We need a gracious revolution in our thinking about world missions. We are not likely to be effective in the next century by merely becoming more efficient within the old paradigms. Mission boards, churches, training schools, and mobilizing organizations need a new paradigm to guide their agenda. As I describe three common mission paradigms—Factory, Wildflower, and Pilgrim, each of which have influenced me at different times—I admit that, for the sake of clarity, I may be presenting extremes. In any case, I believe we must leave the first two paradigms behind and move on to become pilgrims in mission.
The Factory
The dominant assumptions underlying some contemporary missions are rooted in what I call the factory paradigm. The industrial revolution gave us this paradigm. The factory metaphor places a high value on precision, quantitative goals, predictability, efficiency, and control. It moves planners to set goals that can be easily measured. They want to know exactly what the final result will look like, when it will be accomplished, and how much it will cost.
Such a mind-set within the Christian community affects the way we look at the task,
strategies, leadership, and evaluation of mission. When we aim only at what can be measured,
we ignore the more important goals of character, discipleship, and holiness, which we cannot predict or quantify without falling into legalism. Factory thinking forces us to aim for goals that can be accomplished in a specific time frame. It inhibits vision for the qualitative development of people, of the church, and of society.
Fortunately, most factory-minded missiologists also have a genuine love for the Lord and a deep passion for the church, which produces qualities of character in people despite the inadequate aspects of the paradigm. But while the factory model has been helpful in defining the task, far too often lukewarm churches are the result of the assembly-line mind-set.
The Wildflower
In reaction to the factory model, the wildflower metaphor, a more intuitive paradigm, has gained strength. This model emphasizes personal experience, emotions, spiritual warfare, and inner healing. While the paradigm may provide a corrective to the factory model, I question the extent of its integration with biblical teaching, and I fear it may blindly build on contributions from existentialism and Freudianism. Wildflower missionaries often prefer a “go-with-the-flow” approach to missions; they are so embedded in the existential present that they have little time for future planning, or they may assume such thinking is unspiritual. If factory-oriented missionaries have their day planned in fifteen-minute intervals, wildflower missionaries seem to be blissfully unmindful of the calendar. One manages by objectives, the other by interruption. Wildflower missionaries have many strengths and bring spiritual vigor to missions because their flexibility and people orientation enhance their ministry. The danger is that they may lose the foundation of biblical Christianity, become inward looking and lack strategic planning for world outreach.
The Pilgrim
A better mental image is that of pilgrimage. Pilgrims have a visionary goal and a sense of direction, but they realize that the path often leads through rugged mountains and foggy swamps, bringing unexpected joys and sorrows. Pilgrims travel together, helping each other follow the map of the Word of God. Because pilgrims have a sense of direction, they are better able to decide if an event is an unfolding opportunity or a sidetrack interruption. Missionary pilgrims are not surprised by difficulty and ambiguity. They are motivated in their service by a vision of the kingdom.
><> ><> ><> ><> ><>
An Agenda for Revolution
We in missions need a gracious revolution as much as any mission, a revolution based on the pilgrim paradigm. Our direction can be outlined in the following twelve-point agenda.
1. Vision
The pilgrim missionary is driven by a vision of what God can do for people, for the church, and for society. Pilgrims invite lost people to join them on the road to Christ, involve them in a community of believers, and help them to become all God intends them to be. They challenge them to follow the map of the Word and to become lifelong obedient students of Jesus.
For the last ten years we have been conducting vision seminars in its candidate classes, leadership development courses, and field conferences. We also conduct regional vision consultations for missionaries and church leaders in South America, West Africa, East Africa, and Asia. When field directors report to the International Council (which meets every three years), they talk about their vision and the indications they see that the Lord is fulfilling that vision.
In all our efforts, while we encourage after-the-fact numbers to describe results, we focus on inner qualities that describe pilgrims marching toward a vision of the future. We ask, What difference does our ministry make in the lives of people, in society, and in the church? As we become ever more efficient and technologically competent at doing secondary things, I fear we might lose our vision for the work of Christ’s kingdom. Instead of church growth in mere numbers, we need a vision for a glorious church, without spot or wrinkle or any other blemish, holy and without fault. Instead of completing a precise task by a specific date, pilgrim missionaries have a dream of what people might look like if they enrolled as students in the lifelong school of discipleship and more consistently evidenced the fruit of the Spirit.
2. Strategy
It is not enough to have a vision. Strategic plans—action steps—are necessary. In a world of constant change and uncertainty, vision provides a foundation for pilgrim missionaries who dream of creative, innovative, and even audacious strategies. When missionaries unwittingly work from a factory paradigm, they are tempted to aim at programs or methods rather than eternal results. For example, the vision for a theological school should be more than to double the size of the library or build a new chapel. Vision foresees Christ-like qualities in students and the influence they will have on the church and society.
In each vision seminar during the last five years, we have discussed and planned action steps. A pastor’s library project, which provided about 20,000 small theological libraries and training sessions for pastors in Nigeria and South America, grew out of a vision for powerful preaching by better-equipped pastors. Out of a vision for the majestic Andes mountains ringing with the praises of redeemed Quechua grew a radio ministry for that people group. Out of a vision to reach upper-middle-class people of Lima, Peru, grew a Christian TV station. Out of a vision to reach Muslim beggar boys grew a friendship and feeding program.
3. Leadership
All pilgrims are called to be both leaders and followers in the body of Christ. The doctrines of the priesthood of all believers and of spiritual gifts mean that each pilgrim is responsible to lead by taking initiative to help others in the body of Christ. Since no person has all the gifts needed for the pilgrim band, there are times when all pilgrims need to follow other spiritually gifted pilgrims. There is often a need for a person to coordinate the gifts of other pilgrims. A coordinator does not take the place of Christ, the true Head, but has special abilities to maximize the effectiveness of other pilgrims. The most appropriate style for the pilgrim coordinator is team leadership. The pilgrim coordinator needs to be proactive, pushing the process of visionary thinking and action, while trusting the insights of others.
The primary focus of factory leaders is simply to use the person to accomplish the task. Task-oriented leaders tend to use a controlling style that stifles the development of people. Wildflower leaders seek to develop the person but often ignore the task. In contrast, the primary focus of pilgrim leaders is to use the task of world missions to develop other pilgrims.
4. Evaluation
Pilgrims use evaluation not to place blame for past failures or for boasting but rather to help colleagues do a better job next time. Many times the results of ministry are serendipitous—wonderful and unexpected. Thousands of people in a resistant people group decide to follow Christ. Revival breaks out in a Bible college. A women’s fellowship group in Africa catches the vision for supporting their own missionaries to a neighboring country. Evaluation in these cases is not to transfer to humans the credit that belongs to God alone but rather to rejoice in what God has done. Similarly, when results are discouraging, the purpose of evaluation is to figure out what might be done to improve the situation the next time, not to assign blame for failure.
SIM is in the process of changing ministry evaluation forms to focus on three questions: What was your situation? What was your vision? and What did you do to get there? We ask about indicators of results in the hearts of people and look for ways to improve the strategy in the coming months. Under the wildflower paradigm, evaluation tends to focus on how people feel about themselves; attention is concentrated on interpersonal relationships. Evaluation under the factory paradigm, in contrast, is often threatening because it measures specific outcomes in comparison to predetermined goals.
