FASHIONING CHRISTIANS IN OUR DAY + JOHN H. WESTERHOFF + Professor of Theology and Christian Nurture Duke University Christianity is fundamentally a particular way of life corresponding to a peculiar perception of life and our lives; and "Christians," wrote Turtullian in a lapidary phrase, "are made, not born."1 Baptism is the sacrament by which the church makes new Christians--that is, by which persons are raised to new life in Christ, incorporated into Christ's body (the church), infused with Christ's mind and character, and empowered by the Holy Spirit to be Christ's continuing presence in the world. Through Christian initiation within a Christian community of faith, persons are formed and transformed into the persons that baptism establishes them to be. This process, historically known as catechesis--"to echo the Word" or "Christening"--is the means by which a community re-presents Christ (his life, teachings, death, and resurrection) in symbol, myth, rite, and common life and thereby fashions novices so that they might join the community in representing Christ to the world. Catechesis is a complex process, difficult in any historical era, but especially difficult in the United States today. George Lindbeck, at the close of his book The Nature of Doctrine, states categorically "the impossibility of effective catechesis in the present situation."2 While there is every reason to believe that he is correct, I intend to make an attempt at describing a faithful catechetical program for our day. It is based upon the contention that any faithful catechetical endeavor necessitates an understanding of the "church" as an ecology of intentional, interrelated distinctively Christian institutions that provide an alternative to and are in creative tension with similar institutions within _________ This article was first published as the final chapter of Schooling Christians, Stanley Hauerwas & John H. Westerhof, eds., (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992). Used by permission of Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Company. society--that is, families, congregations, and schools in which deliberate, systemic, and sustained efforts are made to fashion Christians. Underlying this radical proposal is a particular interpretation of social life in the United States today. In his book Education and Pluralism, the educational philosopher Thomas Green writes, "The very idea of the polis [in the United States] contains implicit reference to the fact that though the community must be one, it must also be many; though it must have unity, it will inevitably contain diversity. A resulting tension is inevitable."3 Green explains that pluralism may be viewed either as social reality or as ideal; he then goes on to contend that within our American understanding of democracy, pluralism is an ideal--that is, it is valued and cherished. Our society, for example, does not just tolerate but encourages a variety of individual opinions to flourish and contend with each other. Further, it encourages individuals to unite together in voluntary associations for mutual benefit and social influence. The underlying assumption behind this commitment to the ideal of pluralism is that no particular culture, ethnic group, race, or religion has a monopoly on truth or is so rich in itself that it may not be further enriched by others. Further, it assumes that interaction between divergent groups is essential for a healthy society. Pluralism as a reality--that is, as the presence of variety and diversity--is impossible to question. The enormous complexity of American society is readily apparent. While some groups strive to live in relative isolation, most are immersed in this country's cultural, racial, ethnic, and religious diversity through participation in its vast network of social institutions. However, turning that reality into an ideal is somewhat problematic. As least from the Christian perspective, while the ideal of cultural, racial, and ethnic pluralism may be desirable, the ideal of religious pluralism must be questioned, for such a proposition is founded on the assumption that differences between religions are not a matter of truth, conviction, or commitment but rather solely a matter of opinion and private individual concern. Such a proposition is simply not acceptable to many Christians. "The gospel," writes Leslie Newbigin, "cannot be accommodated as one element in a society which has pluralism as its reigning ideology. The Church cannot accept as its role simply the winning of individuals to a kind of Christian discipleship which concerns only the private and domestic aspects of life."4 In a society in which religious pluralism is valued and cherished, any confident statement of ultimate belief, any claim to proclaim the truth about God, God's purpose for the world, or God's will for personal and social life is liable to be dismissed as ignorant, arrogant, or dogmatic. The natural result is the privatization, relativization, and subjectivization of Christian faith and life, a condition antithetical to the gospel. Religious pluralism may be a reality with which we Christians must cope, but I do not believe it can be an ideal we celebrate in principle. To return to Green, our convictions concerning pluralism are extraordinarily important for education--and I would add especially for catechesis, the making of Christians. Our convictions concerning ethnic, racial, cultural, and