" /> A Day In The Journey: June 2004 Archives

Main | July 2004 »

June 26, 2004

Definition

What is a Christian classical school? Fair question. And one which I hope to answer.

First I will address the idea of a Christian school. Most people think they know what being a Christian school entails: uniforms, standards and a Bible class. Yet that is little more than your average private school with some denominational orientation thrown in. A truly Christian school seeks to remember that the "chief end of man is to glorify God. . . ." A truly Christian school remembers that the very act of living is in praise of Him and thus every act of living should be surrounded by Him. And a truly Christian school gives students the opportunity to discover the answers to the "negotiable" questions on their own. Thus, a Christian school should teach every subject from a biblical perspective--teaching in the light that the all-powerful, sovereign God controls every aspect of life and infuses every discipline of man--rather than simply tacking on a chapel or a Bible class. However, a truly Christian school should not fall to the temptation to institute a box for thinking. Students should and must be taught the basics of the faith--and the reasons why they are true. But beyond the basics, students should be allowed to discuss the sides, to turn to their parents for answers, and to come to the conviction they see best. For without training the students to reasonably examine and determine their own position on "negotiable" issues--students are left with a set of "beliefs," but no idea why they are true, or why they should believe them. A truly Christian school should not discourage questioning, it should equip the students with the tools and scriptures to answer the questions.

Now, to the harder task: answering the question, "what is a classical school?" I will warn you that you will have to think outside of "traditional" educational methodology for a few minutes. For about a hundred years, schools have been structured according to the idea that students should be given a set of "subjects" to master by the time they graduate. For example, History. We take a student and teach them over the period of 12 or 13 years a large number of chronological facts that are mainly divorced from every other area of study. These facts we expect them to absorb and spit back out for tests, etc., and then we turn said students out into the world with a vague idea that the world has some historical facts and events. But they never learn more than that. The idea behind what is termed "classical" education goes beyond the mere mastery of subject matter. The idea is to teach children the methods of learning so that they can master any subject they find to be interesting. We'll get back to history in a minute. The basic structure of a classical education follows the Trivium: grammar, logic (dialectic), and rhetoric. Grammar is the study of the parts of language. Every discipline has its own "grammar." History has facts, dates, events; Math, numbers and processes; English, parts of speech and syntax; Science, elements and definitions. In the grammar stage, students learn these tools--the elements and order of the languages. They learn to take apart a "subject" to examine and learn its basic parts. Logic is the study of using and applying those parts of the language. By experimentation and application they understand how the parts work together. Rhetoric is the study of expression. Now that students have learned the elements of a language and how those elements are used and applied, they can learn to express their own thoughts and ideas in that language. These steps helpfully mirror the intellectual development of students (a discussion I will leave to wiser minds, like Sayers). So, back to history. How is history different? Classical students learn facts and events, also, yet not nearly as many. The emphasis is on learning the watershed points. They learn to place these facts and events in their historical context, through literature, and they also learn to apply the lessons learned. In the Grammar stage, facts are learned. By the logic stage, students are learning the connection that historical events have with literature and philosophy. Because the emphasis is on mastery of a process that is the same in all disciplines, students are able to learn connections. A caveaTITLE: the average classical student in middle school will have less individual subject knowledge that the average traditional student. The difference is that the classical student has learned a methodology that will enable him to master any subject he desire to study, whereas the traditional student has only learned the content knowledge. Classical students learn the tools they have to work with, how the tools work and how to apply them to their personal expression.

Wow. I don't know if that makes a great deal of sense. I hope so. It is only a brief overview of Christian classical education. I will leave you with a link to an excellent speech/essay by Dorothy Sayers. She explains things much better than I do. So for a deeper look, please read "The Lost Tools of Learning."
lost tools

June 24, 2004

Preparations

So. I really wasn't expecting all the prep work in going to this school. Okay, maybe I was, but I was hoping it wouldn't be quite so much. The movie part won't be so bad :) but the reading was. . .well good and bad. Recovering the Lost Tools of Learning by Doug Wilson was good. I enjoyed it because it spoke from his personal experience founding a classical Christian school. Not beign Presbyterian, I didn't agree with all of his philosophy, but I found the book very helpful in getting my teeth around the general philosphy of classical Christian education. The Seven Laws of Teaching, on the other hand, was not so easy to get through. The book, by John Milton Gregory, was excellent as far as thesis and core information was concerned. It was inceredibly wordy, however. Of course, that could be because it was written in the 1880's and the style then was rather. . .overly word-filled. However, as repetition is the key to learning, I guess I can't get too irritated about it. Actually, he really explains the keys to being a good teacher--keys that are often forgotten in a day of curriculum methodology and psychology classes. I really felt that he had a handle on what to keep in mind as one is teaching. Right now, I feel well prepared to tackle both classical Christian philosophy (from Wilson) and the application of it (from Gregory). I say this knowing full well that after my first day my feelings of well-preparedness will very likely shatter and I will return to both books to regain myself. But that, I suppose, is the lot of everyone who embarks on a new endeavor!

