Pictures: “Ladder of Divine Ascent - Orthodox Icon 1150”
“The Return of the Prodigal Son - Rembrandt 1669”
Passage: Genesis 27
The most interesting aspect of this week’s lesson was not what we talked about but who was there. Kaitlyn was in the service today but as usual she did not seem inclined to attend Sunday school. After the service I asked her directly if she would join us, reminding her that we had a new format which she might enjoy more than last year. This didn’t seem to be doing it for her. When I got down to the classroom however, Obi and Charlie asked about Kaitlyn and expressed a hope that she would come down. “Ok,” I said, “go get her. Go together so it won’t be awkward.” They sped off to find her while Fern and I waited. They returned and said that she had found work to do but would be down when she finished. With that we began our VTS discussion. After our first round, however, I asked if we should try again. I ended up going to find her while the boys looked at the second painting. I found her sitting at a table with her mother. She told me she would be coming in “a second” so I waited for her (it was not a literal second), and brought her to class where she was welcomed cheerfully. Kaitlyn seemed to enjoy the class and I think being desired and sought out by us was encouraging for her.
The first piece was analyzed by Obi and Charlie who quickly identified holy people climbing a ladder (they justified this by examining their postures and the movement implied by their feet stepping forwards). They also identified the other figures as demons. “What makes you say demons?” I asked. “Because they're black,” said Charlie instantly adding “just kidding” and then explaining the presence of horns, their stylized inhuman shape, their weapons, and the like. We did not discuss the joke but there was a lot of truth in the comment and it would have been worth discussing in more detail if there weren't so many other things to look at. The fact that these creatures were literally black and did not seem to be referencing Africans leaves depictions like these up for debate. Was this art racially motivated? Was Charlie’s comment? I’ve heard arguments about the devil as “the Black Man” go both ways - it was not a discussion we had today. Obi did, however, comment that the holy men in the corner had afros (we had to stop and figure out if he meant their hair or their halos by this).
Charlie noted the humans below the ladder and fell into his old habit of gestures and dialogue. “They’re going - bruh,” he said, while directing his hands outward while keeping his elbows tucked in. “They’re showing resentment? Disbelief? Frustration?” None of my summaries got to the heart of what he meant by “bruh” and I knew it.
They noted the man at the top of the ladder who appeared to be welcoming the holy men and looked like Jesus “because he’s got the white clothes with the colored sash, and his face looks like how people think of him.” They also explored the fancy clothes of the first two men near the top of the ladder. Then Obi noted something really neat I had not noticed in my countless times seeing this painting. At the bottom of the picture was a bluish human face that seemed to be eating one of the humans whole. It was unmistakable, with an eye and nose (Charlie compared it to Bob from Monsters vs Aliens, a blue blob with one eye who swallows people whole). We then discussed the way the demons were pulling people off the ladder. This led to a story which the boys came up with that ended up being pretty spot on. The holy men were climbing the ladder and the demons were shooting arrows at them and pulling them off. The creature below would eat them and the men below (who said bruh), were within this creature, under the water. Again, it was interesting to note that they had pretty fully interpreted the literal events depicted in the piece. Never once did they ponder any metaphorical interpretation of the scene. What did the ladder represent, the face, the stomach. The discussion ended with a look at either a wizard’s hat or a bird that was above the people below.
Kaitlyn jumped right in and made observations about the second picture along with Obi and Charlie. It felt, however, like something had changed in the style of observations that were being made. Charlie began with “I see… six people.” Six?! “Yeah, in the background there are two lurky people in the shadows. There’s a man with a shoe missing. There’s a man with a walking stick, maybe he’s old and decrepit and needs it…” These thoughts were all made in rapid fire succession and it made summarizing or asking about them hard. “Charlie’s noticing six figures, one has a walking stick and maybe needs it to walk. What makes them seem lurky?” “The way they’re both leaning.” Their observations occurred while I had gone to get Kaitlyn so I suppose he must have accumulated several observations to share. Obi suggested that they were “in a place” because the floor was not grassy or dirt. He also noted a pillar behind them. I find it interesting the way they have begun to anticipate my second question and include justification in their initial answer.
Kaitlyn said that the man in the middle was wearing a pirate hat. I asked what made her think: pirate hat. “Because it’s a pirate hat!” answered Kaitlyn definitely. “What about it let’s you know it’s a pirate hat?” “Because it’s fancy and has three points.”
They all participated in poolining observations about the figure in the foreground, that he was poor - missing shoes, bald, ragged clothes, etc. I summarized this and said he seemed poor to which Kaitlyn interjected “don’t judge a book by its cover.” The statement took me aback because her point, that we shouldn’t assume someone is poor just by looking at them, is not completely off base. Finally I asked, “Is there anything about this person that makes it seem like he might not be poor?” Kaitlyn shrugged, “No.” “Maybe he’s picking the old guy’s pocket?” quipped Obi. “Ok,” I said, “then at the very least, we can say that the artist wants us to think that this man is poor.” Charlie then noted that two of the men were wearing red cloaks that seemed to connect them somehow. Then the conversation seemed to lull.