religious diversity will influence the flexibility we are willing to allow schools in accommodating such diversity. More important, it will influence our conclusions concerning the place and role of public and parochial schools for Christians. Green identifies three possible understandings of pluralism and how a society might function in each case. One extreme understanding he names "structural assimilation." This understanding encourages interaction and friendships across ethnic, racial, cultural, and religious groups in every aspect of social life, including marriage. As such, this understanding results in an open society rather than a pluralistic society. Insofar as this has occurred in the United States, some ethnic, racial, cultural, and religious minorities are troubled, for they are aware that this understanding discourages any sense of distinct identity and makes it extremely difficult to transmit distinct understandings and ways of life from generation to generation. At the other extremes is what Green calls "insular pluralism." In this case all social relations are exclusively confined to one's own ethnic, racial, cultural, or religious group. As such, this understanding does not result in a pluralistic society either; it merely provides a means for maintaining the coexistence of different societies alongside each other. While only a few groups have adopted this understanding, it remains extremely difficult to accomplish. Such an understanding, however, has the distinct advantage of preserving identity-conscious groups, and it does make possible the transmission of particular understandings and ways of life from generation to generation. Green favors his third option, which he calls "half-way pluralism," because as he contends it alone makes possible true pluralism. This understanding is founded upon a differentiation between primary and secondary associations. Significantly for Green, there is only one primary association; the family. All other associations are secondary. Therefore, "half-way pluralism" would discourage intermarriage between different ethnic, racial, cultural, and religious groups, but it would encourage interaction and association of these diverse groups in schools hospitals, restaurants, stores, mass media, neighborhoods, and workplaces. Accordingly, pluralism is defined as "a social order founded upon the principle of harmonious interactions for common ends, among distinct familial units, each of which possesses both positive self identity and openness to others."5 Serious problems result, however, when understandings and ways of life practiced by primary and secondary groups conflict, a situation most likely to occur in schools. As a consequence, nothing that any particular ethnic, racial, cultural, or religious group cares strongly about will be introduced into a school curriculum unless there is a consensus, or the others do not object, or it can be introduced in an "objective-comparative" manner. This has been particularly devastating for religion in that it has kept both the study of religion and more importantly the practice of religion out of most public schools. Nevertheless, even our most enlightened understanding of what is appropriate to a public school curriculum limits the school to the teaching of religion and denies the teaching of persons to be religious. Now while this "half-way" understanding of pluralism and education may be reasonable for ethnic, racial, and cultural diversity, it is not reasonable for those who wish to transmit Christian faith, character, and consciousness to the next generation. Further, it becomes particularly problematic when we examine the assumption that schools are secondary associations. In point of fact schools may have become the most significant primary association in contemporary society. By the time children are twelve years of age, they have spent more hours in school than they have spent with their families and religious community combined. Indeed, it would take seventy-five years of attending church and church school regularly to equal the school's influence in the first twelve years of a person's life. Further, schools are not solely instructional institutions in which reading, writing, and arithmetic are taught. Schools are fundamentally agents of enculturation. As Philip Jackson notes, more than ninety percent of the time a child spends in school is spent on enculturation, while only ten percent is spent on instruction. The hidden curriculum of the school is, it appears, more influential than the stated curriculum.6 In the light of this situation, it appears obvious to me that Christians need to question seriously their support of public schools, or better, they need to consider seriously the formation and reformation of parochial schools. The rest of this essay will explore how Christians are formed and what sort of parochial schools are needed in conjunction with family and congregation if authentic Christian faith and life are to be maintained and transmitted from generation to generation in a pluralistic society. The Catechetical Process Earlier we named the process by which Christians are made as catechesis. Catechesis necessitates three deliberate or intentional, systemic or interrelated, sustained or lifelong processes essential to Christian faith and life: formation, education, and instruction. Instruction aids persons to acquire that knowledge and those abilities useful