Previous posts on this issue can be found here, here, here, here, here, and here. In this post we will begin to look at the philosophy of education.
There are two basic ideas set forth in philosophy which can help determine one’s philosophy of education. The first one is ontology. For our purposes, ontology would attempt to answer such questions as, what is reality? Is there an objective standard which must be adhered to in order for true education to take place?
In general, the modern public education system leaves out an objective theory of reality and if education leaves out an objective theory of reality we are only left with each person’s idea of reality. Everything becomes subjective and individualistic. How a person views reality is extremely important and will have a tremendous impact on their view of life.
What about reality itself? I would argue that the “real” world is only understood correctly where God is present and loved. Where He is ignored is a shadowy world of disbelief. Adam and Eve fell from the normal. Because of this view of reality, any education which does not have this foundation, presents a warped view of reality. Reality is understood only in relation to Christ and to God’s Word. God’s Word is the objective standard which must be adhered to in order for true education to take place.
This approach to ontology argues against sending children of Christians to government-run schools. To send your child into the “real” world of public education is to send your child to become victims in the war against Christianity. They are not equipped for such a battle. The public school system may be a great mission field for teachers and administrators, but not for children. Children are the most unqualified of all missionaries and the public school system is not the place for such unqualified missionaries. Why? It is analogous to sending a raw recruit into battle before he has had any training. It would be analogous to sending our children to the front-line of an actual battle to be shot and bombed. But it is even more like sending a raw recruit into the enemy’s training camp where he is being equipped to fight against the beliefs of his parents instead of being equipped to defend the faith once for all delivered to the saints. It is also interesting to note that the Bible gives no example of children being used as missionaries. Adults are always the missionaries.
Guy Doud (1986 National Teacher of the Year and pastor of Christ Community Church in Baxter, Minn.) argues that “the greater good can be served when Christian parents keep their children in the local school and work to make those schools even better.” He quotes Matthew 25:40 as a supporting text and then asks these questions: “What about the ‘least of these’ who will never have any alternative other than to attend public schools? Don’t we need to make public schools the best we can for them? If we love Jesus, we must look beyond our own children to those who have no one to care for them…the countless thousands of Christians who teach in the public schools are powerful witnesses for Jesus Christ. They realize that the best way to brighten the darkness is not to condemn it, but to shine a light in it.”
There are a number of responses which can be made to Mr. Doud’s comments. First, how is the “greater good” served by sending our kids into an environment which is devoid of Jesus Christ? If we “love Jesus”, should we not first and foremost see that our children are in an environment conducive for them to learn to love Jesus? I would argue that the “greater good” is not arrived at by sending your kids to public school. Second, instead of throwing our hands up in despair and saying that some of the “least of these” (which in context Matthew 25:40 is referring to believers) will have no alternative than to attend public schools, perhaps we should work toward providing alternatives. Third, there seems to be a misconstrued idea in Doud’s argument that because people do not send their children to public schools they have no influence in the public school arena. That is simply not the case. It may diminish some influence but it does not destroy it. The question becomes, is the trade-off for influencing the public school system worth putting your children in the public school system? Certainly, we would all agree with Doud that if the public school system is going to be in existence we want it to be the best it can be. Fourth, we certainly want to affirm all Christians who are working in the public school system and who do their best to live as Christ and witness of Him. We do want to shine the gospel light in the darkness of sin but that does not mean that condemnation of sin and darkness is excluded. In fact, condemnation of sin must be included if the light of the gospel is to shine in the darkness of sin.
There are numerous other categories of discussions which are connected with ontology. For instance, cosmology (the view of the world). The issue of creation vs. evolution would be discussed here. Theology is another important category. Theology is the study of God. How is God presented and studied in the particular environment of education which you have chosen for your child? Another category is what is typically called psychology. Psychology is simply the study of the soul. What psychological theory is your child being presented with?
To be continued…
