Socio-cultural Perspectives on Children's Spirituality

Much of the research on children’s spirituality is more individualistic than sociocultural, drawing mostly on psychology and emphasizing children’s individual, inner worlds. Most research has been conducted by “Western” scholars, though work from other cultures and traditions and feminist and postmodernist theory has helped to ensure that research takes more account of sociocultural considerations. Approaches based on sociology and anthropology have brought different, valuable perspectives. While this bibliography tries to identify sociocultural research, the boundary is not always clear-cut. Despite numerous attempts to define spirituality, especially in relation to children, its meaning remains contested, fluid, and often paradoxical. These difficulties are exacerbated by the language used, often presupposing a particular view or slipping between different meanings. Since spirituality has its roots in “spirit,” some literature emphasizes what is “non-material,” though others challenge this. While spirituality has traditionally been seen as tethered exclusively to religion, this has changed recently, especially in terms of children. Greater social and cultural diversity, secularization, and the decline of religious affiliation in many industrialized countries has led to a growing interest in inclusive approaches and a view of spirituality as universal. However, there is usually a recognition that how spirituality is manifested varies depending both on the child and his or her background, culture, and environment. Children’s spirituality is frequently linked to morality, beliefs, and values—and to well-being, rights, agency, and “voice.” Within education, “spiritual” is often seen as referring to a dimension other than the academic and cognitive, but most research argues against binaries and for a more holistic approach. There is some consensus that children’s spirituality should be seen as a process, rather than something reified or fixed. Using a variety of metaphors—such as health, development, growth, and journey—helps to describe aspects of what this process entails. The looseness of definition means that writing related to children’s spirituality sometimes crosses disciplinary boundaries in intriguing ways. Much of the research cited does not fit neatly into one section. Several edited books referred to contain a range of chapters, only some of which refer to children’s spirituality. While the International Journal of Children’s Spirituality contains much more than can be cited here, researchers interested in children’s spirituality from a sociocultural perspective need to be cautious about some published work of questionable quality and look beyond the literature explicitly about spirituality, drawing on a range of different disciplines and journals.