5. Evangelism
John Bunyan’s Pilgrim’s Progress illustrates that evangelism is a necessary—indeed urgent— step in helping pilgrims flee the City of Destruction, enter the gate of salvation, and leave their burden of sin at the cross of Christ. Although the global Christian community has grown rapidly over the last century, due to population growth, there are today more people outside the gate than ever before. As a result, evangelism is needed as never before. Evangelicals working from all three paradigms place a strong emphasis on evangelism. While factory-oriented missiologists have been somewhat mechanical in their approach, they have provided a most valuable service in pinpointing areas of need and drawing attention to unreached peoples. Missiologists working under the wildflower paradigm have helped to emphasize the joy of the Lord for new believers and have encouraged greater creativity in expressions of worship. SIM acknowledges its debt to these streams of mission influence and seeks to be faithful as pilgrims in evangelism.
Along with our related national churches, SIM regularly asks if there are unreached people groups in our areas of responsibility. A high percentage of our missionaries are working with unreached people groups, and we have recently entered some of the most needy areas of the world.
6. Discipleship and Church Growth
When Bunyan’s hero, Christian, flees the City of Destruction, enters the gate of salvation, and leaves his burden of sin at the cross, he is just beginning the next stage of the journey. Evangelism is a most necessary and crucial step, but it is not sufficient. The most urgent need in world missions is the task of helping pilgrims become disciples, learning to obey everything Jesus commanded. There may be as many as 1 billion lukewarm, nominal Christians in the world today. Transformed by Christ, these pilgrims could evangelize their world and flood the earth with justice. Rwanda, Congo, Liberia, Colombia, China, and the United States would become models of justice and peace. Racism, ethnocentrism, and poverty would end as people began to evidence the fruit of the Spirit in their communities.
Growth in grace and in the knowledge of Jesus is an inner, qualitative process that is difficult to predict, control, and measure. It does not fit the factory paradigm. But world evangelization by itself is not the fulfillment of Christ’s Commission. Christ commands us to make disciples who will obey everything he commanded. This is a lifelong process, not a precise task that can be finished by the year 2000 or any time before Christ returns. Church growth as defined by logarithmic graphs and ten-year projections has never been a New Testament ideal for a church.
7. Theological Education
Visionary theological educators see teaching as an opportunity for fellow pilgrims to spend time in what Bunyan called Interpreter’s House. Solid biblical content is taught to help pilgrims find the right path, discover resources to win spiritual battles, and catch the vision of the ultimate goal. Teaching Bible content is a means, not an end. The implicit curriculum for the pilgrim educator is the development of a caring community of disciples learning to obey all Jesus commanded. Wildflower educators often downplay the need for formal education or emphasize personal experience over theological reflection and biblical interpretation. Factory-oriented educators preoccupy themselves with behavioral objectives, test scores, and outward compliance with course requirements.
There are about 18,000 students in our related theological schools or extension programs. A high percentage of our missionaries are involved in pastoral education. We also have worked in a low-profile manner to help promote renewal in theological education. We have encouraged international accrediting in Africa and South America, promoted Theological Education by Extension, and helped to publish the writings of theologians from the Two-Thirds World. We have led seminars for theological educators from dozens of countries, urging a quiet revolution in theological education. But I am afraid that the factory paradigm is still common in our related theological education.
8. Meeting Human Need
Pilgrims are concerned about poverty, sickness, injustice, and hopelessness; the Holy Spirit helps them respond with love and practical action. Both factory- and wildflower-oriented missionaries also have a heart for helping people in need. The factory paradigm, however, tends to see the task in terms of doing things for people, like giving them pills, fertilizer, roads, and wells. It tends to measure results in terms of economic indicators, the number of schools, and so on. Wildflower-oriented ministries tend to give aid based on the emotions of the moment rather than on the long-range development of people in need. But all real development is human development—development that leads people to become all God intended for them.
Even though we can cite many failed efforts from our past, we hope we have been
learning from our mistakes. We support programs that involve people in their own development, such as People Oriented Development in Nigeria and the Niger Integrated Development team, and helping churches minister to the poorest of the poor, for example, in Guayaquil, Ecuador. It is most fulfilling to see the churches we helped to plant catch the vision for meeting human need through their own development projects.
9. Mission and National Church Relationships
Pilgrim missionaries have the task of planting and nurturing churches in other cultures, while
avoiding the temptation of trying to run them. Missionaries need to get out of leadership positions in national churches as soon as possible. Growing churches need to be self-supporting, self-governing, self-propagating, and self-nurturing. At the same time, however, we must confess that an “independent” church is an oxymoron. How can members of the universal body of Christ in one country be independent of the rest of the body? The ideal relationship is one in which the national church and the foreign mission work together in a loving, trusting, and interdependent relationship, each fulfilling complementary functions, neither dominating the other.
Missions working from a factory paradigm seldom see a loving, interdependent relationship as the goal. They are primarily interested in evangelism and precise time-specific targets. For example, they may say that when 20 percent of a people group have become Christians, then 95 percent of the missionaries need to be moved to a new field. Such a strategy may avoid some tensions of church-mission relationships, but it also misses the joy of cross-cultural discipleship and the excitement of partnering together to reach the rest of the world.
We at times has had problems with national church relationships. Sometimes we have held control too long and hindered the development of the national church. But there also have been times when we lost our identity as a cross-cultural mission and fused with the local church. This has meant losing our distinct function as a cross-cultural mission. Through channels such as Evangel Fellowship, which every two years brings together leaders from our related fields, we are endeavoring to develop healthy interdependent relationships.
10.Mission Church Relationships
The home-based sending churches and mission boards have an interdependent relationship. Each needs the other. It is not healthy for a sending church merely to send the missionary and the monthly support and not be involved in the care, encouragement, and prayer for that missionary. Likewise, it is difficult, inefficient, and usually ineffective for local churches to send isolated missionaries around the world. Mission boards provide not only logistic and spiritual support but also structures for field-based visionary planning and for accountability. For individual churches to send missionaries around the world would be like local towns sending their own soldiers into war and having the soldiers report back to the mayor of their home town rather than to the officer in the field. Such a plan not only would be more expensive, it would create chaos in the battle. Sending churches and mission boards are mutually dependent on each other.
Churches and mission boards with a factory paradigm have a more difficult time with an interdependent relationship. Factory-oriented mission boards have a passion for control and may feel threatened by local churches wanting to take more initiative. Factory-oriented church mission committees may feel threatened by the mission board and resent the fact that they use so much money for administration and don’t consult them for every strategic move on the field. The pilgrim paradigm is driven by vision and has a higher tolerance for the more ambiguous relationship of interdependence.
We are learning how to listen to sending churches. While the missionary is the primary
contact with supporting churches, we can learn much from listening to highly motivated mission pastors and committees. In the past two years, leaders have hosted significant meetings with missions pastors and laypeople from major missionary-supporting churches in five key cities. The purpose is not to indoctrinate them about our mission but to listen to their vision and problems and ask if there are things we can do to help them. Several major initiatives have resulted from these meetings.
11. Partnering with National Church Missions
A primary reason why a mission needs to continue a noncontrolling, interdependent discipling relationship with national churches is so we can partner together to reach places neither could reach on their own. The Gospel will be preached in all the world with much more power and credibility if it can be preached by Bolivians together with Australians and Nigerians. It is difficult for a Muslim to say that Christianity is a Western religion when he is hearing the Gospel from a team made up of missionaries from Japan, Canada, and Ethiopia. An ideal is for Christians from any country to be able to share the Gospel together in any other country.