June 12, 2004

Manufactured Gods

They put up big wooden gods.
Then they burned the big wooden gods
And put up brass gods and
Changing their minds suddenly
Knocked down the brass gods and put up
A doughface god with gold earrings.
The poor mutts, the pathetic slant heads,
They didn’t know a little tin god
Is as good as anything in the line of gods
Nor how a little tin god answers prayer
And makes rain and brings luck
The same as a big wooden god or a brass
God or a doughface go with golden
Earrings.

--Carl Sandburg

The Water Circus

These birds in hundreds rained like pelt-like kamikazes the day the heavens caved in because of God’s anger.
Man was floating in circles in a boat made of pitch.
Fish were freed to a place of utter mobility.
And the screaming children were swallowed up by the sea.
Inside the fortress, man smelled like the earth, even though the earth was not yet to be seen.
My curious cohorts would play late in their pens of mud,
And furious others clamoured until they fell into sleep.
The old man’s hand was blood-soaked in teeth-marks,
For the floating zoo had no admission park.
And this lonely dove, the soul of God in image,
Found a twig that set every one off,
In the water circus.

--Kevin Smith

The Song of the Statue

Who is there who so loves me, that he
Will throw away his own dear life?
If someone will die for me in the ocean,
I will be brought back from stone
Into life, into life redeemed.
How I long for blood’s rushing;
Stone is so still.
I dream of life: life is good.
Has no one the courage
Through which I might awaken?
And if I once more find myself in life,
Given everything most golden,--

------------------------------

then I will weep
alone, weep for my stone.
What help will my blood be, when it ripens like wine?
It cannot scream out of the ocean
He who loved me most.

--Rainer M. Rilke

Girl's Melancholy

A young knight comes to mind
Almost like an old saying.He came. Thus sometimes in the grove
The great storm comes and wraps around you.He left. Thus often the wild benison
Of the great bells breaks off
In the midst of prayer...
Then you want to scream in the silence,
And yet only weep softly inside,
Deep in your cool shawl.
A young knight comes to mind,
Riding far in full armor.
His smile was so soft and fine:
Like gleaming on old ivory,
Like homesickness, like a Christmas snowfall
In the dark village, like turquoise
Around which many pearls are fashioned,
Like moonlight
On a favorite book.

--Rainer M. Rilke

Ghost

My mind is haunted by you.
I hear your voice when you aren't there.
I see you in the faces around me.
And when I close my eyes, alone. . . .
I have tried, many times,
To exorcise you from my heart,
From the very corners of my head.
But you always return.
I am hopelessly yours yet. . .
You choose not to come and claim me.
So I watch your spirit cavort
Through the pieces of my heart,
Wondering what to do.
Haunted by you.

The Witness

The noontide is dark,
No sunshine I see;
And all because of
A man on a tree.
All morning O watched
As he hung there so weak,
And then when he died
It seem'd God did speak.

The earthquakes are done,
But spirits still walk.
Who is this man
That makes the earth talk?
He must be God's Son
Just as he said.
But now it's too late:
God's Son is dead.

- - -

It's been three whole days
Since the man on the tree,
But of my despair
No end do I see.
But see, hear the news-
These women are mad!
They say to rejoice;
To no more be sad.
They say He is risen
That man on the tree;
They say from my sorrow
I now can be free.
'How is this true?'
I ask. 'He is dead!'
'Oh no!' they reply.
'It's just as He said.
'He is risen, alive!
And on the third day!'

And then I see Him.
What more can I say.

React

My thoughts lie fallow on the ground.

I cannot react or respond.

The news is too heavy to allow

Me to think on it.

I stare in shock at the bearer.

She waits for response, for answer,

But nothing comes.

My mind is too overwhelmed.

I simply stare at her,

Unbelieving.