for responsible personal and communal Christian life in church and society. For example, through instructional processes persons acquire a knowledge of the content of Scripture as well as the ability to comprehend its meaning and interpret its implications for daily life and work. Instruction alone, however, can produce a person who knows all about Christianity but who does not intend to be Christian. Nevertheless, without the benefit of instruction, persons may not know what faithfulness it, what it implies, or how to decide what is faithful. Education aids persons to reflect critically on their behavior and experiences in the light of the gospel so that they might discern if they are being faithful and when they might need to change their behavior. For example, through critical reflection on the ways in which we live together as families, congregations, or schools, we can reform them to be more faithful. Christians, therefore, need to make education a natural way of life and not just a program, as they engage in critical reflection on every aspect of their lives. Formation aids persons to acquire Christian faith (understood as a particular perception of life and our lives), Christian character (understood as identity and appropriate behavioral dispositions), and Christian consciousness (understood as that interior subjective awareness or temperament that predisposes persons to particular experiences). For example, Christian formation is the participation in and the practice of the Christian life of faith. We do that by identifying with a community, observing how persons in it live, and imitating them. Instruction informs us in terms of knowledge and skills believed by the community to be important for communal life. Education reforms us by aiding us to discover dissonance between how we are living and how we are called to live. And formation both confirms (nurtures) and transforms (converts) us through a process best understood as apprenticeship. Formation is related to a natural process called enculturation; when enculturation becomes intentional it is called formation. Education is necessary for faithful formation, and instruction is important for faithful education, but formation is foundational because it is the primary means by which Christians are made. Still, formation as a process has not been given the attention it deserves. The reasons for this are varied, but among the most significant is that in recent years catechists have been more concerned with teaching doctrine and rational convictions about truth than they have been with faith understood as a community's perception of life and our lives, to which loyalty, trust, and devotion are to be given. Further, a primary concern of catechists has been the teaching of moral decision making and problem solving, which has led them to a neglect of the persons who make the decision and the character of those persons--that is, their identity and disposition to behave in particular ways. And finally, catechists have tended to focus on individual subjective experience to the neglect of consciousness or temperament, the interior awareness that makes any particular experience possible or probable.7 While instruction is a useful means for transmitting beliefs and teaching decision making, and education is useful for making sense of and interpreting experience, only through formation do persons acquire Christian faith, character, and consciousness. George Lindbeck, in his seminal work The Nature of Doctrine, mentioned earlier, provides an analysis for understanding why this is so. In this book, Lindbeck explores four "theories of doctrine." His first theory emphasizes the cognitive aspects of religion and stresses the ways in which church doctrine functions as intellectual propositions or truth claims about objective reality. His second theory emphasizes the experiential aspects of religion and stresses the ways in which church doctrine is derived from reflection on subjective feelings and existential experiences. His third theory combines the first two. Lindbeck's fourth theory of doctrine, which I contend can be correlated with the other two, he names "cultural-linguistic." This theory emphasizes the cultural aspects of religion and stresses the ways in which church doctrine functions as a comprehensive, informing, interpretive scheme embodied in communal symbols, myths (sacred narratives), and rites. Like a culture, doctrine is a communal phenomenon that structures and shapes human thought and experience, rather than a description of subjective experience or objective or propositional statements, accepted on the basis of some authority, about objective reality. Of course, the term culture has such a multiplicity of referents, along with an acquired vagueness, that it makes many suspicious of its usefulness. Still, I believe it is a particularly helpful category in explaining how Christians are formed. Culture, as I use the word, refers to socially established structures of meaning or significance, their related symbolic actions or patterns of behavior, and their resulting artifacts.8 Culture describes a people's learned, shared understandings and ways of life, the framework within which they perceive the world about them, interpret events and experiences, and act/react to this perceived reality. From a cultural-linguistic perspective, religion is the idiom for dealing with whatever is most important and foundational. At