Assumptions

Lately, I've been thinking a lot (and I do mean a LOT) about two things: schooling and eating.  As any of my friends can tell you, I've been obsessing over these topics for months now.  I ask questions like:

Why do we teach our kids what we teach them (with regard to public or private school curriculum, or even homeschooling currciculum, or the university model curriculum - no form of education escapes my questioning)? 

And more school questions:

What do we (my husband and I) value?  In other words, what do we want to pass on to our kids?  (In other words, is it important to us that they can compete in the world they live in and become successful?  If so, what does 'compete' or 'successful' look like?  If that's not important, what is?  What do they need to know - and I am talking head knowledge here - as well as what do they need to experience?  And, what's the best way to give that to them?)

Do I/we believe that it the parents' primary responsibility to educate?  And what does educate mean?  Do we view it traditionally - as in 'schooling' - or do we include things like 'raise up', 'instill values', 'model' in our understanding of education?  Is it more important that they receive the latter than it is for them to receive head knowledge?  Would the process of receiving knowledge in a more traditional setting lead to the same outcome of experiencing and growing in a less traditional way?

How do we form character in our kids that will keep them building their lives on God, with God, and for God, for the rest of their days?

Is preserving our children's innocence a goal?  If so, why?  And for how long?  (I was taught that I needed to toughen up so that I would be able to deal with the big, bad world.  That was valuable - staying innocent and kind was not.  Well, kindness was okay, even expected, as long as I was tough, in control, never let anyone gain power over me.  Kindness was a means to an end and a social norm, not the end goal in and of itself, and it certainly had nothing to do with my true heart towards people or the world, much less what Christ would expect of me.)

Most of the time when I ask my friends the first question - including my many friends that have graduate-level degrees in education - I get blank stares.  Not because they are uninformed or uneducated, but because they've either never questioned why we teach what we teach (being able to teach is what mattered to them because they are passionate about helping kids, God bless them), or because they've gone over this argument so many times that it makes them tired to think of doing it again. 

Then there's always the last reason: they're so saddened and disheartened by the state of schools today that it's overwhelming to think/talk about.  Have you ever noticed how many times you overhear teachers talking about the problems with public schools? 

This past weekend, while listening in on one of those types of conversations, I asked a public school elementary teacher: what would you say to someone to convince them to send their child to a public school?  I feel like people always demand a justification if you want to take your kids out of the mainstream system, so I thought I would turn the argument on its head. 

The response?  Unfortunately, there was some defensiveness and then this: "your problem is you're lumping all schools together."  First off, I didn't know I had a problem.  I was honestly asking a question to become better informed about any good that happens in public schools.  Since I don't have kids at school ages yet, I feel like I don't have good information.  I thought this was an opportunity to go to the source.  Secondly, I truly wasn't and don't lump all schools together.  I can simply look back on my own experience in school to know that it really and truly all depends.  Sometimes, it's the luck of the draw.  So then I ask myself: do I want to gamble with my kids?

This person continued: "You have to look at the school and then the teacher."  I get this response a lot.  The funny thing?  This response does not come close to digging deep to my core questions: is a parent better suited at teaching a child than a teacher?  Does the current school environment - for whatever reason - lack the ability to give our kids the best, or even, good learning experiences?  How should we teach our kids - lecture format, experiential knowledge, field-based studies, etc?  We all seem to agree that babies, toddlers, and preschoolers learn best by doing.  Does that change as we get older?  Aren't we all, fundamentally, created to be explorers? 

I'm not sure where I fall on this spectrum yet.  I want to learn more so that I can make an informed decision for my kids.  A lot of folks - and perhaps some of you - say: "you have to make the best decision for your kid, and that decision might change over time."  If that's you, then please don't take offense at this: I don't know if I agree with that.  When I say "I don't know", I really mean I don't know.  I'm still developing my philosophy.  Right now, I'm leaning towards the following as guiding principles:

• A theology of preserving innocence.  As parents, I think one of our jobs is to allow our children to be children, and to let them grow up slowly (part or our covering, protective role).  Again, I'm not sure why I think this - which makes me feel shaky.  I need to understand scripturally if this is sound or if I'm just longing for a utopian-like childhood for my kids that I never had.  I have a feeling there is a sound, scriptural reasoning behind this - that it is actually crucial to maintain innocence (just think of how Jesus tells us we must enter the Kingdom...innocently, like a child), but I'm still working it all out.
• A theology of developing children.  Again, I say I think because I'm really not sure yet...I think that it is God's plan for children to be raised - first - by nuclear families, and then by the extended family and the greater community in ever-widening circles of influence.  If this is so, then I'm not sure why I would turn over influence to someone who is not within my child's natural circle of influence - a circle that will stay with him or her for a lifetime.  And then there's the time component: even if I think public school - theologically - is fine, how do I find the time to be the primary influence on my child if he/she is gone from me forty+ hours/week?  Again, I have no experience here yet, so I simply don't know.

I bring all of this up because I would really, truly like to hear from you about what you think.  Please email me or post in my comments.  I'm currently reading Teach Your Own by John Holt (an 'unschooling' book by one of the fathers of the homeschooling movement).  I plan to read an educational philosophy book by Charlotte Mason and some books about the history and nature of our public school system (recommendations are welcome!).  Like I keep saying, I want to try to make an informed decision for our kids.

With regard to education, I'll leave you with this.  I heard a very interesting piece from Human Media over the weekend about the fact that our founding fathers believed that democracy would fail without an informed, engaged citizenry.  (They also believed that to become engaged you must first be informed.)  When we were founded as a nation we had no mandate for public education - that didn't come nationally until 1918. 

So, my 4th of July question is this: If we assume that part of the reason we have compulsory public education in our country is to maintain democracy, then is our current public education system serving that goal?  Do we have an informed, engaged citizenry?  Could other forms of education meet that goal in a more effective manner? 

I'm going to save the food questions for another day.  I've already rambled on for too long.  Suffice it to say, my brain is full of questions, and this weekend I realized a common theme:

I am in a process of examining fundamental assummptions.

This is exciting for me.  Are there some assumptions you need to examine or question?  Are you already doing it?  I'd love to hear about it!  I find that it's really awesome to see what God will show us when we don't get so set in our ways that we aren't willing to examine and reexamine - our motives, our methods, and goals. 

Linking up with Jen at Soli Deo Gloria this fine Monday evening.  Be sure to stop by her site! 

One last thing, I promise!  I am going to start a 7-part series on Wednesday called 7 Steps to a Healthier Pantry.  Please be sure to come back for it and tell all your friends!

Parachurch & Parenting

Let me begin with a caveat: I used to be obsessed.  I would find every one I could, making sure to be familiar with the latest and greatest.  I would devour every morsel of knowledge and teaching.  I would quote them to friends and recommend them left and right.  I'm talking about parachurch teachings, in the form of books, lectures, conferences. 

I would latch on to a particular teacher and immerse myself in his or her perspective on what it means to follow Christ.  The teachers varied in background and focus and included Neil Anderson, C. Peter Wagner (and his wife, Doris), T.D. Jakes, Floyd McClung, and John Dawson, among others.

I sought out these sources of leadership when I was still a baby Christian.  Young in my faith and years, I was hungry to grow and looking for help to do so.  Unfortunately, I was at a place in my life (college) where I had no stable local church influence and, therefore, no regular source for pastoral covering, leadership and teaching.  I now believe I used these teachers and their books to fill that void.

Let me be clear: I have nothing against parachurch teachers or organization or Christian authors in general.  On the contrary, I know first-hand that they serve a valuable purpose and often stir up the Church in ways that bear excellent fruit.  My problem with the parachurch world is two-fold: I do not think it a Biblical or effective substitute for the local church; and, I, personally, experienced pain when I did what I see many young believers doing around me today. 

I tried to learn about God from books other than the Bible.

I know that sounds over-simplified, but it's the bluntest way to explain what I did.  I was at a time, as a young Christian, when I was laying the foundation for my new life in Christ.  I spent more time in other words rather than in The Word.  As a result, I often became over-zealous, hyper-religious, confused, and stalled on the journey to true faith - a faith that is utterly and completely God-centric (versus angel-and-demon-centric, warfare-focused, evangelistic-obsessed, or any other version that would fit when we put fruit before the Fruit Giver & gifts before the Gift Giver).