Pitch Black

This morning I watched a movie called Pitch Black. I will give the brief disclaimer that it is rated "R" because the language is profuse and there is some gore. (However, anyone who has watche a Robert De Niro movie--language in this isn't nearly so bad.) That said, this was a great movie. The storyline is intriguing. There is definitely a point at which it goes in a copletely different direction than you were thinking. The characters are interesting and believable. And the story starts right in the middle--a touch I love because it requires the seeding of back-knowledge into the plot. The movie is worth watching if you can deal with the language.

But here is the point that really got me about it. As Christians, we should be able to see the hand of God everywhere and in all things. As a Christian classical educator, I especially want to be able not only to see His hand, but also to convey to my students that they should see His hand in all things. Even in secular works of art/film/fiction. This movie has such a heart-stopping Christ-figure moment. And I would never have expected it. Unfortunately, I do have to somewhat spoil the end to give it to you. But knowing the end doesn't really spoil the movie. And I'll try to be vague enough. . . . Don't read it until after you watch it if you might be disappointed.

Near the end of the movie, Riddick is about to make his getaway, leaving some people behind on this planet. He is stopped by one of the characters who has braved the incredible danger to follow him. There is a scuffle and this character ends up immoblized with Riddick's knife at his/her throat. He/she is refusing to leave the others behind and he asks "Are you willing to die for these people?"
"I'm willing to try."
"That isn't what I asked. I asked if you were willing to die for these people."
pause. "Yes."
"Interesting."
They return for the others. When they are almost to the ship, Riddick is stopped by two of the creatures. While the rescued ones get into the skiff, the character returns to help Riddick, finding him wounded by the creatures, but alive. He/she begins to help him back to the skiff encouraging him with "I said I would die for them, I didn't say I would die for you--now come on. Let's go!" Suddenly, as they struggle back you realize this character has been stabbed. For a moment, as the camera switches between their eyes (eyes being a huge theme in the film) you fall back on your ealier opinion of Riddick and wonder if he has stabbed he/she. Then he/she is ripped away--stabbed and grabbed by one of the creatures as Riddick cries "Not for me! Not for me!"
At the end, Riddick escapes with the others--free because he has "died" on the planet. I was stopped. I sat focused on the fact that this man--who admittedly believes in God yet hates Him--received mercy by the death of another. Even he felt himself unworthy of the sacrifice. Yet beyond that, the death was even more vicarious--because his identity was able to die in that instant. He did die on that planet--as someone else.
Admittedly, I don't think an unbeliever would rush to church over that one. But for me, the literary Christ figure was haunting. Another example of seeing God in even the most unlikely of places.

Beowulf

The first time I read this epic was in college--English literature from the Norton Anthology. I hated it. Horribly. And since then I have always felt vaguely guilty about being such an Anglophile while fiercely hating Beowulf. Then a couple of years ago, I read or heard something about a new translation that was wonderful. I filed that information away in my head and thought passingly of trying the ancient epic yet again. After reading the Iliad, the Odyssey, the Aeneid and parts of Dante, I felt that perhaps I should brave Beowulf again just to see if I truly/still hated it. My mind turned to that peice of translation info I had filed away earlier. Re-delving in Tolkien added fule to my mental fire (as he loved it). But I never acted on my mental inclination. Until now. I recently picked up and finished Seamus Heaney's translation of Beowulf. It is amazing. Before I started, I compared his translation to the one in Norton. No comparison. If you, in the past, have slugged through the horrific prose translation found in Norton, please, please, forget it. It is more remote to the real fire in this epic that a paragraph summary would be to a Shakespearean play. This translation not only preserves the verse form of the original, but it also highlights the beauty of the ancient language. Heaney preserves the Celtic adjective-nouns like "ring-giver," "mail-shirt," and Geat-hero. The story fleaps off of the page--you can see the bard narrating the adventure before later dukes and wanderers. My guilt is gone--this epic is truly amazing: beautifully God-honouring and passionately alive. All those years I was completely wrong about Beowulf--and my fervour re: the importance of literary translating has been vindicated. Heaney's translation is real and vivid--worth every moment--unlike the "scholarly" prose that no-one should ever have been subjected to! Read it.

morals and fiction

Although I wrote this paper as a class assignment, it is truly the position that I hold. The debate over what is "appropriate" or "inappropriate" topical matter for Christian fiction, or any fiction that Christians read, is very delineated. Here's where I stand.

