By Dr. Vernard T. Gant, Director of ACSI Urban School Services
Students will live as committed Christians and thereby make a difference in the world for Christ— this is considered by many Christian schools and educators to be a part of their mission and the goal of their instruction. Moreover, the hope is that some students will devote themselves to fulltime or vocational Christian ministry. Ultimately, however, the desire is that all graduates of Christian schools will practice lifestyle ministry; that is, wherever they go or in whatever vocation they engage, these products of Christian schooling will “do” ministry. This desired, or expected, student outcome is often expressed in the mission and vision statements of many Christian schools. Usually there is some mention of the Great Commission or the desired impact that the products of Christian schools will make on society. The goal, though, is that Christian school students, in whatever position or capacity they find themselves, would demonstrate God’s love and minister to the world, and thereby make a difference in the world.
The above paragraph summarizes the explanation given by some Christian schools for their selective or restrictive admissions policies. They limit their enrollment to children from Christian homes. Thus they ensure, to the degree possible, the existence of a student body and a parental support structure conducive to facilitating the mission of preparing students to live as Christians in the world, because the Christian lifestyle, or way of living, essentially translates to ministry—again, whether formally or informally.
These schools operate under two fundamental assumptions. First, they believe that children who come from Christian homes will comport themselves in ways commensurate with promoting a positive, wholesome school culture. Such a culture, they believe, will help better prepare the student to live a Christian life in the world. Secondly, and adversely, they assume that children from non-Christian homes will behave in ways that foster a negative and counterproductive school culture and that have a corrosive, leavening effect. These schools to a large degree believe that the makeup of the student body determines whether or not a school is Christian—or at least determines the degree of spirituality of the school— and that this makeup has an impact on the desired student There is also the assumption and expectation that Christian parents are supportive of the school’s mission and that they reinforce the values and behavior codes at home.
Christian Schools as Ministries
Most Christian schools identify themselves as ministries (often to justify the low pay and lack of benefits) just as the educators in these schools think of themselves as being in ministry. They usually see the purpose of ministry as twofold. First and foremost in the minds of Christian educators is to present the gospel of Jesus Christ with the goal of getting people saved, whereby they will enter eternal life. A second purpose is to address the ills of society with the goal of correcting that which sin has broken in the world.
All the ills of society are rooted in two basic violations: a failure to love God and a failure to love others.
All the ills of society are rooted in two basic violations: a failure to love God and a failure to love others. When Jesus was asked what was required to inherit eternal life, He put the question back to the questioner, and the correct response was given:
“You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, with all your strength, and with all your mind,” and “your neighbor as yourself.” (Luke 10:27, NKJV)
Implicit in this reply is that the fundamental governing principle of salvation and eternal life is love. To love God is to keep His commandments; to love others is to seek their highest good. Every failure to love God is idolatry, because it involves putting something or someone before Him. Every failure to love others is injustice, because it either actively harms them or passively withholds from them what is helpful to them. Again, to love God is to keep His commandments, and to love others is to seek their highest good. The apostle Paul, under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit, stated these truths accordingly: “Love does no harm to a neighbor; therefore love is the fulfillment of the law” (Romans 13:10, NKJV).
This concept did not have its introduction in the New Testament. Actually, God made it known in
the Old Testament as He revealed to the prophet Micah His requirements of humanity and His assessment of ultimate good: He has shown you, O man, what is good; and what does the Lord require of you but to do justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with your God? (Micah 6:8, NKJV)
Jesus described these requirements as the important things to God. Upon reproving the religious leaders of His day, Jesus pointed out that they had engaged meticulously in their religious activities while they “neglected the weightier matters of the law: justice and mercy and faith” (Matthew 23:23, NKJV). Justice, or to do justly, means simply to do what is right. It means aligning with God’s law—His requirements. Mercy, or to love mercy, goes a step further by not only doing what is right toward others, but acting toward others in such as way as one would have others act in return. This is illustrated in the parable of the Good Samaritan. There was no Mosaic law that required the Samaritan to assist the victim on the Jericho road except for God’s command to love your neighbor as yourself. When Jesus asked which one “was neighbor to him who fell among the thieves?” the correct response was given—“He who showed mercy” (Luke 10:36–37, NKJV).