The factory paradigm places a high value on efficiency and getting the most results for the least amount of money. Advertisements in major magazines like Christianity Today challenge churches to simply send their money to support national evangelists because it is cheaper or more efficient. While there may be situations where churches in more-developed countries should send money to support national evangelists, the process is loaded with danger. Seldom does the national church feel the responsibility to pick up the support of the evangelist when foreign funding is eventually cut off. Often the local evangelist does not feel accountable to the local church. Moreover, sending churches in the West do not get the blessing of sending their own daughters and sons to their “Judea, Samaria, and to the ends of the earth.”
Our related churches in Nigeria and Ethiopia each have more than 1,000 cross-cultural missionaries, supported primarily by local churches.
12. Revival
Pilgrims need regular renewal. It seems that the normal tendency is for missionaries, supporting churches, and field churches to lose their way and fall into the Slough of Despond, to be tempted at Vanity Fair, chained in Doubting Castle, or captured by the Giant of Despair. We become discouraged and begin to fight with each other. Revival helps us to get back on the pilgrim path. Revival is not the ultimate goal for the church any more than getting back on the track is the ultimate destination of a derailed train. Without revival, however, we get stuck with all kinds of problems for a long time.
Factory-oriented churches either try to control revival or are afraid it will become too emotional. Wildflower churches may at times think that the emotional high of revival is the ultimate goal rather than a means for pilgrims to get back on the path of worship and service. Pilgrims seek daily revival as the Spirit uses the Word to challenge and correct those who stray from the path.
Since 1998 we set aside the ten days between Ascension and Pentecost for fasting, confession, and obedience to the Word. Guided by the model of revival in Nehemiah 9, we included confession, worship, prayer, and obedience. We used e-mail as the primary means of encouraging the mission family each day to continue to seek the Lord.
We now have four couples who travel around the mission world as international pastors. Many times the Lord brings renewal during the annual spiritual life conferences held on each field. Many have told me that they are praying daily for revival in our mission, in our supporting churches, and in the thousands of our related churches in Africa, Asia, and South America. May the Lord graciously give us profound times of refreshing and renewal.
What might happen if churches, missions, and schools would catch a vision for a gracious revolution in world missions? Could it be that the twentieth century, an amazing century of progress in missions, will be seen by historians as a mere prologue to the astounding growth of biblical Christianity in the twenty-first century? May it be so.
Thursday, September 13, 2007
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
Agenda for A Quiet Revolution in Christian Education [1]
The field of Christian Education by its very nature needs renewal in each generation. Because we are involved in the ongoing process of helping to mature believers, we are always only one generation away from extinction. It is easy, and maybe natural, for Christian educators to lose the vision of the previous generation, and to merely perpetuate the mechanics of programming. Rather than being motivated by the driving force of our movement's founders, we are often motivated by a need for mere survival. In each generation we must seek to rekindle the fire and vision of those who have gone before us.
In some ways we are facing a crisis today as great as or greater than ever before. Anti-Christian values are more obvious in society. Families are facing pressures greater than could have been imagined 50 years ago. Missions have been very successful in the last half-century, but now much of the church around the world is facing a second-generation lukewarmness. Nominal Christianity in many of the developing nations is growing at an astounding rate.
Meanwhile, the field of Christian education is again becoming stagnant. Today we seem to be enamored with a mechanistic view of ministry -- or else we move to the opposite extreme and "buy into" a romantic intuitive view. The Christian education pendulum swings back and forth between an agenda that on one hand stresses efficiency in depositing information into the head of the learner, and an agenda which on the other hand merely stimulates people to contemplate their proverbial navels.
The church around the world is facing the age-old crisis of nominalism while the field of Christian education is again urgently in need of renewal. We must rethink both our theory and practice. This is not to say that there are not healthy signs of renewal in many of our organizations, but we can all benefit from a rekindling of our vision.
Renewal Is Difficult But Not Impossible
We err when we think that renewal in Christian education will be simple. But we also err when we think it is impossible.
Often we are tempted to think that renewal in Christian education can be brought about by adding more efficiency to our method or by instituting better planning. Sometimes we seem to assume that if we can learn to control the environment a bit more efficiently, we can program the Holy Spirit and organize the universe.
Even if we could achieve perfect curricula, programs, structures, methods, and teachers we would never be able to guarantee Christian growth. Thus, it is naive to think that we can bring about renewal by demolishing the Sunday School, by incorporating computers, or by using more creative teaching techniques. neither can we guarantee success by merely encouraging more fellowship and sharing.
Renewal in Christian education seldom comes through long-range planning. It has most often come through men and women of vision, faith, and action who were able to inspire others. If the process of Christian growth is impossible to pre-determine, then it is impossible to set a time-table for our agenda. Our agenda for renewal is not to figure out a better system. Our agenda must be to stimulate vision and action in men and women of faith.
It would be easy to conclude that renewal in Christian education is impossible. When we study the history of God's people from Adam and Eve to the present we see a frightening pattern of rebellion and refusal to grow in grace. Jesus found it much easier to raise the dead and walk on water than to promote faith in his disciples -- and how many of us can even walk on water? The story of the children of Israel is a case study in the difficulty of promoting spiritual growth. God had much less trouble getting the people out of Egypt than he did in getting Egypt out of the people. The prophets were frustrated with the ongoing problem of rebellion and idolatry in the children of God. Even with the teaching and modeling of the apostles, the power of sin was still strong in the hearts and actions of the early Christians. For some reason, God chooses not to force spiritual growth in his people, even though he has perfect control over all the curriculum factors.
Yes, it would be easy to think that the task of renewing Christian education is impossible, and in one sense it is. Yet in another important sense, it is irresponsible for us to think that we cannot work to rekindle our vision and renew ministry. We have supernatural resources. Throughout history there have been examples of people who have sought God, prayed, and through the power of the Word and the Spirit have brought about a revolution in ministry. Renewal is possible only through the grace of God, but that grace is real and is greater than all our sins. Renewal is both necessary and possible.
Hopeful Signs
There are already hopeful signs of renewal in the field of Christian education. Hundreds of dedicated youth directors are spending thousands of hours discipling youth and are using creative methods to stimulate growth. Summer missions projects are stirring up a new sense of commitment to the Lord and to ministry. The Christian camping movement is challenging youth to a deeper commitment to Christ. Seminaries are producing hundreds of graduates each year who have basic Christian education skills and a heart for ministry. Christian radio and television ministries seek to strengthen the home and the church. Topical seminars and films are meeting needs of struggling Christians. Para-church organizations are continuing effective ministries which play an important part in bringing renewal. Christian education publishing houses are producing innovative curriculum to further stimulate the educational work of the local church. Missionaries are becoming more aware of the need for understanding the cross-cultural implications of Christian education principles. Third-world church are taking advanced degrees in Christian education and related fields.
The Need For Renewal
Yet as I talk to Christian education leaders in seminaries, publishing houses, and para-church organizations, I sense discouragement, dissatisfaction and a hunger for renewal. Too often we merely go through the motions to keep out organization from collapsing. Survival or profitability, rather then significance, have too often become our chief concerns. While there are signs or renewal in Christian education, the general pattern is not encouraging.
