Arm in Arm with Adolescent Girls: Educating into the New Creation

Abstract

Emily Peck-McClain offers an ethnographic study of the relationship between Christian teenage girls and several personal and social issues such as body image, sexism, and racism. She then offers a liberation-centric interpretation of the middle section of Paul’s Letter to the Romans (chapters 6–8) as a theological foundation for ministry among this demographic. Peck-McClain argues that girls think complexly about their social and theological locations, but that their thoughts and questions are often silenced in churches because of a prevailing theological paradigm focusing on personal sin, repentance, and righteousness. Against this paradigm, Peck-McClain argues that in Romans 6–8, Paul interprets sin and grace as opposing principles struggling against one another in human lives and societies, rather than as the products of correct or incorrect choices. Interpreting sin and grace as external forces in the world liberates girls from understanding their bodies and choices as the sources of sin, takes the pressure of “being good” off their shoulders, and instead allows them to hope for the ultimate victory of grace over sin and the coming of the new creation. Arm in Arm with Adolescent Girls is a case study in bringing theology to bear on curriculum development and the practice of ministry to young people. The greatest strength of Peck-McClain’s work is her integration of this theoretical framework with ethnographic research, showing that solid theological foundations for youth ministry are necessary because unconsidered theologies will not be capable of answering the complexity of teenage questions and struggles. Teenage girls engage critically and reflexively with issues of faith, morality, body image, sexism, racism, sexuality, and media pressure. Peck-McClain finds a theology capable of meeting these challenges in Paul’s description of a cosmic struggle between sin and grace. In this respect, liberation theology is another important context for Peck-McClain’s work, but her citations reflect a less robust engagement with the theoretical foundations of liberation theology than with contemporary theories of youth ministry. Peck-McClain’s arguments rest on an interpretation of Romans 6-8. She argues against a caricature of Paul which one-sidedly emphasizes personal responsibility for sin and righteousness and advocates for “body/mind dualism” and “self-hatred.” Since dualism and selfhatred are surely realities in many pews, pulpits, and youth groups, Peck-McClain’s appeal for a healthy theology of the body is pastorally wise. However, her argument could reflect fuller engagement with the lively contemporary debate about the meaning of the word “righteousness” in the Pauline epistles, since Peck-McClain’s main exegetical point is that “sin” and “righteousness” have been incorrectly defined by the traditional Protestant soteriology and morality. Peck-McClain does not appeal to the New Perspective on Paul as a source for her critique of “righteousness,” as she could have. She risks unnecessarily losing the goodwill of scholars and other readers who remain committed to a personal concept of sin and righteousness by dismissing their view too quickly, without giving the issue the theoretical treatment it deserves. Nevertheless, Peck-McClain’s interpretation of Romans speaks