This is a lot of stuff to deal with in one post, so I’ll try to just sort of give an overview that might hit on several of Kirstin’s questions. I think Norb hit some good ideas. I find it helpful to divide our thought in this area into the realm of the way things are and the way they should be.
Yes, many parents do send their children to my school so that they can be safe from the big bad world. To do so though, is to miss the point.
Parents should send their kids to my school because we have a single unified philosophy. All the teachers in my school agree that God is first and all things taught must begin there. In a way, whether you believe in Chrisitanity or not,, it still makes sense for your kid to be taught out of a philosophical unity. I admire a great many public school teachers (my two brothers, my mom, Norb but trying to teach in a spiritual vacuum (or a spiritual obscurity) seems crazy to me.
But how much more do you want to send your kids to a christian school when you are a believer. I say Amen to Norb regarding the notion that no school should shelter a kid. Protect them, and make them safe from harm, yes (all schools should do that)). But I want my students to come into contact with the people and ideas of the world. I just want them to do that with the aid of a guide who can help them understand what they are looking at — seek to discern the grace of God and the brokenness of sin.
As to the seeker sensitive question, maybe I am missing the point here. Seeker sensitive doesn’t mean not speaking the truth, does it? (sorry about the double neg there). Christian schools should certainly be more welcoming, less condescending, more transparent, and should do more in the way of offering scholarships. I also think they should worry less abou t what their applicants profess, and more about what their graduates profess.
Got a 7 month old on my lap. Fighting a losing battle. must go more later mayber
BBC
Aug 03 2004
08:20 pm
This is a lot of stuff to deal with in one post, so I’ll try to just sort of give an overview that might hit on several of Kirstin’s questions. I think Norb hit some good ideas. I find it helpful to divide our thought in this area into the realm of the way things are and the way they should be.
Yes, many parents do send their children to my school so that they can be safe from the big bad world. To do so though, is to miss the point.
Parents should send their kids to my school because we have a single unified philosophy. All the teachers in my school agree that God is first and all things taught must begin there. In a way, whether you believe in Chrisitanity or not,, it still makes sense for your kid to be taught out of a philosophical unity. I admire a great many public school teachers (my two brothers, my mom, Norb but trying to teach in a spiritual vacuum (or a spiritual obscurity) seems crazy to me.
But how much more do you want to send your kids to a christian school when you are a believer. I say Amen to Norb regarding the notion that no school should shelter a kid. Protect them, and make them safe from harm, yes (all schools should do that)). But I want my students to come into contact with the people and ideas of the world. I just want them to do that with the aid of a guide who can help them understand what they are looking at — seek to discern the grace of God and the brokenness of sin.
As to the seeker sensitive question, maybe I am missing the point here. Seeker sensitive doesn’t mean not speaking the truth, does it? (sorry about the double neg there). Christian schools should certainly be more welcoming, less condescending, more transparent, and should do more in the way of offering scholarships. I also think they should worry less abou t what their applicants profess, and more about what their graduates profess.
Got a 7 month old on my lap. Fighting a losing battle. must go more later mayber