As I suggest an agenda for renewing Christian education, I do so not as a distant critic, but as a fellow struggler. An agenda is not intended to be a final statement, but a guide for dialogue. Both the agenda itself and the implications of the agenda are intended to stimulate discussion and debate. I encourage disagreement and trust that you will help me to see the agenda more clearly.
Agenda Item #1:
We Must Cooperate.
Most of our organizations represent centers of influence in Christian education. One organization may be seeking renewal yet be frustrated by lack of support from other organizations. We tend to blame other centers of influence for not doing their part. Church may blame seminaries for not producing youth ministers with practical skills, and seminaries may blame publishing houses for not being more innovative. Publishing houses say they can't sell innovative curricula to traditionally minded churches. Creative directors of Christian education say they will get fired if they don't do what the management-minded local church Christian educational committee wants them to. The need for renewal in one center of influence calls for renewal in another centers.
Many adult Sunday school are merely providing a dull second sermon. Christian education directors may jump from one curriculum fad to another while unaware of basic questions.
Christian education in the home has been emphasized, but does not yet seem to be having much effect in helping with the problems of marriage and parenting. Parents are not finding answers and are becoming more desperate. Deep problems in the home carry over to the church and make it difficult to renew the Sunday school. Likewise, problems in the Sunday school make it difficult to renew Christian education in the home.
Publishing houses are often frustrated in their desire to improve curriculum. They know that local churches will not buy anything too different. Knowing that teachers are volunteers, and knowing they will most likely spend less than 20 minutes preparing the lesson, they give step-by-step formulas to the teacher. Such formulas make it more difficult for a teacher to adapt a lesson for the specific needs of the students. Students get bored, teachers resign in disappointment and the superintendent madly rushes to coerce another unsuspecting teacher into the cycle.
Pressure is put on academic departments of Christian education to attract more students. We compete with each other in trying to "sell" our degree as being the easiest to earn, the cheapest of the most practical course of study. Sometimes we achieve this by requiring students to do less theoretical and scholarly reflection. We are often subtly pressured to give students easy, "cook book" answers to complex problems and to give them a "bag of tricks" called teaching methods. We in the academic study of Christian education are not being encouraged to rethink our philosophical and theoretical assumptions. On the other hand, some Christian educators involved in scholarly reflection do not test and revise their theories by attempting to improve the practice of Christian education. Too often there is an antagonism between scholars and practitioners of Christian education. This antagonism leads to an isolated, ivory tower scholarship that results in poor theory, or else it leads to an uncritical acceptance of methods that results in poor practice.
No single center of influence will be able to bring about renewal. If we are to bring about renewal in Christian education, we must work together. Individual seminaries, publishers, para-church organizations, denomination and local churches will not be able to bring about a renewal. Christian education centers of influence re-enforce each other in promoting or hindering renewal. Yet our moral tendency is to compete with each other and to blame each other for failure in the church or the home, rather than to cooperate in strategizing for renewal.
Many of us are tired of shallow gimmicks and of organizational competition. In spite of the overt success of some of our churches and organizations, many insiders have the growing suspicion that the field of evangelical Christian education is again stagnant and in need of renewal. While we are bogged down with internal struggles, families are falling apart, individuals are faltering in their growth toward maturity in Christ, and churches are becoming lukewarm. The urgency of the task demands not primarily survival, but significance. Our task is to foster the maturity of individuals and the Church. This task should be our top priority.
Agenda Item #2:
We Must Re-Evaluate Out Purposes.
(BOX A)
Renewal in Christian education will not be possible until we re-evaluate the ultimate purposes of our organizations. What is the ultimate purpose of Christian education? The problem among evangelicals is not that we are unable to answer the question. We would most likely answer that the chief purpose of our organization is to glorify God. But we tend to answer as if this were a catechism question. We might say the right words but we are not sure of their significance. We say we believe that our purpose is to glorify God, but seldom understand the implications of such a statement for our ministry. Our stated purpose is seldom our actual purpose.
If we really believe that the ultimate purpose of Christian education is to glorify God, then our ultimate purpose must not be Bible knowledge, organizational survival, human development, or even church growth. All of these are means to a greater end. If they become ends, they become idols. Teaching the Bible, developing programs, building relationships and showing concern for the poor are good, but in themselves they do not automatically contribute to the glory of God. When they become ultimate ends, the educational process becomes unbalanced and less than biblical.
I fear that in actual practice, most of our organizations make idols out of means. We must re-evaluate our ultimate purposes.
Agenda Item #3:
We Must Re-Evaluate Our Motivation For Ministry.
Our real ultimate purpose, in contrast to our stated ultimate purpose, also controls our motivation, or our moral reasoning. Even good actions can reflect low levels of moral reasoning. God is concerned not only with what we do, but also with our motives. People look on outward behavior, but God is more interested in the heart. Eating and drinking can be either good or evil, but whether we eat or drink or whatever we do, we must do it for the highest levels of principled morality for the glory of God.
Schools, churches, para-church organizations, denominational structures and publishing houses must operate at some level of moral reasoning. If the level of moral reasoning is to glorify individuals, or the organization, or even the Church, then the activities and results of the organization will not contribute to renewal. Our programs will reflect our level of moral reasoning, or our motives for ministry. If we could make the glory of God our actual purpose rather than an afterthought tacked on to organizational purpose statements, we would be much more willing to cooperate with each other, would have a deeper sense of personal satisfaction in our ministry, and we would rekindle the vision for renewing the field of Christian education.
I fear that in our day-to-day activities, our real motivation is seldom to bring glory to God.
Agenda Item #4:
We Must Study More Thoroughly The Nature Of Human Development.
(Box B)
In order to bring about renewal in Christian Education we must do more to study the nature of people and how they develop. Our current emphasis is inadequate. We learn about the nature of persons through special revelation in Scripture and through natural revelation. We believe that Scripture is the ultimate authority, but that God wrote the book of nature as well. The two sources are complimentary, even when they at times may seem to contradict each other.
Our first source of information about the nature of persons is special revelation. In order for us to understand the nature of persons, we need to understand the nature of God. As Christian educators we need to study theology more deeply. But again, it is not enough to know "correct" answers regarding the nature of persons. We must integrate this information into the theory and practice of Christian education. We believe that God created people in His image, yet our educational methodologies often treat people as if they were machines or animals. Other educational strategies (even those used by evangelicals) tend unconsciously to ignore the Fall and the fact that people are basically selfish and depraved. We have lost something of the image of God and thus we cannot bring about Christian growth by means of our own internal resources. We are tempted to think that we can "educate" or socialize people into the Kingdom. Even we evangelicals are tempted to think that if we can somehow get rid of poverty and injustice people will be whole. We must struggle more fully with the educational implications of our theological understanding of the nature of persons.
The second source of information regarding the nature of persons is empirical observation. Christian education at Wheaton has always studied the nature of persons. Twenty-five years ago when I was a student here, we studied age-group characteristics based on the findings of Gesell and others. We charted characteristics and implications for the practice of ministry. A sensitivity to such research helped us realize that our task was not just to teach the Bible, but to teach it to real people with specific interests and abilities.
