Everyone is at different points on their journey into the realm of classical Christian education. You may be a longtime believer in this approach to education, you may have just stumbled upon it yesterday and are intrigued, or be anywhere in between. The movement to revive tried and true classical pedagogy, to provide students with an education that feeds their souls, makes them more like their Maker, provides them with the tools of learning, the ability to reason and to speak with clarity and precision, and which transmits to them the heritage and tradition that is rightfully theirs, is growing. That is a very good thing. People are hungry for something of substance! At best, modern education is starving children and robbing them of their full human potential. At worst, it is actually destroying their souls and programming them to serve whatever is currently trending on Satan’s TikTok.
We can all be very thankful for the growth that this movement has experienced over the last 30 years or so and it seems that interest is waxing, not waning. Unfortunately, with such growth comes certain challenges. Anytime any kind of organization grows it brings new people with new ideas and perspectives. This can be helpful to keep things from growing stagnant, of course, but it should be acknowledged that there is a range in the kinds of people who enter enthusiastically in. Some people want to preserve things just as they are and not change a thing, others want to cautiously offer improvements and additions to what has been done so far, others want to take it down to the studs and remodel completely, still others bring only a wrecking ball with them (watch out for those last types, they are wolves). At present the Classical Christian Education scene is mostly one big tent with a whole lot of different kinds of folks involved. In this one big tent there are decidedly different philosophies of education all making use of the term classical, there are decidedly different brands of Christian in the mix with various theological commitments, and, socially speaking, there are some vastly different values becoming more clearly stated.
The classical in “classical education” means different things to different people. Some schools are completely devoted to Dorothy Sayers’ The Lost Tools of Learning whereas others have strong criticisms of her perspective. Is the Trivium everything or should we be a seven liberal arts school? Should we just learn a bit of Latin roots and grammar or should we get our students actually reading classical Latin works by the time they graduate (or even Greek)? Should we learn a little about logical fallacies to be better “critical thinkers” or should we deeply study Aristotelian logic, Symbolic Logic, and Induction so students can argue clearly, reason powerfully, and destroy foolish ideas? Do we teach modern composition techniques and formats or do we use the Progymnasmata to exercise every writing muscle in the body? Many other such questions could be asked. I’ve been around the CCE scene long enough now to know that there are schools which call themselves “classical” at every point on a scale from 1 to 10 in academic quality (as well as a few that are straight up 11’s).
The word “Christian” in classical Christian education also has a diversity of expressions among CCE schools. While there is a legitimacy to recognizing and affirming the church catholic and apostolic, acknowledging as brethren those who are outside our own traditions, there is a decided difference between Roman Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, and Protestants. Even within Protestantism there are important differences between Lutherans, Presbyterians, Baptists, Methodists, etc. Those differences affect how we teach in our classrooms and what we teach in our classrooms. There is a strong, and understandable, desire for Christians from various churches to pass on their particular tradition and theological commitments to their children. We can learn a lot from each other in our disagreements, which makes big tent meetings very useful, and we all need opportunities to practice Christian fellowship and charity outside our own bubbles, but it’s no good pretending like there are no differences or that they don’t matter.
All of this being said, the differences in what we mean by “classical” or in what we mean by “Christian” are for the most part not the biggest problems facing the CCE movement. The biggest challenge and most pressing issue, which will require us to draw some clear battle lines, is on the front of social commitments. By “social” I mean those issues being thrust upon society at large where our schools (and churches) have to decide where they will stand, rise, or fall. In particular I am speaking about issues related to human sexuality, gender identity, and race. All of these issues, insofar as secular culture is pushing them upon us, broadly fall under the banner of “critical theory”. All of this amounts to nothing less than an attempt to redefine cultural norms and language itself. If it were mere cultural norms, like bell bottoms vs. skinny jeans, we could shrug it off and say, “who cares?” But, in this case, it would be better to say that it is civilizational norms which are at stake. Fundamental beliefs about what it means to be a human person, a man or a woman, an American, and a Christian are all being undermined. Critical theory seeks to tear down the central institutions of civilization, particularly those most shaped by Christianity, and erect something new in its place, namely, an androgynous society where everyone is “equal.” Sadly equality under the Critical Theory regime means tearing everyone down to the same nothingness rather than helping people rise to the highest heights of human potential as image bearers.
The warning signs are all flashing that these insidious ideas are beginning to infect our schools and our curriculum houses. There is a growing rumble that we ought to stop reading so much western civ. literature (a.k.a. dead white guys) and that we should make sure to represent more women and people of color in our reading lists. We are starting to be told, from within our own tent, that there must be more African and Asian literature and less Homer, Plato, Dante, and Shakespeare for the sake of fairness and equity. We have, apparently, to do a skin color check before we take up any book to make sure we are keeping our reading lists balanced for equity’s sake. To not be racist we must become obsessed with skin color in our reading lists. To not be sexist we must check authorial chromosomes and have a balanced ratio of men and women in our reading lists. What clearly does not matter is which texts have been most influential in western civilization, nor which texts are actually the best literature and most worth our time. No. Skin color and sex must be everything unless, of course, you’re a bigot.