the heart of culture is religion, and at the heart of religion are the perceptions that define its social construction of reality or its worldview and ethos. Because a cultural-linguistic understanding of doctrine stresses the means by which human thought and experiences are shaped, molded, and constituted by cultural and linguistic forms--participating in a community's rites and internalizing its sacred narrative, for example--its emphasis is on intentional enculturation or formation. It is therefore useful to understand how culture is sustained and transmitted from generation to generation. Enculturation is a natural process of formal and informal, intentional and unintentional means by which children are inducted into a community and acquire its culture. In pluralistic cultures the process of enculturation is complex and difficult, even for those ethnic groups that attempt to isolate themselves from the general culture and its numerous subcultures. Acculturation is the process by which persons learn to adapt to the general culture while still maintaining their own particular subculture. This process is similar to learning a second language without either becoming completely bilingual (in terms of thinking as well as communicating in both languages) or making the new language one's primary language. Acculturation is easiest when applied to technique and taste--such as eating with knife and fork rather than with one's hands, eating raw rather than cooked seafood, or driving a car rather than riding a bicycle--and it is more difficult when it enters the realm of symbols. In any case, it is possible to be enculturated in one culture and acculturated to function in a second culture without losing the fundamentals of one's primary culture. Nevertheless, only if this is done intentionally, forcefully, and consistently will an ethnic group be able to continue over time as an identity-conscious cultural community in a pluralistic society. This implies that for Italian-Americans to maintain Italian culture, for example, a number of conditions will be required: close-knit families; an Italian-speaking congregation; a stable, boundary-conscious neighborhood of Italians; a parochial school with Italian teachers; and the presence of mass media resources representative of Italian culture. Where these conditions do not exist, each succeeding generation of adults will provide a less than adequate form of enculturation for their children. The result will be that in three generations the adults will no longer be Italian-Americans, except in name. Intermarriage, mobility, diversified peer groups, mixed neighborhoods, public schools, and mass media make enculturation into a particular subculture difficult, if not impossible. Assimilation is similar to enculturation; it is the process by which adults are inducted into a new culture through conversion, thereby leaving behind the first culture into which they had been enculturated. For example, there are adult immigrants who discard their ethnic heritage when they arrive in the United States and immerse themselves so fully in American culture that they no longer think of themselves as, for example, Scotch-Americans, but as Americans who left Scotland. Their children are then enculturated into U.S. culture, never knowing themselves as anything but "Americans." Assimilation is a process related to believer's baptism or adult baptism, while enculturation is a process related to infant baptism for the making of Christians. As processes they are similar. The problem is that while we attempt to shape our children to be Christians, they are also being influenced by the dominant culture. If we can discover how to enculturate them as Christians and acculturate them to be U.S. citizens, we will have been faithful. But in doing so, we run the risk of their being enculturated to be U.S. citizens and acculturated to be loyal members of an institutional church. Formation is the primary means by which Jesus taught. Vernon Robbins, in his book Jesus the Teacher, claims that Jesus was a unique teacher. Instead of waiting for potential students to seek him out, sit at his feet, and take notes, as in the schooling tradition, Jesus sought and summoned students to follow him, to become companion-apprentices, as in the itinerant tradition. Jesus then sent them for to seek, summon, and commission others through a similar process of identification, observation, and imitation.9 Aaron Milavec, in his book To Empower as Jesus Did, makes the interesting observation that typically we translate the Greek word didaskalos as "teacher" and didaskein as "to teach." He points out that as a result of this translation, Pasolini in his film of St. Matthew's Gospel represents Jesus as a teacher without a classroom, traveling about delivering lectures in the form of homilies to convey beliefs and ethical principles. Milavec goes on to point out that these same Greek words can also be translated as "master" and "to apprentice"--that is, "to live with" or "to accompany," to have one's own life guided and shaped by life shared with a master.10 So it is that James - perhaps the first bishop of the church in Jerusalem, in what according to tradition was a homily delivered to the elect before their baptism--lays stress on the moral life expected of those who follow the way of Jesus; he therefore warns that no many of them should be catechists, for more will be expected of them (James 