But evangelical Christian education has been slow to catch on to the significance of newer bodies of research about nature of persons. As the LeBars learned much about the nature of persons from research in their time, we today will have much to learn about the process of human development from more recent research.
We should take the initiative in conducting research in human development. The more we can discover about how God intended people to grow, the more insights we will gain for promoting that growth. we are not doing enough serious research about human development and about the variables that promote or hinder development. Research questions should be generated from our understanding of both theology and social science. Solid theoretical research has many practical applications. Such findings are broadly generalizable and are thus useful in many more situations, including inner-city and non-western cultures. Theoretical research will help us to answer not only, "What kinds of programs work?", but more importantly, we will begin to address, "Why does it work?" and "How can we do it better?" For example, what factors in the Christian home promote or hinder internal faith convictions? What is the relationship between moral reasoning and Sunday school teaching styles? Research is crucial in helping us to understand the nature of people and the factors that promote the kind of development intended by God.
Christian educators have often been slow to see the value of theoretical research. Such research does not seem "practical," at least not for the pastor urgently seeking ideas for setting up a personal filing system. Theoretical research in human development does not seem practical for the Sunday School teacher trying to find techniques to make flannel-graph stick to the board.
Seminaries and Bible colleges have a professional orientation and do not claim to be strong research institutions. It is appropriate for them to generate practical projects rather than to conduct correlational or quasi-experimental research. But solid research must be done within the Christian liberal arts context.
All social science research builds on philosophical assumptions. Our research must be built on our theological and philosophical assumptions. For example, the recent research in faith development is an example of interesting and important research that is flawed by poor theological assumptions. But who is doing such research from an evangelical framework?
Para-church organizations and publishing houses are learning the value of market research. Such research is valuable, but it does not go far enough. We need to know not only which curriculum is most likely to be bought by churches, but also need to investigate the relationship between curriculum and spiritual growth. We need to go beyond asking, "which colors attract buyers?" to "what is happening in the lives of students and teachers as a result of the curriculum?"
If our ultimate purpose in Christian education is to help others to more fully glorify God, then we need a deeper commitment to discovering how God intended people to grow toward that purpose. We will never fully understand the secrets of human development, but a deeper understanding of God-ordained human development is a necessary precondition for re-thinking aims and means in Christian education. Apart from this kind of research we will be tempted to adopt methods without reflecting on their implications for promoting or hindering Christian growth.
I challenge us to do more research from a theological and theoretical perspective, to learn more about human development. We need to take the initiative in this research, to the glory of God.
Agenda Item #5:
We Must Reconsider The Aims Of Christian Education.
(Box C)
We will not be able to renew Christian education if we continue with inadequate aims. Our aims for Christian education must be generated from our understanding of ultimate purpose, and from our understanding of the nature of persons. Our ultimate purpose is to glorify God in what we do and why we do it. Basic to understanding the nature of persons is knowing that we are created in the image of God, yet we are fallen. In our fallen state we do not glorify God. Thus we need new birth and God-ordained development. Such development is both natural and supernatural. Growing out of these understandings, our aim must be to promote the kind of growth which will enable us to more fully glorify God.
The greatest need of the human race is to regain the completeness of the image of God which was lost in the Fall. The reason we are not able to glorify God in all that we think and do is because we have been children of the Devil. Christ died and rose again in order for us to be restored. We must be born again into God's family. Then we need to grow more and more into the likeness of Christ. This is the aim of Christian education -- to be born into God's family and to mature toward the likeness of Christ. Our aim is to promote natural and supernatural growth. Yet, we know that we shall not be like Him until we see Him as He is. In some sense, then, we can never fully achieve the aim of Christian education this side of heaven.
Growth is an inner, active and continuous process. Yet too often Christian educators understand the aim not as an inner process, but as promoting outward behavioral character traits. Often our aim is merely to impart bodies of information. Fads in teacher education tempt Christian educators to aim at pre-determined behavioral objectives. Secular trends in educational measurement tempt Christian educators to aim for measurable and quantifiable results. But our measurements are only of religious behavior or religiosity, rather than inner "heart development." Since we are able to observe and quantify much educational activity, and since we feel our aims must be measurable, our unconscious aim becomes educational activity rather than inner, active and continuous growth toward becoming all God intends us to become. Outward behavior is not a guarantee of inner spiritual growth. (In spite of what my mother taught me, cleanliness is not an indication of godliness.) People with polite character traits are not necessarily godly people. Some of the most evil people throughout history have been knowledgeable of the Bible. Satan probably would have no trouble getting a perfect score on our Bible diagnostic exams.
To be sure, outward behavior must change as we become more Christ-like. But such behavior is an indication of heart development, and is not an aim. When the indicator, or outward, behavior becomes an aim, we are really teaching people to become pharisaical.
On the other hand, some Christian educators are reacting so strongly against behavioristic aims that they say aims are not necessary at all. Some say we should just teach the Bible and let the Holy Spirit determine aims for the learner. Yet Scripture does give us aims.
Aims are not end points, but directions. We can never check off the list of the fruit of the Spirit as something finally accomplished. We can never fully say we have accomplished love, so now it is time for us to get to work on joy, and next year peace, and maybe before I die I'll get to self-control. Growth in grace is never fully achieved in this life, but it does give us an aim or a direction. Faith, hope and love do not evidence themselves in pre-determined and fully predicted behaviors. Our aim must be to promote a process rather than to predict a product. That process is growth -- both natural and spiritual growth.
God has given the human teacher a part to play in promoting growth, yet he or she is responsible for only a part of the process. Although Bible knowledge is important. But Lois LeBar taught that the Bible is a means for promoting growth and is not an end. Our greatest danger in Christian education is that we make the means the end. The result will be merely external or "outer" development. Is it any wonder that most of our efforts in Christian education do not produce "inner" results.
The aim of the teacher, then, is to stimulate conditions which are most likely to foster the process of growth.
It may be appropriate for our organizations or businesses to have pre-determined objectives and measurable standards. But we should not confuse organizational aims with educational aims of ministry.
I fear that we carry over our understanding of management objectives to the task of Christian education, which is primarily an inner process. Such a management philosophy in Christian education will produce hypocrisy rather than spiritual growth. If we see the aim as a product, we still aim for knowledge, skills, habits or character traits, all of which may or may not be an indication of true inner development. A product understanding of aims may be the reason why nominal and lukewarm Christianity is growing so rapidly in our evangelical churches.
In order to renew Christian education we must rethink our aim. The aim to foster the God-ordained process of development.
Agenda Item #6:
We Must Rethink Our Methods.
(Box D)
If the aim of Christian education is to foster a process, then the means for promoting the process is of utmost importance. In a certain sense, fostering the means for promoting the process becomes the aim.
Learning is an inner, active, continuous and disciplined process. Thus, we should begin with the felt needs of learners rather than from the theoretical knowledge of Scripture. The Bible is a means for promoting maturity in Christ and was not intended by God to be an end in itself. Such thinking is radical. Christian education methods are still too often characterized by tactics which intend the learner to be passive. Our methods are so dependent on external motivation and external behavior that we may actually hinder inner growth in grace. Too often we seek to control outer behavior rather than to compel active reflection. We use gimmicks to get the attention of the student, but such gimmicks seldom lead to an inner sense of need.
