transformed to reflect God’s image more and more clearly. For those who are not yet disciples, the capacity to be creative, intelligent, aesthetic, moral, relational and spiritual, while marred by sin, still exists.

What is the responsibility of the church to young people during the formative years of life? A focus on adolescent and child capacities, under the guidance and care of mature Christian leadership, can help at-risk youth discover the source of their imagery. As they explore what it means to be created by God in His image, youth can begin to understand their significant part in the mega-story known as the kingdom of God.

Notes

1. C. F. D. Moule, Gospel of Mark, as cited in The Expositor’s Bible Commentary, ed. Frank E. Gaebelein and J. D. Douglas (Grand Rapids, MI: Zondervan, 1990). Electronic text hypertexted and prepared by OakTree Software, Inc.
2. A. R. Colón with P. A. Colón, A History of Children: A Socio-cultural Survey Across Millennia (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 2001), p. 91, quoted at http://www.pobronson.com/factbook/pages/198.html#579, accessed February 2010.
3. Jawanza Kunjufu, Countering the Conspiracy to Destroy Black Boys (Sauk Village, IL: Afri- can American Images, 1985).
4. Maria Montessori, The Absorbent Mind (New York: Henry Holt and Company, 1995), p. 4.
5. Ibid., p. 7.
6. Alfred Meidow, “Maria Montessori opens the first Casa dei Bambini (Children’s house),” in Daniel Schugurensky, ed., History of Education: Selected Moments of the 20th Century, http://schugurensky.faculty.asu.edu/moments/1907montessori.html, accessed July 2015.
7. Montessori, The Absorbent Mind, p. 92.
8. Scottie May, “Maria Montessori,” in Listing of Christian Educators, Talbot School of The- ology, Biola University, http://www.talbot.edu/ce20/educators/catholic/maria_mon- tessori/, accessed July 2015.
9. Fred Smith Sr., Leading with Integrity: Competence with Christian Character (Bloomington, MN: Bethany House Publishers, 1999), p. 171.
10. Isaac Watts, “Alas, And Did My Savior Bleed?” originally published in Hymns and Spiritual Songs, 1707-09, Book II, number 9.
11. Peter May, “What Is the Image of God?” http://www.bethinking.org/human-life/ what-is-the-image-of-god, accessed July 2015.
12. Charles L. Feinberg, The Image of God, Bibliotheca Sacra 129, Dallas Theological Seminary, 1972, pp. 235-246.

Questions for Thought

1. When you examine the youth you serve (or, for that matter, anyone else) through the grid of the divine imprint, what do you see?
2. What are some of the elements of Montessori’s work that contributed to a motivational environment?
3. Clues to motivating youth can be discovered by “reading” the behaviors and responses of the youth themselves. As you examine the youth in your ministry, what clues do you find?