3:1). Why? Because catechizing implies apprenticing and the catechist is called to be a master to apprentices, which further implies that the catechist will focus her or his attention on an ever-deepening and loving relationship to Christ. Similarly, the catechumenate in the early church was founded on the principles of an apprenticeship--that is, a formation process in which persons (catechumens) apprenticed themselves to the community and participated in its life and practiced its way of life accompanied by a sponsor, a master (catechist) who represented the community. Thus the making of Christians involves the practice of living a particular way of life. The process is similar to that used in learning a craft such as stonemasonry, a sport such as basketball, or an art form such as dance. The learner apprentices himself or herself to a master. Through observation, imitation, and practice the apprentice learns a multitude of skills. The apprentice also learns a language and is initiated into a history. Christian apprenticeship is discipleship. If a person desires to become a Christian, he or she needs to practice praying the Lord's Prayer, ministering to the poor and needy, and performing other acts basic to being Christian. He or she also needs to learn a story so that words and actions merge together, shaping the heart, mind, and soul of the apprentice. Formation then is fundamentally the practice and experience of Christian faith and life. Aspects of Communal Life Formation, understood from the perspective of intentional assimilation or enculturation, involves eight aspects of communal life, each of which contributes to and influences the practices and experiences that are foundational and necessary for the making of Christians. We will examine each in turn. 1. Communal Rites In 1925, Willard Sperry, then dean of the Harvard Divinity School, wrote Reality in Worship.11 In a chapter entitled "The Occasion and Intention of Public Worship," he contended that the church shares with many other institutions common tasks that are religious in nature, and that many of these activities are done better by institutions other than the church. The one unique contribution of the church, he continued, is its cultic life. While the work of the church is real and intelligible through the life and actions of its member sin daily life, the church is clearly defined whenever and wherever people meet together to address themselves to the act of liturgy. Liturgy is the original and distinctive task, the primary responsibility of the church. Everything else may be conceded, compromised, shared, and even relinquished, but so long as the church invites people to worship God and provides a credible vehicle for liturgy, it need not question its place, mission, and influence in the world. But if it loses faith in its liturgy, if it is thoughtless in the ordering of its liturgy or careless in the conduct of its liturgy, it need not look elsewhere to find vitality: it is dead at heart. Cultic life refers to a community's rites--repetitive, symbolic, and social acts which express and manifest the community's sacred narrative, along with its implied faith and life. (Ceremonial acts are prescribed behaviors; ritual acts are prescribed words.) These liturgies include several kinds of rites: (1) rites of intensification that follow the calendar (once a week, month, or year) and shape, sustain, and enhance the community's faith, character, and consciousness, as well as increasing group solidarity; (2) rites of transition that follow the life cycle and promote meaningful passage for persons and the community from one stage of life to another, and (3) rites of initiation that induct persons into the community. Through these symbolic actions, persons practice the Christian life and make the Christian community's narrative their own (Importantly, all the other aspects of formation that will be considered later are encompassed in a community's rites.) Within secular culture there are numerous rites that are intended to shape the community's worldview and value system. They too are repetitive, symbolic actions expressive of the community's understandings and ways. The dominant secular rites called "spectator sports" are intended, for example, to support individualism (even in team-oriented sports we award a most-valuable player), aggression (the most popular sports are often violent), competition (a tie is considered unsatisfactory; someone needs to win), and cooperation--but the kind that supports nationalism (raising the flag and singing the national anthem as well as cooperating with your team in order to beat the other team). Advertising is another form of cultural rite; it supports an economic system based on self-interest and consumption. These rites and others constantly attempt to enculturate us into the society's understandings and ways; this explains why, when persons in the early church entered the catechumenate to be formed as Christians, they were no longer permitted to attend public spectator sports. If we are to be formed as Christians, we must take our Christian rites seriously. This implies making participation in the church's liturgy the heart of formation. 