One’s neighbors include all the members of society, and in loving their neighbors the members of God’s kingdom serve as agents of healing in society.
Not only does love cause no harm, but it also seeks the best interest of its neighbor, as Jesus indicated in the parable of the good Samaritan. This parable teaches that a person belonging to God’s kingdom should seek to remedy the ills of society, first by no longer contributing to its ills (doing justly), and second by endeavoring to correct existing ills (showing mercy). Furthermore, the parable, which was given in response to a request for a definition of neighbor, clearly establishes that one’s “neighbor” crosses racial, religious, and—by inference—all other lines. In other words, one’s neighbors include all the members of society, and in loving their neighbors the members of God’s kingdom serve as agents of healing in society. In doing so, they both represent and promote the kingdom among those who have not yet embraced it.
It is imperative, in the Christian school’s endeavor to prepare students for life, that these fundamental kingdom principles are kept in mind and at the forefront of the school’s program and practices. As stated in previous issues of this publication, children represent the prime opportunity for both preparing an individual for Christian living and ministry and for making an impact on an individual through the same. The challenge is how to proceed in such an endeavor in the school setting.
Assessing Students’ Spiritual Readiness
Some schools operate on the premise that the student assimilation process begins with the student selection process. That is, they believe that the assimilation process is aided by students who either fit a certain profile or meet certain criteria. They operate under the belief in the “leavening principle” or the “fellowship principle.” The leavening principle holds that if a non-Christian child or non-Christian family is permitted in the school, then that little heathen leaven could contaminate the entire Christian bunch. The fellowship principle holds that non-Christian children who represent darkness ought not to fellowship with Christian children who represent light, for what fellowship does light have with darkness? This would constitute an unequal yoking, which is expressly forbidden in Scripture (2 Corinthians 6:14). If, however, one were to consider the whole counsel of God, it would be readily apparent that God did not intend for His people to take an isolationist approach toward the world, or toward nonbelievers, for then His people would have to go outside the world (1 Corinthians 5:10). These principles and practices operate under two assumptions: (1) children from Christian homes are not going to have a negative, corrosive effect on other students, and (2) children from non-Christian homes are not going to have a positive, edifying effect on other students. Christian schools have been around long enough to disprove both assumptions.
A child’s level of Christian maturity, or spirituality, is not and cannot be artificially determined. Nor is it determined by factors such as the child’s age, degree of religious activity in the home, or frequency of church attendance. Instead, that maturity is evidenced by the child’s receptivity to spiritual matters and the willingness to practice them. Therefore, while a student application may require that the child indicate church membership or frequency of attendance, or it may even require a ministerial recommendation, these criteria do not guarantee or even gauge the child’s spirituality. Neither is the length of time one has been a professing Christian proportionate to the person’s level of spiritual maturity. That is, there are those who have professed to being Christians for a considerable period of time, yet they are still babes and are carnal in some areas—just as there are those who have been Christians for a relatively short period of time, but they are spiritually mature in some areas.
Again, it is worth considering Jesus’ “admissions” policy and practice. When an immoral woman such as Mary Magdalene or a crooked public official such as Zacchaeus or any other “sinner” was willing to do His will, that person was admitted into His fellowship. By the same token, when a devout religious person with a long, rich history of religious practice was unwilling to do His bidding, that person was excluded from His “school” of followers (see Matthew 19:16–22). Again, the basis for acceptance by Christ was not the followers’ prior lifestyles or religious beliefs, but the willingness of the followers to comply with the conditions for following Him. That is the reason that Jesus’ invitation to “whosoever” to follow Him was tempered with the condition that no one could follow Him unless there was a willingness to forsake all (Luke 14:26, Matthew 16:24).