REALISM AND MORALS IN CHRISTIAN FICTION


Fiction—the realm of the fantastical, the imitation of daily life, the place where reality may not be as clear as we think. The realm of fiction contains so many differing areas of work and expression. Yet all areas of fiction, from the utterly fantastical to a story that could take place next door, have one very serious element in common: because they deal with fallible beings, they will contain the mistakes of fallible beings. In order to portray realistic characters in any setting it will be necessary to deal with what are often termed "objectionable elements" in many Christian circles. Yet they don’t have to be dealt with in an objectionable manner. It is very easy to see how pagan writers deal with these elements, but finding examples of proper handling in Christian literature is often a hard task. How is a moral or Christian person to deal with sinful elements in the lives of their characters? And in what way should their dealings with these elements be different from the world’s methods? One has to look no further than the Bible to find examples. From this source, a Christian writer of fiction can formulate his philosophy for handling so-called "objectionable elements" in fictional literature.

The first question probably asked by most readers is whether or not these elements need to be included in fictional literature. In order to answer that question, the purpose of fiction needs to be understood. Rolland Hein reminds us that

the novel presents an imaginative vision of life in order to tell a higher truth. This is the compelling quality of the serious novelist’s vision: he has something true to say about life, but he can way it only by embodying it in an imagined real world.(1)

Fiction becomes the mirror of life and human nature no matter how fantastical it is. If the work has anything to say to its readers, the characters must be real and believable, their struggles identifiable with us. In order to accomplish this, an author must realize that sin is a very prevalent aspect of life. An accurate picture of humanity in any time period can rarely be presented without having to deal with instances like cheating, stealing, deception, adultery and so on. All of these are human frailties caused by sin nature—all actual occurrences in many lives. Therefore, to overlook or ignore them is to be false to life itself. If an author is not honest with life, he cannot present truth to his audience.

There are, of course, certain barriers to the presentation of realism in fiction. One has only to glance at many examples of modern fiction to realize that. In modern fiction one finds factual, and often graphic, presentations of instances with either no moral commentary on the actions at all, or an "open-minded" approach. Not all modern fiction is bad. As one writer stated, "That there is some value in contemporary fiction, poetry, or drama they may not doubt; but often the values remain only half-formulated or completely hazy." (2) The values and intent of the author are often difficult to find or very ambiguous lest they offend a reader. Whatever the reason, these works of fiction become filled with unnecessary graphic details of events that, while true and many times integral to the intent of the author, are explained far more than any reader needs or wants to know.

This trend in modern fiction has tended to cause certain kinds of response in Christian writers. The general response is to withdraw from any kind of realism altogether. In their stories, the morals must be primary, sacrificing realistic characters for "values." They forget, however, that if the characters are not realistic, the audience will not identify with them so the values are overlooked. One author writes, "Evangelical churches have not fared well in the area of the novel." He goes on to note that often

it has been handled sympathetically by pious but artistically limited writers. The latter give either a shoddy two-dimensional picture of life or a prim and proper portrait, so emasculated, so colorless, or so obviously faked that the books say nothing about life of any significance, and can be read only by the already convinced who believe that they are keeping themselves ‘pure,’ ‘unspotted from the world,’ by reading an adulterated rather than an adulterous version of life.(3)

Too often Christian writers seem to forget that eliminating sin from one’s picture of life leaves readers with a sappy sweet picture of perfection, a picture that cannot be applied to real life. But if that is not the proper response for Christian authors to overemphasized realism, what is? The first place to look for the answer is the Bible.

The Bible contains many examples of the foolish acts of sinful men. From Mr. Ingles we learn that

if the Bible is to be our standard, we must admit that nothing lay outside the province of the inspired writers. There are passages in the Bible concerned with the grossest and sometimes the most shocking forms of evil. There are stories of Sodom, of the Benjaminite war, of Amnon and Tamar. And there are the less startling but no less realistic stories of Joseph and Potiphar’s wife, of David and Bathsheba, of Hosea and his faithless wife. (4)

Another author, Leland Ryken, states it simply:

Thinking Christianly about realism begins with an awareness that the Bible affirms the necessity and legitimacy of realism as an artistic technique. The Bible depicts the full range of human depravity and as such adopts the basic strategy of realism. (5)

God included realistic elements of life in His Word. But there is an important principle for the Christian writer to learn from their inclusion. God did not cause these instances to simply be included as factual events, He showed the consequences of the actions. The major difference between the Bible’s presentation of sinful elements and the world’s is this:

