Is Child Liberation Theology Mostly Intellectual?

In a recent PhD dissertation, retired pediatrician and professor of child health Peter D. Sidebotham explored the topic of Christian “child-attentive theologies.” Child-attentive is Sidebotham’s proposed label for theologies that seek to elevate or empower children in theological discourse and community action and practice. Sidebotham included several child-related theologies under this umbrella, including theologies of childhood, child theology, and child liberation theology. He also provided provocative analysis and criticism of each theology type. 

As I am a child liberation theologian, I was particularly interested in Sidebotham’s analysis and criticism of child liberation theology. I really appreciated what he wrote, even when his thoughts were critical. I was also fascinated by Sidebotham’s suggestion that we should consider how children are portrayed in child protection policies—a potent and revelatory exercise. All too often, child protection policies present children as vulnerable, powerless victims, instead of human beings with agency and rights.

One of Sidebotham’s criticisms of child liberation theology stood out to me, though. He argued that child liberation theology is “a primarily intellectual exercise, rather than being rooted in practical action.” While Sidebotham did not give any reasons for why he made this criticism, I found it striking because any theology that remains primarily an intellectual exercise stands in direct opposition to the principles underlying not only liberation theology in general, but child liberation theology specifically. One of the driving forces behind creating liberation theology was to provide a counterweight to how traditional theology focuses so much on beliefs and so little on actions. Liberation theologians developed the concept of “orthopraxis” for this very reason: to ensure orthodoxy isn’t seen as the final destination of the Christian faith. Rather, as James 2:20 declares, “Faith without deeds is useless.” In similar fashion, child liberation theology says adults must not just think about children in nicer ways. Adults need to proactively protect and empower children as well. Protecting and empowering children is what this theology is all about.

I have argued on multiple occasions that, if child liberation theology is only intellectual to its advocates and adherents, then it is an idol and a false gospel. Of course, that has no bearing on whether child liberation theology is only intellectual. But I am not convinced that it is. All the evidence I have seen points to a different reality. 

While child liberation theology is currently a small field, it is deeply grounded in practical action. Here are a few examples: Rebecca Stevens-Walter has been putting her ideas of intergenerational worship in faith communities to practice for years. She is also a parent. Craig L. Neesan, while an academic, has put his intellectual advocacy for children into concrete action, partnering with Zero Abuse Project’s Victor Vieth to develop child protection training programs for seminaries and writing guides like Here We Stand: A Lutheran Response to Child Abuse for faith communities on child protection. He is also a pastor. Carie Moore simultaneously studied for her master’s degree and wrote her thesis—a Franciscan take on child liberation theology—while parenting her young children, as she “studied and applied what I was learning to what I was experiencing.”  And while I myself am neither a parent nor a pastor, my own advocacy for child liberation theology is deeply informed and inspired by my years of advocacy work for homeschooled children and my experience with educating homeschool groups and faith communities about child protection.

I don’t think this is primarily intellectual for any of us, honestly. Child liberation theology is, instead, something we think is desperately needed in our world today in the most concrete of senses. In fact, we want concrete change for the betterment of children so desperately that we would give up child liberation theology in a heartbeat if it ceased helping, or started harming, children.

As I told Abram Kielsmeier-Jones when he interviewed me for Currents Journal last year, “Children, right now, are being abused and killed because of the choices adults are making. If the child liberation theology I am promoting does not help address this problem, it’s not worth my energy or time.”