The pressure is also mounting on the fronts of sexual orientation and gender identity. At present this is less of an issue in our schools and associations than is critical race theory. We are all pretty clear on this one still… but it’s coming. It’s coming on the heels of “racial equity.” Once you accept one form of critical theory you will find yourself hard pressed not to accept the other forms also. You may well charge me with the slippery slope fallacy… we will see. It takes only a quick glance at universities who have accepted critical theory to see what has become of the study of classical texts and languages. Our schools will go the same dead paths if we accept their axioms. We can look at mainline Protestant denominations to see what becomes of organizations that lose touch with their founding principles.
David Goodwin, president of the ACCS, has started keeping a running tab on the back and forth over “wokeness” in CCE. I commend taking the time to peruse the dialogue taking place among the talking heads.
So far we are a big tent with a lot of voices but already we have seen some separations happening. The Association of Classical and Christian Schools (ACCS) is essentially the flagship association for classical Christian schools but in the mid 1990’s the Society for Classical Learning (SCL) formed with its own particular vision. The ACCS has the reputation of being a bit more “blue collar” and the SCL a bit more “white collar” in their doings. ACCS tends to focus more on practical pedagogy in the classroom and SCL seems to enjoy more ethereal discussions of an ivory tower sort about issues in the study and teaching of classical education. Further, ACCS has a decidedly Protestant and reformed leaning slant1 whereas SCL is very intentional about keeping the big tent big. SCL’s website says that they affirm “historic Christianity as expressed in the Nicene Creed and to exploring the relationship of Christ to the broader culture.”2 The broadness of affirming the creeds and no other statement of faith allows Roman Catholic, Eastern Orthodox, and Protestants alike to feel that they have a place in SCL.
Well and good. I’m not opposed to having some big tents in which we may have open discussions of various sorts. May those big tents continue and be fruitful and host conferences for us to come together and talk about things that matter. May various pedagogical approaches and Christian traditions be like iron sharpening iron when we have opportunity to rub shoulders. Even so, It is nonetheless obvious to me that the time has come to form some smaller tents in the CCE movement. I do not propose this as an anathema against the big tent. Nor am I suggesting we set up battle tents to wage war against other small tents that may be set up. Rather, it is important that associations and institutes be formed for the furtherance of CCE as a whole and to lean into what makes our particular traditions unique.
If the big tent, God forbid, catches fire then what? Shall we all be utterly trapped inside the flames? Or shall there be other associations, in friendly relations with the big tent, that can take in refugees? If the ACCS or SCL falls completely to Critical Theory and “Woke” ideologies and becomes about as much use as the United Methodist church or the PCUSA, then let there be other bastions which can hold strong and keep fighting the good fight.
Further, while affirming that the Christian church is bigger than any small tent, any one denomination, or a particular theological persuasion, it is no use in pretending that all traditions are equally good or right. Rubbish. I believe that the Protestant and Reformed tradition is the most faithful expression of biblical Christianity and I want my understanding of classical Christian education to be formed and informed by it. I want to produce curriculum that is unapologetically speaking out of that tradition. I want to build schools, train teachers, and speak to students as a Reformed classical Christian educator and lean into those distinctives. Surely Wesleyan-Arminians want the same? Surely Roman Catholics and Eastern Orthodox and Lutherans want the same? They all think they are right, they’re not, but they think so (and that doesn’t offend or scare me). It only makes sense to form associations, small tents, which press forward as classical educators within our traditions and develop our own unique flavors of CCE that will allow us to raise our kids from within our specific traditions.
I am excited to announce the formation of The Beza Institute which seeks both to preserve the western classical Christian tradition of education (once for all delivered to and formalized by medieval Christians) and also to press forward with a distinctly Reformed approach to classical Christian education. As the organization grows we hope to offer teacher training, podcasts with interviews and book discussions, articles on CCE from within the Reformed perspective, an online peer reviewed journal, online events with our Fellows and special guest teachers, and we will be working to form our own press for publishing curriculum, new works on classical Christian education and pedagogy, theology, fiction, and more.
Our desire is to strengthen and reinforce the big tent, not detract and detach from it. But we move forward knowing confidently who we are, what we believe, and also what errors in theology and culture we reject. Should the worst come about, and the big tent burns to the ground, we will still be here. We are intentionally using flame retardant materials from the outset.
https://classicalchristian.org/statement-of-faith/
https://www.societyforclassicallearning.org/about/ (Accessed 6/12/23)
I am, for some reason, hesitant to open this.
One reason must be I have no idea what this means.
I understand what CCE is. The tent portion, however, has not landed in my purview as of yet.
Perhaps the religious aspect is what is making it difficult.
But that may be my sign to take a peek inside.
I am an administrator at an ecumenical classical school. I love my school and am honored to serve our constituency, but I do think a lot about how my own children's education would be different if we were at a school that drew a more specific theological line—not to divide, like you said, but to clarify. Your small tent analogy is a good way to categorize these thoughts. I am excited for the Beza Institute! Thank you for your work.