The realism of the Bible is realism within definite bounds. Modern realism frequently differs from biblical realism in the following ways:

The Bible does not contain a preponderance of depravity in its account of human experience. It does not leave the reader with the impression that degradation is all there is to life, or that there is no alternative to ugliness and depravity.
The Bible does not dwell on the sordid details of sexual immorality. It avoids dramatizing profanity by using narrative summary instead. It does not share the clinical or descriptive approach of so much modern literature and are in the portrayal of sex.
The Bible never condones the evil that it depicts. A majority of modern. . .literature, however, portrays immorality as a normal and inevitable part of human behavior. (6)

God always reminds his readers of the consequences for sinful actions.

From the example of the Bible, the principle can be obtained that

it certainly is not necessary for the Christian writer to dwell on the portrayal of evil in human experience. Indeed he cannot be a Christian writer if he prefers to wallow in human perversity and sin, to titillate the perverted taste and the defiled imagination of the carnally-minded reader. But, on the other hand, he cannot be a true artist, he cannot he a significant writer, is his vision does not include the whole of human life, the depths of depravity as well as the heights of aspiration. (7)

That is the balance of being a Christian writer.

Of course, without application, all of this is merely a listing of facts, rather than a formulated philosophy of writing. The application must begin with a simple, yet foundational fact--"the Christian novelist is distinguished from his pagan colleagues by recognizing sin as sin. According to his heritage he sees it not as sickness or an accident of environment, but as a responsible choice of offense against God which involves his eternal future." (8) It is always important for the Christian author to bear in mind that man is sinful, and that his follies are sin. Thus, when sinful acts are needful to present a real and necessary picture, the duty of the Christian author is to present them as sin rather than glorifying them as many modern authors do. The Christian author needs to also keep in mind that "the portrayal of evil per se does not make an evil book. If that were true it would be necessary to cut out great portions, not only of the Bible, but of the works of Shakespeare as well." The literary market needs fiction that presents sin in its true face, rendering the consequences for that sin rather than excusing or praising it. "So long as certain areas of life are handled only by the non-Christian writer, we will continue to advance a non-Christian view of life in its deepest recesses." (9) The ministry of believers extends even to the area of literature. Pagans will not be able to see sin for what it is if Christian authors eliminate if from their literature for fear of appearing "indecent." As shown before, the Bible itself "uses the technique of realism to tell us something that we need to know, namely, the sinfulness of the human condition and the misery of a fallen world." (10) The Christian writer is an artist and "art had two main themes—life as it should be and life as it fails to match that ideal. As with the Bible, much art portrays things that the artist wishes to reject and denounce." (11) Though it may be easy to forget, "The only way to offer a negative perspective on something is to portray it in a negative light. But notice in the meantime that artists have to portray evil before they can show their indictment of it." (12) The bottom line for Christians and realistic portrayal of "objectionable elements" is this: in order to present life and humanity in a truthful and relevant manner, Christian writers must present certain sinful elements—but the Christian author has a responsibility to present these elements as sinful. The consequences of all actions, especially sinful ones, must be included and presented to the audience so that they become aware of what is sin. Balance in this area, as in all others of the Christian life, is the key. With that kept in mind, the Christian author can offer to his reading public a powerful and realistic portrayal of life that contains a meaningful lesson for application to his readers lives.

1. Rolland N. Hein, "A Biblical View of the Novel," in The Christian Imagination: Essays on Literature and the Arts, Ed. Leland Ryken (Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1981), 257.

2. Virginia Ramey Mollenkott, "A Christian Approach to Modern Literature," in The Christian Imagination, 187.

3. James Wesley Ingles, "The Christian Novel and the Evangelical Dilemma," in The Christian Imagination, 339.

4. Ibid., 341-42.

5. Leland Ryken, The Liberated Imagination, (Wheaton, Illinois: Harold Shaw, 1989), 239.

6. Ryken, 242.

7. Ingles in The Christian Imagination, 341-42.

8. Flannery O’Connor, "Novelist and Believer," in The Christian Imagination, 324.

9. Ingles in The Christian Imagination, 341-42.

10. Ryken, 240

11. Ibid.

12. Ibid.

WORKS CITED

Ryken, Leland. The Christian Imagination: Essays on Literature and the Arts. Grand Rapids: Baker Book House, 1981.

Ryken, Leland. The Liberated Imagination. Wheaton, Illinois: Harold Shaw, 1989.