Christian education for all:
The following quote was taken from a fairly well known Christian “non-discriminatory statement”: X “admits students of any race, color, national
origin, ethnicity, disability or sex to all the rights, privileges, programs
and activities made available to students of the school. It does not
discriminate on the basis of race, color, national origin, ethnicity,
disability or sex in the administration of its educational policies,
admissions policies, financial assistance, athletics, or any other school-administered programs…”
Being the father of a child with special cognitive and developmental needs, I am apt to look upon the above statement with suspicion. Not to single these educators out (at least they had the stomach to profess it), but much of the private school world is not in step with this statement. Now, if Christian schools were just another private school, I really don’t think I’d find fault. Besides, isn’t this the nature of a private school? These schools focus on certain populations, and promote certain policies that they think will further the education of these children (and gain the school a name in the process), without supervision from an outside body (like the government), hence the title “private”. But, as Christians in the educational arena, are we not called to a different standard? Excellence is definitely an attribute that Christians should exemplify but not at the cost of other attributes. Maybe, the early 20th century label, “fundamentalist”, has caused us to reconsider and distance ourselves from the idea that Christian education is a “school in a bubble”. Instead of creating a safe-haven from the world, it promoted a ghetto, fortress mentality portraying an image of ignorance, superstition, cheap grace, and worse to some, poor education. Or maybe, we want to prove to the world (and maybe to ourselves as well) that we can be just as competitive as any other school. If so, we often leave with a pride if we succeed, and a shame and dishonor if we fail. Is Christian education really about excellence, being competitive, measuring the percentage of the population that is college bound, and winning, or is there something more important?
To consider some answers to this question, I would like to ask how these few questions could be framed in relation to my son’s segment of the population. For a child with significant developmental special needs, can winning ever be a reality, if you consider the competition offered by other segments of the student body? How does a child with Cerebral Palsy compete with a 200 lb defensive end in last year’s high school football team for a place on this year’s team? How does a child who is deaf audition for a part in the school play or school musical? Can an autistic child who has no verbal ability even consider the possibility of college? Again, I must ask, what is the purpose of Christian education? Is it just to train and prepare children for college? Is it to help children discover and develop their talents? Is it to help students learn how to successfully interact with their peers and teachers in difficult situations? I would say yes to all of those questions, and yet, none of those questions require a distinctly Christian response. Christian education offers not just a competitive or superlative alternative to public education but something completely distinctive. It offers discipleship. Let’s look at that initial statement again: “…admits students…It does not discriminate…” Let’s be honest, it does discriminate. Having arrived at this understanding let me shock you. I think it should, though in a different manner than prescribed. We have particular purposes for striving towards particular goals. The purpose of Christian education is discriminatory and prejudiced in its nature, as it seeks to set itself apart according to the teachings of Scripture and character of God, not submitting itself to any other patterns of philosophy. This discrimination and prejudice is not against races of people, nor ethnicities nor heritages, but against ideas and policies. As a Christian school, we must be biased against sin and in favor of righteousness; we must discriminate against immorality and be prejudiced in favor of holiness. We must tip the scale in favor of integrity, discipline, honor, and the value of all people, compassion, and sacrificial living, and against fear, ignorance, hard-heartedness, laziness and disobedience. We must seek to acknowledge and glorify God in all our disciplines as the Creator and Sustainer and dispel the myth that these disciplines are self-invented, at best (or at least humanly recognized), or eternal, at worst (pantheism).
Deuteronomy 6:7 says, “and thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shalt talk of them when thou sittest in thy house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up.”
Furthermore, if Christian education seeks not to replace the educational responsibility of the parent (as the public school system seems to border on) but to nurture it by coming alongside and partnering with parents, it must consider its responsibilities and the means of cooperation with parents. This Scripture refers directly to the training of children in the ways of the Lord and the importance of the Word of God in their lives, commonly described as discipleship. The task of the previous generation and the responsibility it shoulders for the next is articulated all throughout the Scriptures.
Psalms 22:30: A seed shall serve him; It shall be told of the Lord unto the next generation.
Psalms 48:13: Mark ye well her bulwarks; Consider her palaces: That ye may tell it to the generation following.
Psalms 145:4: One generation shall laud thy works to another, And shall declare thy mighty acts.
Our prime responsibility as older Christians is to the next generation, to the children, to the covenant community. We as Christians are called, not only of mutual discipleship, but of discipleship of the next generation. Listen to the vows, the Presbyterian Church in America congregations take in the sacrament of baptism,
“Do you as a congregation undertake the responsibility of
assisting the parents in the Christian nurture of this child?”
