I have received quite a bit of reaction to my post on the debate over Southern Baptists and public schools. One correspondent wondered if I was not sacrificing love of neighbor for safety and security. After all, he argued, we should love not just our own children but the children of others. This means seeking to influence the public schools by keeping our children in them. I don’t think this argument works.
Love of neighbor is, of course, a mandate of Christian discipleship. And love of neighbor entails seeking educational opportunity for children outside of our families of our ecclesial communities. This is why we should support efforts at commonsense educational reform. The question, however, is whether this love of neighbor annihilates the unique parental responsibilities within the family?
The Scriptures consistently speak of education within the context of a father imparting wisdom and knowledge to his sons and daughters (Deut 6; Prov 1). Jesus appropriates this imagery when he speaks of watching what his Father is doing and doing likewise (John 5:19-22). This does not mean that home schooling is the only (or even, necessarily, the best) option, any more than it means that the father must grow all of the family’s food. It does mean, however, that fathers are responsible for their children’s well being, in terms of food, nurture, and education. This is above and beyond the call of love of neighbor. After all, the apostle Paul warns that the man who does not provide for his own family is “worse than an unbeliever” (1 Tim 5:8).
Often joined with the neighbor-love argument is the “salt and light” contention that being a Great Commission people necessitates remaining in the public schools in order to influence them. Let’s remind ourselves that the public schools are a recent invention. Are we compelled to leave our children in whatever system the government institutes, or else sacrifice our evangelistic responsibilities? Some school systems have “preschool” programs that begin at age three. Are we obligated to these as well? How about the “after-school” programs that run until 6, 7, even 8 PM? What if the United States government decides to universalize boarding schools?
Moreover, it doesn’t seem that the “salt and light” advocates can live consistently with their arguments. After all, if public school education is part of the Great Commission mandate then why send one’s children to a relatively good public school? Why not send them to the worst possible public school as an effort to reach the “World A” of the educational system? Most would not do this. Why not? Because they believe that the education of their children is important. Exactly…
That brings us to the real nub of the disagreement. Do the public schools really do what they claim to do, that is, enculturate children into the mainstream of contemporary values? I think they do. The underlying question then is whether the mainstream of contemporary values is consonant with the Gospel of Jesus Christ.