2. Environment Our church environment includes architectural space and artifacts, along with sights, sounds, smells, and tastes. We shape our environment and it in turn shapes us. The history of architecture and art is the history of culture. For example, a culture in which specialization and differentiation dominate is more likely to construct space for particular activities: bedrooms for sleeping, dining rooms for eating, and so forth. One's environment encourages or discourages, facilitates or hinders particular behaviors. our understandings of the purpose and the proper use of space influence our perceptions, dispositions, and consciousness. In some churches there is a space for a vested choir and clergy that is separated from the space for the congregation; this arrangement could be seen to imply that the sacred and the secular are appropriately and necessarily separated. Further, by not permitting many normal activities (eating, drinking, talking, and the like) within worship space, we make that separation more severe, thereby lessening the church's influence on daily life and work. Churches that use small silver bowls for baptism make it difficult to understand baptism in terms of drowning and being brought back to life or as being fully washed. Churches that display pictures of a white Anglo-Saxon Jesus without any other images of Jesus distort the nature and character of Jesus as the Christ. In that regard, it is fortunate that we do not know what Jesus looked like, and it is therefore appropriate to use a great variety of images. 3. Time Our orientation toward past, present, and future, the structure of time in terms of particular activities, and the ordering of time in terms of the calendar--all provide structure for understanding the meaning and purpose of our behaviors. There is the Hallmark card calendar that orders time with occasions such as Mother's Day, Halloween, St. Patrick's Day, the Fourth of July (Independence Day), Memorial Day, birthdays, and so forth. Many churches celebrate such days and thereby encourage a secularization of the church. For Christians the celebration of baptism days and the church's year--Advent, Christmas, Epiphany, Lent, Easter, Pentecost, and so forth--are more important. The stories we celebrate shape our faith and life. One year when Mother's Day and Pentecost corresponded, many churches celebrated Mother's Day and then wondered why the Holy Spirit was not alive in their lives, or the church infused by its presence. Just as serious a time warp is the ecclesial calendar that celebrates days such as Stewardship Sunday, Theological Education Sunday, Mission Sunday, Rally Day, etc., all of which are more likely to make loyal members of the institutional church than to form Christians. 4. Communal Life Communal life encompasses the governance or polity, the programs and events, the economics and budgets of a community, all of which support behaviors and suggest that some are more valuable than others. Communal life also encourages particular behaviors and makes others possible, for it establishes the ways in which people are to spend their time, energy, and money and therefore how the church understands its mission and ministry. How many churches have a sign when you enter that says, "If you spend too much time, energy, and money in this building, you are neglecting your ministry"? Most churches teach that service to the institutional church and its members is ministry. Further, many congregations create a budget and then have a stewardship drive to get pledges to support it, using the methods of modern fund-raising--and then wonder why their people do not live a life of Christian stewardship. Other churches make church growth a goal, using secular means to attract and integrate members--and then wonder why their church is seen as a social club with which people make a contract rather than a covenant, so that if the church says and does what they believe, they stay and support it, but if not, they leave and begin another church. 5. Discipline Discipline refers to behaviors that are taught, practiced, and celebrated within a community. We live in a society where people lack and indeed do not like discipline. They think they can be virtuous without practicing the virtues. They want instant health and weight loss without the discipline of exercise and dieting over the long haul. They want to become Christians overnight without effort. But to be Christian and maintain a relationship with God takes years of hard work and discipline. Simplicity, for example, is an aspect of the spiritual life. But if we are to learn to live simply we need to practice buying things only for their usefulness and not for their status, to reject anything that is addictive, to develop the habit of giving things away, to avoid buying now and paying later, to learn to enjoy things without owning them, and to develop a deeper appreciation of creation. Especially important is the practice of critical reflection and resistance to non-Christian influences. 