Contrary to my expectations about what church education looked like, I found it can be diverse and multifaceted. I have determined that I favor a Religious Education model that offers diverse and creative ways to learn and grow and that is based in an anthropology that sees humanity as reflections of Divinity, capable and responsible for co-creating a world in which we can live in harmony with other beings and our environments. Assessing the needs and wants of a church will help me design programming that will resonate with a particular community and respect whatever theological and anthropological differences may exist within a congregation.
Perhaps because I did not grow up in any church or attend any church educational programming as a youth, I made assumptions about what church education looked like; I assumed the main goal was to teach youth Bible stories and the interpretations of them that were standard for the particular denomination. I have come to see that church education can have many forms and goals, from indoctrination to social transformation. I have begun to think about what I would like both youth and adult education to look like in my church. I would like youth education to adopt the Religious Education model and to offer diverse and creative ways for children to absorb material and grow in their understandings of faith. I have also come to understand the need for a Needs Assessment– while I may want particular models of education, a church body may want or need something very different. Likewise, I imagine adult education looking particular ways, but a community may have very different desires than I imagine. Fundamental to creating programming that can reach a community and their needs is an anthropology that should dictate the way that I assess need and design programming for faith communities.
Since it seems to me that more churches have youth educational programming than adult educational programming, it seems that children’s education is very important to many churches. I have seen this truth alive in my home congregation as we have expanded our youth ministry staff, invested in Godly Play curriculum, and children and their well being continue to score high on surveys done by our church. Considering how important youth programming is to families in faith communities, it is important to create quality programming that will be formational for youth and that parents are enthusiastic about. While a needs assessment in any congregation is important in determining how to design programming for a particular context, I imagine that Fowler’s Stages of Faith would be important in considering how to design programming for particular age demographics. Considering the types of thoughts and questions that youth in a particular age bracket might have when learning can help to form material that can elicit meaning for children of all ages.
I imagine that this education would primarily fall under the category of “Religious Education,” but depending on the needs of a community, may encompass some “Sunday School” aspects (such as food or help reading). Age-appropriate material would be important since, as Fowler articulates, faith tends to look very different at different stages of life and is perhaps more predictable at younger ages (1). Certainly evangelism would not be part of Religious Education nor would I want to participate in programming that was. The Religious Education model leaves choice about belief up to those learning and allows for well-rounded, social sciences-influenced programming to offer material to be absorbed in a variety of ways that allows youth to grapple with their questions and make meaning from biblical and religious material in their own ways (2). I would hope to design programming that would also explore Christian practices and symbols so that while youth are encouraged to make their own meaning and ask questions about Bible stories, they would also come to understand our church’s particular ways of praxis and understanding. I imagine programming that reads and acts out Bible stories, has “mock church” for children, and has time for personal art and written reflection so that youth can make their own meanings and explore what resonates with them (or does not!). Despite whatever I might imagine youth and children's programming to look like in my future church, the Needs Assessment will be an important part of how I determine what educational programming will look like.
Jane Vella asks the important question, “Who needs what as determined by whom?” (3) Upon accepting a ministerial position or taking on new roles at any church, it will be important to ask this question in order to determine the needs as people in the church may articulate them. It will also be important to give time for observation before instituting changes in order to discern whether some needs that are present have not been articulated or are in conflict with those needs that are articulated. It will be useful to discern how other patterns of teaching (sermons, worship, Bible studies, etc.) show how a community learns and likes to learn.
I see adult education being a large part of my ministry. Creating environments that can foster dialogue and growth are important to designing adult education. In asking the WWW question, I can determine where interests lie in a church context. Some congregations enjoy Bible study and exegetical work, while others (like my own church context) are more inclined to participate in programming around current social and justice issues, like immigration, environmentalism, or human trafficking– Bible studies are sparsely attended. Understanding where general passions lie in a context can allow me to create programming that will be meaningful and desired in a church community.
Part of this observation will be to determine how people in a particular context perceive themselves and their relationship to the Divine. In my context of the UCC, wherein there is no creedal foundation, views of Jesus, God, and the human condition vary widely. Determining how a particular congregation tends to view God, Jesus, and the human condition will allow me to create programming that will be understood and perhaps challenging to a church context. In comparing a congregation’s theology, christology, and anthropology with my own, I can find ways of communicating that are authentic and meaningful to others and to find common ground to begin educational processes. While I must live my anthropology, I must also make sure that I do not grasp it so tightly that I articulate my worldviews in ways that become empire-building over kingdom-building. Christ will work differently in different people’s lives and I must honor the ways that other people represent him (4).
Thinking of how to find common ground requires me to examine my own beliefs. I determined my anthropology to be the following:
Humans are manifestations of the Divine. We act independently, but hopefully with our inherent interrelatedness in mind. We are uniquely conscious and analytical in ways that other beings are not, which gives us great responsibility to act in ways that benefit the entire Earth system. God aids us in this journey by luring us toward paths most advantageous to all, to enter into co-creating a better world until we reach a point of harmony. This goal is one I refer to as “Kingdom.”
This anthropology is meaningful to me, but may not be for more traditionally-minded church-goers and may, on the surface at least, be at odds with the ways that people in a church context imagine their God and their role. Finding common ground will allow me to articulate myself in ways that are meaningful to me, while allowing congregants to articulate and grow in their own beliefs in ways that are equally authentic and meaningful to them. Living my values of interrelatedness and responsible stewardship while imagining my community as manifestations of Divinity will hopefully foster an environment in which adults can co-create meaning together while exploring issues that are important to their community and faith journey.
(1) Thomas Fowler, Becoming Adult. Becoming Christian.
(2) Models of education discussed in class on February 10, 2015.
(3) Jane Vella, Learning to Listen, Learning to Teach, 64.
(4) Thomas Groome, Christian Religious Education: Sharing Our Story and Vision, 268.
(5) Jane Vella, Learning to Listen, Learning to Teach, 4.
No comments:
Post a Comment