We must begin with the felt needs and experiences of the learner. We must then help the learner to see his or her own experience in light of the authoritative Word of God. When we compare Scripture with experience, we sense disequilibration. Such disequilibration can be used by the Holy Spirit to convict us and motivate us to put our experience and life more into submission or equilibration with Scripture. The process is often best done in a community of learners. The job of the teacher is the Word, the Spirit and the body of believers. The essence of interaction must compel thinking and action in the learner, relating experience to the Bible.
Methods based on technology have only limited potential. Technology can be useful for transmitting information, but usually by itself, does little to foster the process of critical reflection and action in the learner.
Neither are romantic teaching methods sufficient. such methods tend to focus only on experience, without stimulating reflection on content.
Social learning theory provides an inadequate model for method. Scripture must be free to critique society. Modeling by itself is not a good method for stimulating critical reflection between Scripture and experience.
Methodology in Christian education is in need of renewal. Too often we accept methods merely because they seem creative, make us feel good, or seem to be "at the cutting edge" of technology. We must rethink our educational methods.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
I fear for the Church around the world. Almost everywhere the Church is plagued by apathy. Half-hearted Christianity is becoming a dangerous epidemic. There's a war going on! The Church is in trouble, and we Christian educators, who can provide resources for the battle, are ourselves complacent and in need of renewal. We must seriously rethink our purposes, our motives, our understanding of persons, our aims and our methods. We must move beyond our narrow organizational horizons and rekindle this strategic vision. Discussing the agenda must be only the first step.
[1] Adapted from a talk given May 22, 1988 for the celebration of the Price - LeBar Endowed Chair in Christian Education at Wheaton College
In some ways we are facing a crisis today as great as or greater than ever before. Anti-Christian values are more obvious in society. Families are facing pressures greater than could have been imagined 50 years ago. Missions have been very successful in the last half-century, but now much of the church around the world is facing a second-generation lukewarmness. Nominal Christianity in many of the developing nations is growing at an astounding rate.
Meanwhile, the field of Christian education is again becoming stagnant. Today we seem to be enamored with a mechanistic view of ministry -- or else we move to the opposite extreme and "buy into" a romantic intuitive view. The Christian education pendulum swings back and forth between an agenda that on one hand stresses efficiency in depositing information into the head of the learner, and an agenda which on the other hand merely stimulates people to contemplate their proverbial navels.
The church around the world is facing the age-old crisis of nominalism while the field of Christian education is again urgently in need of renewal. We must rethink both our theory and practice. This is not to say that there are not healthy signs of renewal in many of our organizations, but we can all benefit from a rekindling of our vision.
Renewal Is Difficult But Not Impossible
We err when we think that renewal in Christian education will be simple. But we also err when we think it is impossible.
Often we are tempted to think that renewal in Christian education can be brought about by adding more efficiency to our method or by instituting better planning. Sometimes we seem to assume that if we can learn to control the environment a bit more efficiently, we can program the Holy Spirit and organize the universe.
Even if we could achieve perfect curricula, programs, structures, methods, and teachers we would never be able to guarantee Christian growth. Thus, it is naive to think that we can bring about renewal by demolishing the Sunday School, by incorporating computers, or by using more creative teaching techniques. neither can we guarantee success by merely encouraging more fellowship and sharing.
Renewal in Christian education seldom comes through long-range planning. It has most often come through men and women of vision, faith, and action who were able to inspire others. If the process of Christian growth is impossible to pre-determine, then it is impossible to set a time-table for our agenda. Our agenda for renewal is not to figure out a better system. Our agenda must be to stimulate vision and action in men and women of faith.
It would be easy to conclude that renewal in Christian education is impossible. When we study the history of God's people from Adam and Eve to the present we see a frightening pattern of rebellion and refusal to grow in grace. Jesus found it much easier to raise the dead and walk on water than to promote faith in his disciples -- and how many of us can even walk on water? The story of the children of Israel is a case study in the difficulty of promoting spiritual growth. God had much less trouble getting the people out of Egypt than he did in getting Egypt out of the people. The prophets were frustrated with the ongoing problem of rebellion and idolatry in the children of God. Even with the teaching and modeling of the apostles, the power of sin was still strong in the hearts and actions of the early Christians. For some reason, God chooses not to force spiritual growth in his people, even though he has perfect control over all the curriculum factors.
Yes, it would be easy to think that the task of renewing Christian education is impossible, and in one sense it is. Yet in another important sense, it is irresponsible for us to think that we cannot work to rekindle our vision and renew ministry. We have supernatural resources. Throughout history there have been examples of people who have sought God, prayed, and through the power of the Word and the Spirit have brought about a revolution in ministry. Renewal is possible only through the grace of God, but that grace is real and is greater than all our sins. Renewal is both necessary and possible.
Hopeful Signs
There are already hopeful signs of renewal in the field of Christian education. Hundreds of dedicated youth directors are spending thousands of hours discipling youth and are using creative methods to stimulate growth. Summer missions projects are stirring up a new sense of commitment to the Lord and to ministry. The Christian camping movement is challenging youth to a deeper commitment to Christ. Seminaries are producing hundreds of graduates each year who have basic Christian education skills and a heart for ministry. Christian radio and television ministries seek to strengthen the home and the church. Topical seminars and films are meeting needs of struggling Christians. Para-church organizations are continuing effective ministries which play an important part in bringing renewal. Christian education publishing houses are producing innovative curriculum to further stimulate the educational work of the local church. Missionaries are becoming more aware of the need for understanding the cross-cultural implications of Christian education principles. Third-world church are taking advanced degrees in Christian education and related fields.
The Need For Renewal
Yet as I talk to Christian education leaders in seminaries, publishing houses, and para-church organizations, I sense discouragement, dissatisfaction and a hunger for renewal. Too often we merely go through the motions to keep out organization from collapsing. Survival or profitability, rather then significance, have too often become our chief concerns. While there are signs or renewal in Christian education, the general pattern is not encouraging.
As I suggest an agenda for renewing Christian education, I do so not as a distant critic, but as a fellow struggler. An agenda is not intended to be a final statement, but a guide for dialogue. Both the agenda itself and the implications of the agenda are intended to stimulate discussion and debate. I encourage disagreement and trust that you will help me to see the agenda more clearly.
Agenda Item #1:
We Must Cooperate.
Most of our organizations represent centers of influence in Christian education. One organization may be seeking renewal yet be frustrated by lack of support from other organizations. We tend to blame other centers of influence for not doing their part. Church may blame seminaries for not producing youth ministers with practical skills, and seminaries may blame publishing houses for not being more innovative. Publishing houses say they can't sell innovative curricula to traditionally minded churches. Creative directors of Christian education say they will get fired if they don't do what the management-minded local church Christian educational committee wants them to. The need for renewal in one center of influence calls for renewal in another centers.
Many adult Sunday school are merely providing a dull second sermon. Christian education directors may jump from one curriculum fad to another while unaware of basic questions.
Christian education in the home has been emphasized, but does not yet seem to be having much effect in helping with the problems of marriage and parenting. Parents are not finding answers and are becoming more desperate. Deep problems in the home carry over to the church and make it difficult to renew the Sunday school. Likewise, problems in the Sunday school make it difficult to renew Christian education in the home.