This clearly articulates the congregation’s response to the question of responsibility in the baptism of a child. We indeed are our “brother’s keeper”. Furthermore, I would argue that the question goes further in precipitating the overarching question of one generation’s duty to the next, more specifically, a Christian school’s obligation towards its student body. We are to instruct in the disciplines of learning, we are to hone skills in the development of artistic accomplishment, we are to train our bodies in the pursuit of athletic excellence, but most importantly, we are to teach God’s Word diligently to our children, not only in knowledge but also in application.
This brings to focus my second and ultimate point, “Who is to be trained in this way?” “Who is to be trained and discipled in this manner?” The answer is not only the one who excels, achieves, and succeeds academically, athletically, intellectually and artistically, but all children. Let us consider the phrase “covenant children”. What does this phrase refer to? This idea arises particularly in Genesis, during the interchange between God and Abram. Covenant children are the children of believers, where at least one parent is a believer, This is evident in the Old Testament practice of circumcision. God spoke to Abraham to circumcise his children on the 8th day as a sign that the child was a visible participant in the community of faith and would one day inherit the promises of God.
“14 For the unbelieving husband is sanctified in the wife, and the unbelieving wife is sanctified in the brother: else were your children unclean; but now are they holy.”
Whether a child has only one parent due to misfortune, whether only a single parent is a professing believer, or whether he/she is blessed with two believing parents, the child is referred to as holy, or set apart, that is, set apart to God as part of His people, warranting discipleship, and benefiting from the blessings God pours out on His people. These parents have an obligation, a duty, and a joyful responsibility to train each and every one of their children in the ways of the Lord. This means that if at least one parent is a believer, the child, regardless of “race, color, national, origin, ethnicity, disability or sex” should be discipled in the way of the Lord. The Christian educational institution exists to help the parent accomplish that task.
But is that how we, as Christians, have chosen to define and delineate Christian education, and has that been our practice? As Wesley, of Princess Bride fame, declares to Count Rugen, the evil inventor of the Machine, upon his survival the fire swap and “rodents of unusual size” and subsequent capture, “we are men of action, lies to do not become us”. We, too, need be more honest with ourselves concerning the entire covenant. As I’ve been a part of the Christian educational process now for almost eight years and have observed a number of different situations at different schools, I’ve noticed that the broad area of low performance in the private school setting is something only lightly addressed. The reality of current Christian education is that it caters to mostly the moderately successful to highly gifted and talented student. Of course, there are a number of different reasons students perform poorly. Advocates have made the case that anything from poor diet, to poor parenting, to abuse, to an unsafe home environment, to hyperactivity, to learning disabilities (reading, comprehension, visual, auditory and processing impairments, to name just a few) might be responsible for poor performance. These schools are not adequately equipped (either in economy or mentality) to address the atypically low performing students, those with more severe impairments in learning, things that cause behavioral disruptions, severely limit comprehension, prevent fine motor coordination and development (writing and verbal impediments) and stifle cognitive growth. Now the cost of addressing this particular segment of the student population is significant because their education requires specialized instruction. While public schools are mandated by the state to accept all students, private schools are not. Those that choose to address students in these categories have to consider the cost of a multitude of additional services like therapies (speech, physical, occupational), tailoring the curriculum to a wide variety of student ability, as well as the student teacher ratio. (I’m sure I’ve left some things out of what needs to be considered.) To be fair to the discussion, there are some understandable (though not excusable) arguments against making such an investment, made by both parent and educational institution. The main one is cost. There is no doubt that the cost to educate a child with special needs can be significant, especially if they are seeking to compete with the many therapies provided within the framework of a public school program. Smaller teacher/student ratios can also prove a greater financial burden on the parent. Realizing the financial disincentive (sometimes almost twice the regular tuition at the elementary level), many parents choose to put their children in public programs, especially since Christian schools which do offer a program (few indeed) often do not offer financial aid. From an educational perspective, the most compelling reason against accepting students with significant need is the diversion of funds away from the majority. Many falsely rationalize that the money could help more students if it was spread out. But this is just an excuse not to do what God has called us to. Others, perceiving the benefit of such a program at their school (interaction with another population of students that we can learn from) also miss out on the real benefit. The unfortunate assessment of either perspective is that it does not adequately account for our God-given value. Christ did not call us to “efficiency” so much as to “loving one another” because of how He created us, “in His image”. If we truly believe hat the unborn child is valuable because God creates all life, we cannot denigrate these children, thinking that they are less valuable because they cannot give back as much to the student population, or society. That, my friends, is utilitarianism and places value on human life only as it is appreciates usefulness to the general society. This belongs to such ideologies as communism and fascism, not to Christianity. Our God-given mandate as educators is to disciple all Christian children not just those who its convenient to educate.