I tend to have an excitable personality.  As my mother-in-law pointed out (an observation which I greatly appreciated): I'm one of those people who hears about something and immediately wants to try it.  I invest resources into whatever the new thing is (sewing, quilting, scrapbooking, etc) and become obsessed with it.  For about a day, that is, and then I'm on to the next thing.  This relates to the hyper-emotionalism I wrote about in an earlier post.  I know this about myself, so I know that I have to be careful before I swing in the direction of the next, big thing, even if the next, big thing is legitmately valuable.  Therefore, I actively put my energies into things that last: Jesus, Scripture, relationships and activities/interests that feel solid to me, not easily blown about by the wind.

(Incidentally, it was so hard to remember the names of the teachers I used to obsess over that I actually had to do some research to make sure I was remembering accurately.  As I did, I ran a Google search on "books on spiritual warfare", which used to be a particular interest of mine.  All of the authors of the latest and greatest books were names I did not recognize, save one: Neil Anderson, author of The Bondage Breaker.  It's funny that he's the one who is still around, fifteen years after my obsessive years, for, in my life, his teachings are the ones that bore the most lasting fruit, while many of the others served to merely stir me up emotionally and distract me from the point: Jesus Himself.)

(On another side note: I may not remember the names of the authors and parachurch leaders, but I remember every pastor and priest, every small group leader, every youth minister, college leader, or young adult's minister.  But that's probably a discussion for another time!)

My point?  I'm going to recommend two books, and I wanted you to know that I do not do so lightly.  I don't know that I agree with everything that's said in either, but I think they raise important enough points that they should be read by parents and discussed in light of Biblical Truth.  The books are: Bringing Up Boys & Bringing Up Girls by Dr. James Dobson.

I have come late to the SAHM (stay-at-home-mom) world.  Most of my SAHM friends have been doing it from day one.  I, on the other hand, gained the privilege of staying at home with my children when Gunnar was two-and-a-half and Lilian was eleven months old.  As such, I cherish every second with them.  I feel called to be their primary caregiver; I firmly believe it's the most important job that any mom out there has (and dad as well, but I'm speaking from my own experience). 

How does all of this relate?  It's slightly disjointed, I know, but I'm tieing these things together in this way: when I experienced a headship vacuum I became a little lost along the way.  How much more so when our children are left to fend for themselves, to try to understand Truth without the covering God has given them.  It's our job, not society's, not our culture's, to raise them.  Both of these books have helped me (and my husband) to think through ways to intentionally and proactively raise our children, and to be aware of the world in which we are raising them.  There are many other ways to engage that process, of course.  This is just one I have found immensely provocative and helpful, so I wanted to pass it on.  If you've read either of them or start them in the weeks to come, I'd love to hear your thoughts!

One last thought before I conclude: the impetus for this post comes from something I read in Bringing Up Girls today. 

"Children are a gift from God, ans we are stewards of their welfare.  Training up our daughters in this sense implies helping them to navigate the cultural mindfields that lie in their paths - teaching them eternal values, talents, and perspectives.  It means instilling within them an appreciation for truthfulness, trustworthiness, self-discipline, self-control, gneerosity, and sweetness of spirit." (Chapter I)

When I came across the words "self-discipline" and "self-control" I said a quick, silent prayer: "oh Lord Jesus, please help me teach my son these things" (my daughter too, of course, but I was particularly thinking about my ants-in-his-pants son).  I prayed it out of exasperation and with little faith, not really believing he could actually learn not to touch everything in sight (he's a tinkerer). 

As I prayed, I saw a picture of my own heart.  I realized that my desire was for him to learn these things once; I had the attitude (hidden to me until that moment) that if I could just get these character traits instilled in him, I'd be done.  I could let out a big "whew" and move on.  When I realized that that was actually want I wanted, what I was secretly hoping for, I laughed at myself.  As if, I wanted to say.  Parenting is not that simple, I'm learning, and we humans aren't wired that way.  We have to learn things over and over again.  That's why "love is patient"; that's why God is the best parenting model.  He never gives up on us and kindly re-teaches us lessons we've learned a thousand times before.

So, to bring us back to my original point: I'm thankful that there are parenting books out there to help us for the long haul; but I know that the most important parenting book is the Bible, and the most important model is God Himself.  Lord, have mercy on us all!

Linking up with Soli Deo Gloria today.  So glad to be back.  Check out the links of the ladies who contribute - you won't be sorry!