Skip to main content

Why Little Children are Special

Why are little children special to Jesus? Not because of their innocence. Even quite small babies quickly learn to be very manipulative. They know just when to cry, when to smile, when to throw a tantrum, and how to go limp all over so that it becomes very difficult to lift them up and put them into a pushchair or sit them up to the table,

Nor are little children special because they are humble. Tiny children think they are the centre of the universe – that everything revolves around them and their wants. They expect to eat, sleep, be wakeful and be amused just when it suits them. Sensible and capable parents have to begin, quite early, to teach their children that other people are important, too, otherwise they become spoilt.

Nor are little children special because of their openness and trust. Children go through phases. Immediately after birth they are very trusting indeed and will happily go to anyone who is prepared to look after them and make the right soothing noises. But very soon they become extremely suspicious, especially of strangers, and will burst into tears or cower behind their mothers and fathers if forced to be with someone they don't know or don't like. It's only later, once they start talking and interacting more with other people, and learn to be a bit more independent of their immediate family, that they generally become more open and trusting again.

So if it's not these things which make little children special to Jesus, what is it that is so special about them that we are told to become like them? I think what made children special was that they were at the bottom of the pile in the world where Jesus lived. They had no rights, no privileges and often not much opportunity to have fun or simply be themselves. The kingdom of God belongs to those whom no one else thinks is important – the people whose opinions are not valued; the people who, like the children of bygone times, are expected to listen but who are never heard.

The crowds who flocked to see Jesus instinctively knew that he cares for children and brought them to him, but the disciples – despite all that they had seen and heard – still did not seem to understand this. They thought that children are an unnecessary distraction from what Jesus had come to do. Clearly, they were blind to the truth, but maybe we shouldn't be too critical of them because the truth is not always easy to see. [1]

A Buddhist proverb says that three things cannot long be hidden: the sun, the moon and the truth. But sadly that's not really the case. Problems can be so familiar, so ordinary and so routine, that they can go unrecognised for years.

This is how it was with child abuse. People have sometimes seen it as a modern issue, but actually it's an age-old issue which was simply overlooked, as proved by the hundreds – and perhaps thousands – of people who have come forward in recent years to say that they were abused as evacuees during the Second World War.

And this is how it was with bullying which, for as long as schools have existed, was just assumed to be part and parcel of normal school life. Despite the immense psychological harm which it inflicted on children, who often hated and feared school because of the bullies when they might otherwise have enjoyed it, teachers just seemed to shrug their shoulders and assume that there was nothing much that could be done about it. Or else they would pretend that bullying didn't exist in their school just because no one – or hardly anyone – ever owned up to being bullied. But now that bullying is more out in the open, it has rapidly become the single biggest reason why children phone Child Line for help and advice.

And this is how it has been ever since commercial television began broadcasting adverts which exploited children and their parents to sell toys, snacks, fast food, films, sugary breakfast cereals and drinks, and much else besides. As a result, children's health has been damaged, their hopes and dreams have been manipulated, and their pocket money – and their parents money – has been raided to make profits for big corporations.

And that's before we get to all the child soldiers, child refugees and child disaster victims from around the world. They continue to be the most vulnerable people, the people at the bottom of the pile, the people with whom we must identify if we want to enter the Kingdom of Heaven.

And it's not just children with whom we are asked to identify – but anyone who has been reduced to childlike vulnerability: asylum seekers, minority groups, people who are longterm unemployed, or who have lost their homes and possessions, their health, their pensions, or whatever. We are asked to identify with them because God identifies with them! In Jesus, born in a manger and crucified on a cross, he became one with them that they might enter the Kingdom of Heaven. And we must become one with them to if we want to be heirs of that same Kingdom.

This is something which the Church is called to do, but it's also something which we are called to do as individuals, if we would be followers of Jesus. We are called to imagine what it was like to be a little child, to see things from a little child's point of view, to pray for the weak and the vulnerable, to stand alongside them, to support them, to act to help them, just as God in Jesus acted to help us.

In the final analysis, we have to acknowledge that we are actually like little children as far as God is concerned. We all need to acknowledge our dependence on God. We all need to recognise our vulnerability to sin. We are all weak and in need of help. And that help is at hand. If we receive the Kingdom of God as a little child, Jesus will still lay his hands upon us and bless us – just as he blessed those children long ago.

[1] Mark 10.13-16

Comments

Anonymous said…
interesting explanation, it's better than the one i thought it meant anyway, namely the child putting its trust in an individual and relying on them for everything.

hope you post more, they are good

Popular posts from this blog

I don't believe in an interventionist God

Matthew 28.1-10, 1 Corinthians 15.1-11 I like Nick Cave’s song because of its audacious first line: ‘I don’t believe in an interventionist God’. What an unlikely way to begin a love song! He once explained that he wrote the song while sitting at the back of an Anglican church where he had gone with his wife Susie, who presumably does believe in an interventionist God - at least that’s what the song says. Actually Cave has always been very interested in religion. Sometimes he calls himself a Christian, sometimes he doesn’t, depending on how the mood takes him. He once said, ‘I believe in God in spite of religion, not because of it.’ But his lyrics often include religious themes and he has also said that any true love song is a song for God. So maybe it’s no coincidence that he began this song in such an unlikely way, although he says the inspiration came to him during the sermon. The vicar was droning on about something when the first line of the song just popped into his head. I suspect …

True Love

Mark 12:28-34 In 1981 Prince Charles was put on the spot during a television interview with Lady Diana Spencer, his new fiancee. The interviewer asked them if they were in love. Lady Diana’s instant response was , ‘Of course!,’ but Prince Charles replied, ‘Whatever “in love” means.’ Now in case you think Prince Charles is just a bit of a cold fish, on National Poetry Day 2015 he read a poem on Radio 4, ‘My love is like a red, red rose’ by Robbie Burns. I thought, ‘This is going to be a bit wooden,’ but I was wrong. He read the poem so movingly that Clarence House has made it available on YouTube and Twitter. Listening to him it was impossible to escape the conclusion that he now knows what being “in love” means. O my Love is like a red, red rose, That's newly sprung in June: O my Love is like the melody, That's sweetly played in tune. As fair art thou, my bonnie lass, So deep in love am I; And I will love thee still, my dear, Till a' the seas gang dry. But what does being “in …

Why are good people tempted to do wrong?

Deuteronomy 30.15-20, Psalm 119.1-8, 1 Corinthians 3.1-4, Matthew 5.21-37 Why are good people tempted to do wrong? Sometimes we just fall from the straight and narrow and do mean, selfish or spiteful things. But sometimes we convince ourselves that we’re still good people even though we’re doing something wrong. We tell ourselves that there are some people whose motives are totally wicked or self-regarding: criminals, liars, cheats, two-timers, fraudsters, and so on, but we are not that kind of person. We’re basically good people who just indulge in an occasional misdemeanour. So, for example, there’s Noble Cause Corruption, a phrase first coined apparently in 1992 to explain why police officers, judges, politicians, managers, teachers, social workers and so on sometimes get sucked into justifying actions which are really totally wrong, but on the grounds that they are doing them for a very good reason. A famous instance of noble cause corruption is the statement, by the late Lord Denni…