Publishing houses are often frustrated in their desire to improve curriculum. They know that local churches will not buy anything too different. Knowing that teachers are volunteers, and knowing they will most likely spend less than 20 minutes preparing the lesson, they give step-by-step formulas to the teacher. Such formulas make it more difficult for a teacher to adapt a lesson for the specific needs of the students. Students get bored, teachers resign in disappointment and the superintendent madly rushes to coerce another unsuspecting teacher into the cycle.
Pressure is put on academic departments of Christian education to attract more students. We compete with each other in trying to "sell" our degree as being the easiest to earn, the cheapest of the most practical course of study. Sometimes we achieve this by requiring students to do less theoretical and scholarly reflection. We are often subtly pressured to give students easy, "cook book" answers to complex problems and to give them a "bag of tricks" called teaching methods. We in the academic study of Christian education are not being encouraged to rethink our philosophical and theoretical assumptions. On the other hand, some Christian educators involved in scholarly reflection do not test and revise their theories by attempting to improve the practice of Christian education. Too often there is an antagonism between scholars and practitioners of Christian education. This antagonism leads to an isolated, ivory tower scholarship that results in poor theory, or else it leads to an uncritical acceptance of methods that results in poor practice.
No single center of influence will be able to bring about renewal. If we are to bring about renewal in Christian education, we must work together. Individual seminaries, publishers, para-church organizations, denomination and local churches will not be able to bring about a renewal. Christian education centers of influence re-enforce each other in promoting or hindering renewal. Yet our moral tendency is to compete with each other and to blame each other for failure in the church or the home, rather than to cooperate in strategizing for renewal.
Many of us are tired of shallow gimmicks and of organizational competition. In spite of the overt success of some of our churches and organizations, many insiders have the growing suspicion that the field of evangelical Christian education is again stagnant and in need of renewal. While we are bogged down with internal struggles, families are falling apart, individuals are faltering in their growth toward maturity in Christ, and churches are becoming lukewarm. The urgency of the task demands not primarily survival, but significance. Our task is to foster the maturity of individuals and the Church. This task should be our top priority.
Agenda Item #2:
We Must Re-Evaluate Out Purposes.
(BOX A)
Renewal in Christian education will not be possible until we re-evaluate the ultimate purposes of our organizations. What is the ultimate purpose of Christian education? The problem among evangelicals is not that we are unable to answer the question. We would most likely answer that the chief purpose of our organization is to glorify God. But we tend to answer as if this were a catechism question. We might say the right words but we are not sure of their significance. We say we believe that our purpose is to glorify God, but seldom understand the implications of such a statement for our ministry. Our stated purpose is seldom our actual purpose.
If we really believe that the ultimate purpose of Christian education is to glorify God, then our ultimate purpose must not be Bible knowledge, organizational survival, human development, or even church growth. All of these are means to a greater end. If they become ends, they become idols. Teaching the Bible, developing programs, building relationships and showing concern for the poor are good, but in themselves they do not automatically contribute to the glory of God. When they become ultimate ends, the educational process becomes unbalanced and less than biblical.
I fear that in actual practice, most of our organizations make idols out of means. We must re-evaluate our ultimate purposes.
Agenda Item #3:
We Must Re-Evaluate Our Motivation For Ministry.
Our real ultimate purpose, in contrast to our stated ultimate purpose, also controls our motivation, or our moral reasoning. Even good actions can reflect low levels of moral reasoning. God is concerned not only with what we do, but also with our motives. People look on outward behavior, but God is more interested in the heart. Eating and drinking can be either good or evil, but whether we eat or drink or whatever we do, we must do it for the highest levels of principled morality for the glory of God.
Schools, churches, para-church organizations, denominational structures and publishing houses must operate at some level of moral reasoning. If the level of moral reasoning is to glorify individuals, or the organization, or even the Church, then the activities and results of the organization will not contribute to renewal. Our programs will reflect our level of moral reasoning, or our motives for ministry. If we could make the glory of God our actual purpose rather than an afterthought tacked on to organizational purpose statements, we would be much more willing to cooperate with each other, would have a deeper sense of personal satisfaction in our ministry, and we would rekindle the vision for renewing the field of Christian education.
I fear that in our day-to-day activities, our real motivation is seldom to bring glory to God.
Agenda Item #4:
We Must Study More Thoroughly The Nature Of Human Development.
(Box B)
In order to bring about renewal in Christian Education we must do more to study the nature of people and how they develop. Our current emphasis is inadequate. We learn about the nature of persons through special revelation in Scripture and through natural revelation. We believe that Scripture is the ultimate authority, but that God wrote the book of nature as well. The two sources are complimentary, even when they at times may seem to contradict each other.
Our first source of information about the nature of persons is special revelation. In order for us to understand the nature of persons, we need to understand the nature of God. As Christian educators we need to study theology more deeply. But again, it is not enough to know "correct" answers regarding the nature of persons. We must integrate this information into the theory and practice of Christian education. We believe that God created people in His image, yet our educational methodologies often treat people as if they were machines or animals. Other educational strategies (even those used by evangelicals) tend unconsciously to ignore the Fall and the fact that people are basically selfish and depraved. We have lost something of the image of God and thus we cannot bring about Christian growth by means of our own internal resources. We are tempted to think that we can "educate" or socialize people into the Kingdom. Even we evangelicals are tempted to think that if we can somehow get rid of poverty and injustice people will be whole. We must struggle more fully with the educational implications of our theological understanding of the nature of persons.
The second source of information regarding the nature of persons is empirical observation. Christian education at Wheaton has always studied the nature of persons. Twenty-five years ago when I was a student here, we studied age-group characteristics based on the findings of Gesell and others. We charted characteristics and implications for the practice of ministry. A sensitivity to such research helped us realize that our task was not just to teach the Bible, but to teach it to real people with specific interests and abilities.
But evangelical Christian education has been slow to catch on to the significance of newer bodies of research about nature of persons. As the LeBars learned much about the nature of persons from research in their time, we today will have much to learn about the process of human development from more recent research.
We should take the initiative in conducting research in human development. The more we can discover about how God intended people to grow, the more insights we will gain for promoting that growth. we are not doing enough serious research about human development and about the variables that promote or hinder development. Research questions should be generated from our understanding of both theology and social science. Solid theoretical research has many practical applications. Such findings are broadly generalizable and are thus useful in many more situations, including inner-city and non-western cultures. Theoretical research will help us to answer not only, "What kinds of programs work?", but more importantly, we will begin to address, "Why does it work?" and "How can we do it better?" For example, what factors in the Christian home promote or hinder internal faith convictions? What is the relationship between moral reasoning and Sunday school teaching styles? Research is crucial in helping us to understand the nature of people and the factors that promote the kind of development intended by God.
Christian educators have often been slow to see the value of theoretical research. Such research does not seem "practical," at least not for the pastor urgently seeking ideas for setting up a personal filing system. Theoretical research in human development does not seem practical for the Sunday School teacher trying to find techniques to make flannel-graph stick to the board.
Seminaries and Bible colleges have a professional orientation and do not claim to be strong research institutions. It is appropriate for them to generate practical projects rather than to conduct correlational or quasi-experimental research. But solid research must be done within the Christian liberal arts context.
All social science research builds on philosophical assumptions. Our research must be built on our theological and philosophical assumptions. For example, the recent research in faith development is an example of interesting and important research that is flawed by poor theological assumptions. But who is doing such research from an evangelical framework?
