Yesterday and Tomorrow
Lutheran Education Yesterday and Tomorrow
Our Lutheran schools were built with the idea that they would equip God’s
people for works of service to the church and society. This involved an
excellent education, not only in Biblical studies, but also in all other areas
of knowledge. Philip Melanchthon, author of the Augsburg Confession, regarded
learning as a tool needed to recover the Word of God, which is in its purest
form encased in languages that could be learned only by diligent study of a
number of subjects. He wrote, “Without in understanding of language, one cannot
read the Old and New Testaments; and to understand languages one need all sorts
of related knowledge in history, geography, chronology, and other liberal
arts.” Melanchthon further considered learning essential to faith and good
order in society. He wrote, “ Without education, religion and the arts will
decline and mankind will be reduced to animality. … Only through the
maintenance of learning can religion and good government endure, and God
demands that children be brought up in virtue and piety.”
Upon arriving in America, the first building the Saxon immigrants erected
was not a church but a school. Although referred to as a college, in its early
years it served nine students ranging in age from 4 to 13. Concerning this
school, Walther wrote, “We the
undersigned, intend to establish an instruction and training institution which
differs from the common elementary schools principally in that it will embrace,
outside of (in addition to) the general and elementary curriculum, all branches
of the classical high school, which are necessary for a true Christian and
scientific education, such as: Religion, the Latin, Greek, Hebrew, German,
French and English languages; History, Geography, Mathematics, Physics, Natural
History, Introduction to Philosophy, Music, and Drawing.” It was a truly
“classical” school.
In recent decades, our Missouri Synod schools have wandered further and
further down the road of progressive education. Progressive education is
founded on the beliefs of Jean Jacques Rousseau who taught that there is no
original sin and that the first impulse of the child’s nature is always right.
Therefore, Rousseau asserted that the child’s own nature is the ultimate good
and should not be corrupted by authoritative or directive teaching techniques.
His views have given rise to such failed educational concepts as “whole
language,” “child-directed learning,” and “social promotion.”
Rousseau’s educational ideas were scorned in his home country of France,
but they were embraced in America primarily through the work of John Dewey.
Mark Milliron explains Dewey’s educational philosophy, “The radical humanist
platform for education, in which the child was seen as inherently wise and
disciplined, was the philosophy upon which Dewey built his progressivist
paradigm. It led to the ‘child-centered’ pedagogy that is almost universally
promoted in faculties of education and subscribed to by provincial ministries
of education. According to the child-centered model, what mattered was not the
learning of subject matter, neatly and logically arranged, but the child’s own
development. Thus, academic content was minimized and student-directed
activities were increased. Because content was seen as secondary to process,
curricular outcomes were rewritten with activities that built ‘ self-concept’
and ‘classroom community’ replacing academic standards. Assessment of
performance was made anecdotal and relative, so that the fragile egos of
flowering personalities wouldn’t be nipped in the bud of their development.”
In the 1970’s and 80’s, Missouri’s schools adopted the progressive methods
thinking them to be modern and neutral. They believed they could use secular
methods and still retain their Lutheran doctrine. But methods cannot be
separated from their underlying philosophy. With these methods came the
humanistic and socialistic philosophies that spawned them. The result has been
a corruption of our doctrine, a reduction of academic requirements, and an
erosion of piety and virtue in our schools.
Classical education seeks to restore that which was once good and right in
our schools. It does not deny or neglect the use of modern technologies (e.g.,
computers), but it emphasizes training the child in the way he should go so
that when he is old he will not depart from it. Dr. Gene Edward Veith contrasts
the goals of progressive and classical education, “[Classical education] turns right
side-up the modern Romantic 'child-centered' approach to education. ... Because
[romantic educators] believe childhood is a time set aside for pleasure and
freedom, they want learning to be fun and entertaining, scarcely distinguished
from games and play. ... The classicist sees childhood very differently. He
knows that 'children ... want to be brought up; they do not want to remain
12-year-olds.' The [classical] teacher aims to form the adult-to-be, not
liberate the-child-within.”
Classical education is built on the foundation that truth is transmittable.
It seeks to train the mind to think with an adequate base in language,
literature, and general knowledge; a thorough understanding of logic and
argumentative fallacies; and much practice at defending the Christian faith
with both reason and piety. P.E. Kretzman wrote, "The aim of Christian
Education is: 1) faithfully to imbed and anchor in the intellect of the rising
generation all the holy truths upon which the life of the mature congregation
fundamentally is based ...; 2) to stir their emotions to a vital interest in
these truths; and 3) to bend the will, so that it may run in the paths in which
the Holy Spirit, turning to account those truths in His own time and hour,
lifts them into personal faith ...." Such are the aims of a Lutheran and Classical
Education.
We need to restore this kind of education in our Synod. We need it for the
sake of our children that they might be well educated. We need it for the sake
of our schools that they might be centers of learning and equippers of God’s
people. We need it for the sake of our church that it may remain faithful to
Christ’s truth and endure until His return. The renowned Missouri Synod
theologian, J.T. Mueller, wrote about our schools, “Our pioneer fathers had, to
a remarkable degree, the gift of vision, particularly educational vision. They
distinctly foresaw the tremendous possibilities involved in Christian education
as a basic means by which to develop, promote, and safeguard the existence of
the Church, founded upon the preaching of God's pure Word.”
I believe the very survival of the Lutheran church - at least as a
Bible-believing and God-honoring church - is dependent on our ability to indoctrinate
our children in the faith, teach them to love it, and equip them to defend it.
Lutheranism is not retained by buildings or bureaucracies; it is retained and
transmitted only by God's people well indoctrinated and well equipped to adorn
their lives and their lips with God’s truth. Thirty years of progressive
education in Missouri Synod schools have left us ignorant of the truth and
ill-equipped to defend it. It is time for a change.
William
C. Heine
Education
Chairman
Wyoming
District, LCMS
January
2000