It is this willingness that puts the followers of Christ on common ground. It is this willingness that puts a student body on common ground. By this same token, for example, if a student from a Christian home is unwilling to submit to the conditions for “following Christ” in the Christian school, that student is less prone to being spiritually assimilated and to exerting a positive influence than the student from the non-Christian home who is willing to submit. Again, the willingness is not just a matter of intellectual assent, but rather intentional acceptance. It is not a matter of verbal acknowledgement, but of vocational application.
The Spiritual Maturation Process
A sign on a school administrator’s desk read, “Raising teenagers is like trying to nail Jell-O to a tree.” This statement speaks vividly and simply to the challenge of rearing children. Child rearing is not an organizational process but an organic one. There is not a scientific method, a magic formula, or an absolute proven technique. Ungodly children have been the products of godly homes, and godly children have been the products of ungodly ones. While no one can determine a child’s outcome, it is possible to determine a child’s input. The input aids in the development and maturation of the child. This is true physically, socially, culturally, intellectually, and spiritually.
The spiritual maturation process includes three phases, or components:
- Formation of Christ in the individual (Galatians 4:19)
- Conformation of the individual into the likeness of Christ (Romans 8:29)
- Transformation
A. Inwardly (Romans 12:1–2)
B. Outwardly (Matthew 5:13–16)
Phase one is a momentous event. This can be called the conversion, or salvation, phase. This is the event of being born again. It was Paul’s ultimate desire for Israel: Brethren, my heart’s desire and prayer to God for Israel is that they may be saved. (Romans 10:1, NKJV)
Salvation should be the Christian’s ultimate desire for all individuals, including the students of Christian schools. Christian educators must be prepared to address for all their students what it means to be saved and how one becomes saved. Christian educators and schools make a critical error when they assume that children from Christian homes are by default Christians. In like manner, they show equally flawed thinking when they assume that children from non-Christian homes are by default non-Christians. Salvation is not a family affair but an individual one.
Phase two, on the other hand, is an ongoing process. It is the growth process—the process of being conformed into the image of Christ. In practice, it is the process of increasingly adopting the mind of Christ and behaving like Christ. Christian educators assist in the process through the principles of Christ and Christian living, which are
- instilled throughout the school
- inspired by the staff through their lifestyles
- instructed to the students systematically
Phase three is an outcome. It is the product of individuals who are not being conformed to the world but are being transformed (Romans 12:1–2). This is the outcome whereby doing is a result of being, that is, transformational living. Transformational living has both an inward and an outward component. Individuals whose lives have been transformed become transformers. These individuals make a difference where they are present. They function as “salt and light” in a dark and savorless world. They have been trained to know that true faith results in good works just as faith without works is dead. They realize that they are God’s workmanship created for good works. And they live in such a way that people will see their good works and glorify the Father in heaven (Matthew 5, James 2, Ephesians 2).
This, of course, should be the desired outcome for all students. Again, a reminder is in order that no one can determine the outcome—only the input. Paul states this clearly when he says that one person can plant and another person can water but that God is the one who determines the outcome (1 Corinthians 3:6). Christian educators are responsible for taking children at various stages of development and providing them with the elements that cause growth. They must realize that their students (even those the same age or with similar backgrounds) will not be at the same level of development when they enter the school nor will they grow at the same rate. Educators must distinguish between divine sovereignty (that which belongs to the realm of God) and human responsibility (that for which humans will be held accountable).
When doing so, Christian schools and educators take themselves out of the role of divinity in the matter of student selection and student spiritual assimilation. They know that all students are sinners in need of salvation, all are loved by the Father, all who yield their lives to Him are accepted by Him, all can grow in grace and in the knowledge of Him, and all can choose to be instruments of “salt and light” in the world. The role of Christian educators is simply to nurture all students to this end.
The Meantime Volume 6 Number 2