Are we raising kids who won’t fit in? I have asked this of myself regularly over the past few years. My wife and I are educating our three boys at home. We don’t watch television (only an occasional video). We emphasize books. We read to the kids and make them memorize poetry. We pray together on our knees. In many ways, our kids are culturally ignorant. They don’t know about Disney World. The other day, my five-year-old asked, “Who is Mickey Mouse?”
So I guess the answer to the question has to be yes. But the “yes” is a qualified one, for when one considers the concept of “odd,” one should ask, “compared to what?” This moves us in a helpful direction, for if “normal” is merely what everyone else does, then what is normal changes with the times. What is odd in one time might not be odd in another. On the other hand, if “normal” refers to a proper way of being human, and if human nature is unchanging, then what is odd, in the sense of being opposed to the majority, may in fact be normal.
As we consider exactly what, in our culture, sets the odd kids apart, it seems to me that the clearest and brightest line can be drawn when we ask the following question: Will your kids be raised primarily on books or on television? To put it another way: Will your children be educated in a logocentric environment, where the written and spoken word is the primary conveyer of meaning, or will they ingest most of their information through electronically generated images?
The whole thing is worth your time and reflection.
The only caveat I would add--and I most surely do not say this with any undergirded fortitude--is that it seems there is a cost associated with education like this, and that cost is public involvement and evangelism. Perhaps this hasn't always been the case (classical education used to be the norm). But times have changed and education is drastically different (and probably deficient). So my question is, what do we value more? The education of our kids or unbelievers in public school? Or, said perhaps less inflammatorily, is there a balance we can strike between sequestering our kids for their proper education and their involvement with the public so that they may spread the good news?
I met a guy recently who is vehemently opposed to both private Christian school and home school for the simple reason that evangelism can't happen when you aren't around unbelievers. My guess is that Mitchell would say evangelism will be a natural outworking of the grounded and studious "moral imagination." I am not so sure. I have about three years before I have to decide.
Posts
4 comments:
The logic that home schooling or private schooling your kids takes them away from the public sphere (and evangelistic opportunity) is flimsy. This is especially true in the elementary grades. No where in the bible do we read admonitions to push young children out as little lights in a dark world. Rather, we are repeatedly instructed to disciple them and ground them in their faith. Perhaps once they get to middle school or high school they will be ready to not only shine their lights, but also be ready to "keep themselves unpolluted from the world" (James 1:27).
The other reason that argument is flimsy is that it assumes that public school is the only place to evangelize. This simply isn't true. My wife and kids are regularly reaching out to our neighbors. My wife is more shrewd and strategic about it. My girls, especially the 4 year old, is always confidently talking to my neighbor. And then there are the conversations that happen at story time at the public library. Or at outreaches through our church where they are involved (like MOPS). Granted, there may be greater exposure to more opportunity in public schools; but, in nearly every other sphere of life you need to be creative and take more initiative to evangelize. Why not teach our kids how to interact and engage with others in creative ways so they are not limited in life to evangelize only in environments that are convenient?
I'm not saying the opportunity isn't there in public schools. But I am saying it is myopic to claim that evangelism can't happen if you don't send your kids to public schools. In order for either approaches to be effective, parents need to be extremely intentional about discipling their children in order to equip them to share their faith in their context, and to "watch their lives and doctrine closely" so as to not make shipwreck the faith they aim to share.
I mostly agree with you and think you have begun to answer well the "How do we balance?" question. The problem, as is usually the case, is with those whose practice is extreme, at both ends of the spectrum.
Still, while the "Kids can't do evangelism if they aren't in the public schools" position is flimsy, as you say, the question it brings about is not nearly as flimsy, in my opinion. It clearly something you have considered and will continue to consider. That is the right way to go about it.
In the end, there is no right position. Each family will decide what is the best for their kids. But that is just the beginning of figuring out how you'll help your kids understand and practice the Great Commission.
Post a Comment