Para-church organizations and publishing houses are learning the value of market research. Such research is valuable, but it does not go far enough. We need to know not only which curriculum is most likely to be bought by churches, but also need to investigate the relationship between curriculum and spiritual growth. We need to go beyond asking, "which colors attract buyers?" to "what is happening in the lives of students and teachers as a result of the curriculum?"
If our ultimate purpose in Christian education is to help others to more fully glorify God, then we need a deeper commitment to discovering how God intended people to grow toward that purpose. We will never fully understand the secrets of human development, but a deeper understanding of God-ordained human development is a necessary precondition for re-thinking aims and means in Christian education. Apart from this kind of research we will be tempted to adopt methods without reflecting on their implications for promoting or hindering Christian growth.
I challenge us to do more research from a theological and theoretical perspective, to learn more about human development. We need to take the initiative in this research, to the glory of God.
Agenda Item #5:
We Must Reconsider The Aims Of Christian Education.
(Box C)
We will not be able to renew Christian education if we continue with inadequate aims. Our aims for Christian education must be generated from our understanding of ultimate purpose, and from our understanding of the nature of persons. Our ultimate purpose is to glorify God in what we do and why we do it. Basic to understanding the nature of persons is knowing that we are created in the image of God, yet we are fallen. In our fallen state we do not glorify God. Thus we need new birth and God-ordained development. Such development is both natural and supernatural. Growing out of these understandings, our aim must be to promote the kind of growth which will enable us to more fully glorify God.
The greatest need of the human race is to regain the completeness of the image of God which was lost in the Fall. The reason we are not able to glorify God in all that we think and do is because we have been children of the Devil. Christ died and rose again in order for us to be restored. We must be born again into God's family. Then we need to grow more and more into the likeness of Christ. This is the aim of Christian education -- to be born into God's family and to mature toward the likeness of Christ. Our aim is to promote natural and supernatural growth. Yet, we know that we shall not be like Him until we see Him as He is. In some sense, then, we can never fully achieve the aim of Christian education this side of heaven.
Growth is an inner, active and continuous process. Yet too often Christian educators understand the aim not as an inner process, but as promoting outward behavioral character traits. Often our aim is merely to impart bodies of information. Fads in teacher education tempt Christian educators to aim at pre-determined behavioral objectives. Secular trends in educational measurement tempt Christian educators to aim for measurable and quantifiable results. But our measurements are only of religious behavior or religiosity, rather than inner "heart development." Since we are able to observe and quantify much educational activity, and since we feel our aims must be measurable, our unconscious aim becomes educational activity rather than inner, active and continuous growth toward becoming all God intends us to become. Outward behavior is not a guarantee of inner spiritual growth. (In spite of what my mother taught me, cleanliness is not an indication of godliness.) People with polite character traits are not necessarily godly people. Some of the most evil people throughout history have been knowledgeable of the Bible. Satan probably would have no trouble getting a perfect score on our Bible diagnostic exams.
To be sure, outward behavior must change as we become more Christ-like. But such behavior is an indication of heart development, and is not an aim. When the indicator, or outward, behavior becomes an aim, we are really teaching people to become pharisaical.
On the other hand, some Christian educators are reacting so strongly against behavioristic aims that they say aims are not necessary at all. Some say we should just teach the Bible and let the Holy Spirit determine aims for the learner. Yet Scripture does give us aims.
Aims are not end points, but directions. We can never check off the list of the fruit of the Spirit as something finally accomplished. We can never fully say we have accomplished love, so now it is time for us to get to work on joy, and next year peace, and maybe before I die I'll get to self-control. Growth in grace is never fully achieved in this life, but it does give us an aim or a direction. Faith, hope and love do not evidence themselves in pre-determined and fully predicted behaviors. Our aim must be to promote a process rather than to predict a product. That process is growth -- both natural and spiritual growth.
God has given the human teacher a part to play in promoting growth, yet he or she is responsible for only a part of the process. Although Bible knowledge is important. But Lois LeBar taught that the Bible is a means for promoting growth and is not an end. Our greatest danger in Christian education is that we make the means the end. The result will be merely external or "outer" development. Is it any wonder that most of our efforts in Christian education do not produce "inner" results.
The aim of the teacher, then, is to stimulate conditions which are most likely to foster the process of growth.
It may be appropriate for our organizations or businesses to have pre-determined objectives and measurable standards. But we should not confuse organizational aims with educational aims of ministry.
I fear that we carry over our understanding of management objectives to the task of Christian education, which is primarily an inner process. Such a management philosophy in Christian education will produce hypocrisy rather than spiritual growth. If we see the aim as a product, we still aim for knowledge, skills, habits or character traits, all of which may or may not be an indication of true inner development. A product understanding of aims may be the reason why nominal and lukewarm Christianity is growing so rapidly in our evangelical churches.
In order to renew Christian education we must rethink our aim. The aim to foster the God-ordained process of development.
Agenda Item #6:
We Must Rethink Our Methods.
(Box D)
If the aim of Christian education is to foster a process, then the means for promoting the process is of utmost importance. In a certain sense, fostering the means for promoting the process becomes the aim.
Learning is an inner, active, continuous and disciplined process. Thus, we should begin with the felt needs of learners rather than from the theoretical knowledge of Scripture. The Bible is a means for promoting maturity in Christ and was not intended by God to be an end in itself. Such thinking is radical. Christian education methods are still too often characterized by tactics which intend the learner to be passive. Our methods are so dependent on external motivation and external behavior that we may actually hinder inner growth in grace. Too often we seek to control outer behavior rather than to compel active reflection. We use gimmicks to get the attention of the student, but such gimmicks seldom lead to an inner sense of need.
We must begin with the felt needs and experiences of the learner. We must then help the learner to see his or her own experience in light of the authoritative Word of God. When we compare Scripture with experience, we sense disequilibration. Such disequilibration can be used by the Holy Spirit to convict us and motivate us to put our experience and life more into submission or equilibration with Scripture. The process is often best done in a community of learners. The job of the teacher is the Word, the Spirit and the body of believers. The essence of interaction must compel thinking and action in the learner, relating experience to the Bible.
Methods based on technology have only limited potential. Technology can be useful for transmitting information, but usually by itself, does little to foster the process of critical reflection and action in the learner.
Neither are romantic teaching methods sufficient. such methods tend to focus only on experience, without stimulating reflection on content.
Social learning theory provides an inadequate model for method. Scripture must be free to critique society. Modeling by itself is not a good method for stimulating critical reflection between Scripture and experience.
Methodology in Christian education is in need of renewal. Too often we accept methods merely because they seem creative, make us feel good, or seem to be "at the cutting edge" of technology. We must rethink our educational methods.
* * * * * * * * * * * * * *
I fear for the Church around the world. Almost everywhere the Church is plagued by apathy. Half-hearted Christianity is becoming a dangerous epidemic. There's a war going on! The Church is in trouble, and we Christian educators, who can provide resources for the battle, are ourselves complacent and in need of renewal. We must seriously rethink our purposes, our motives, our understanding of persons, our aims and our methods. We must move beyond our narrow organizational horizons and rekindle this strategic vision. Discussing the agenda must be only the first step.
[1] Adapted from a talk given May 22, 1988 for the celebration of the Price - LeBar Endowed Chair in Christian Education at Wheaton College
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)