Then, for the first time in a long time I broke away from pure VTS to prod the conversation onwards. “What’s going on in the picture? Can you connect what you’re observing to explain what the story’s about?” Charlie took up the challenge and I wished I had kept my mouth shut - it was too much. His story: The poor man had stolen from the rich man but was caught. The rich men were gathered together to discuss how to punish the poor man but he confessed and the man on the left forgave him. But it was a trick, the pirate man and the lurky people were planning to kill him. This is a bad summary, but this was the gist and it hinged on a lot that Charlie had not gotten from observation - which he admitted. “What makes you think that they’re going to kill the poor man?” “Nothing, I just said that.” I decided to focus in on this idea of forgiveness, mostly because the Prodigal Son story which the painting depicts centers on this.
“What makes you say that he’s showing the poor guy forgiveness?” I asked. Charlie answered with a gesture imitating the man in the painting, “Because he’s going like this.” I tried to coax him into using more words before finally explaining, “I have to summarize this later, can you try to use your words?” His response was better but didn’t add much that the gesticulation hadn’t expressed, “He’s kinda hugging the guy and his face seems kind…” Here the conversation petered out after Obi and Kaitlyn took one final look at the man’s missing shoe and suggested that there might be a hidden Nike logo on the sandal. There were far fewer jokes today.
Our BMS discussion did not go as well as I had hoped after getting so excited about it and explaining it to everyone on Tuesday. I think it still has potential but when the kids know they are looking for a single word it keeps us from looking at the big picture (the inverse of how looking at the big picture omits little details). After reading about Jacob and Esau the kids noted “trembled uncontrollably” “blessing” and “kill.” Each of these could have been discussed but everyone was eager to share their word and I chose to note each one and then go back to talk about them. I think this was a mistake. Obi stated that the blessing in the story seemed “unbelievable.” He seemed to be noting the authority with which Isaac, the patriarch, blessed his sons. Why should it matter what he says will happen? Can he really control their futures? Most of these questions were implied. Charlie wanted to focus on “uncontrollably,” but I struggled to see much significance to this apart from the trembling. Kaitlyn was shocked that Esau wanted to kill his brother. Other words that were noted were: into the wilderness, and stole. At this point I realized that I needed to explain my intentions rather than expecting them to reveal themselves. I explained that the Bible connects to itself and asked where each of these words connected to stories we had already looked at. The obvious one was last week’s story of Cain and Abel, in which another jealous brother murders the other. We also discussed the Fall in which Adam and Eve are sent “into the wilderness” because they “stole” a “blessing.”
My favorite connection was Charlie’s. I asked him to address Obi’s question. Why did Isaac have the authority to give a blessing? He recalled Abraham who was given a blessing by God and suggested that Abraham passed this blessing onto Isaac. Isaac was then able to give it to his son. I affirmed this and then pondered aloud the fact that God chose Abraham. Then, God chose Isaac in spite of Abraham desiring the blessing to go to Ishmael. Here, Jacob got the blessing that Isaac wanted to give to Esau. There seems to be a consistent pattern in the father’s not getting to choose where their blessing goes.
Still, the conversation was not very vibrant. Everybody seemed unsure of what they were supposed to be saying. I think I was making it clear that I was looking for a specific type of answer and was not quite finding it. I decided to explain a little more about the “hyperlinked Bible” and prep them for where I wanted to take this in upcoming weeks. I realized that unlike VTS, kids doing BMS would need to be in on the practice to get the most out of it. I shared with them the rainbow hyperlink chart. We examined it and interpreted what the different pieces of it represented. The cooler part was when Kaitlyn mentioned Christians in Africa and I said “Did you know most Christians live in Africa?” This was great because it led to a bonus round of VTS and one of the most rewarding.
I pulled out the population of Christian’s chart (which I referenced for my research) and we just looked at it. Details I hadn’t noticed jumped out as everyone took turns making observations. The fact that almost every country in Oceania except Australia was in the darkest group (highest number of Christians). Mexico was also dark, along with most of South America. Even Islamic countries like Saudi Arabia were blue (and therefore had some Christians). Heck, even North Korea was light blue (with something like 1% of the population being Christian). We discussed the fact that Christianity is no longer a “white-man’s religion” but pondered the link between colonialism and Christianity. “Yeah, but it isn’t forced on anyone anymore, it’s there own,” noted Charlie. Poland was dark too, darker than most of the rest of Europe. We talked about the role persecution has on growing the church. I shared what I knew about Christianity in China. The fastest growing church in Christianity’s history, now slowing because the government has made their own sanctioned version and is no longer openly persecuting. More than anything, this conversation made me feel that the VTS has been worthwhile. They were empowered to look at an image and interpret it, sharing their observations and making inferences.