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
No comments:
Post a Comment