6. Social Interaction Social interaction refers to who does what, with whom, for what purposes: the natural, normal, unconscious ways in which people relate to and treat each other. The following poem by Alice Walker illustrates this dimension of formation: Sunday School: Circa 1950 "Who made you?" was always the question. The answer was always "God." Well. There we stood, three feet high, heads bowed, leaning into bosoms. Now I no longer recall The Catechism or brood on the genesis of life. No. I ponder the exchange Itself And salvage mostly the leanings.12 If persons grow up in an environment that is highly competitive, individualistic, and aggressive--that is, an environment in which conflict is resolved by acts of violence--they will as adults behave in these ways, perceiving them to be the way life is intended to be. 7. Role Models Role models are persons past and present who are acknowledged and celebrated as exemplars of the Christian life; they are "masters" to whom children and initiates are apprenticed--teachers, for example. Who are the people we memorialize, install, congratulate, and celebrate within the church? Many churches have plaques on the walls of rooms to remember wealthy men who have funded them, establishing these men as models for the next generation's understanding of being Christian. Churches install all sorts of people-- church school teachers, choirs, etc.--but mostly those who work within the church, thereby establishing that ministry is serving the institutional church. Churches celebrate and congratulate people all the time (sometimes even church teams who win football games), but neglect the saints among us that we want the next generation to imitate. Some churches do celebrate certain saints, but mostly men and clergy. When other churches eliminated the celebration of saint's days, they began to celebrate the lives of other "saintly" persons, thereby teaching how the church believed Christians should live their lives. 8. Language Language refers to the naming of and the descriptions of behavior. It includes both verbal and nonverbal means of communication, our vocabulary and our grammar. Our language reflects our understandings of life. For example, how many times do we say "I have" something. We have friends, cars, degrees, jobs, mates, etc. We possess and own things and people--but avarice is a sin. Some come to church because they "have no friends." For the Christian the question is not "Do I have a friend?" but "Am I a friend?" To be a friend is Christian. We claim Jesus is our Savior, which means that we are not victims to heredity or environment but free from their influence and able to make moral decisions. But people sometimes say "I can't do that for you this week," which establishes them as a victim to a previous decision. It would be more appropriate for a Christian to say "I will not to do that for you this week," which establishes us as moral persons who make free decisions as believers in Jesus Christ and members of his church. In his defense of a cultural-linguistic understanding of religion, George Lindbeck explains that to become religious involves becoming skilled in the language or the symbol system of that religion. And the grammar of religion, like that of any language, cannot be explicated or learned except by practice. One of the functions of the theologian is to teach Christians how to talk so that they might live as Christians.13 In his essay entitled "The Church as God's New Language," Stanley Hauerwas cites Hans Frei's observation that Barth took the classical themes of "communal Christian language molded by the Bible, tradition and constant usage in worship, practice, instruction and controversy, and he restated or redescribed them...[so as to] recreate a universe of discourse...instructing [the reader] in the use of that language by showing him how...."14 The English philosopher John Austin, in How To Do Things With Words, explains that the primary function of language is not so much to say something as to do something. We humans perform actions through our words: we promise, pledge, apologize, forgive, judge, rebuke. As a consequence, the words we speak have effects on us and on others; they alter relationships. Austin goes on to suggest that the most important word-acts we perform are those that ritualize, for they not only express us but also shape us. Liturgical speech is performative; it is deemed effective in that it does what it says: "I baptize you," "I absolve you," and so forth. Further, he points out, we participate in these word-acts, these rites, primarily to submit ourselves to their discipline so that we might become disciples.15 Parochial Schools Having examined various contexts for formation, it should become clear that they are all interrelated and that together they all provide the basis for being intentionally Christian in our contexts of primary association--that is, in our homes, congregations, and schools. Previously we suggested that the making of Christians in our day may necessitate that the church maintain parochial schools related to congregations, to which Christian parents will send their children. I will now turn to examine the nature and character of such a Christian school. But first a few comments. When I speak of a "parochial school" I do not mean simply a church-related or church sponsored school, nor do I have in mind a quality public school in which religion is taught and the day begun with prayer and Bible reading. I am talking about a Christian school, a school that is intentional about every aspect of its life and the formation of Christians. When I talk about the importance of a parochial school, I do not want to give the impression that I believe that having such schools will provide the solution to all our problems. Only if the home, the congregation, and the school unite and are intentional and consistent in their efforts will the church (understood as a combination of all three of these) have the possibility--and only the possibility--of forming Christians. I also want to make clear that without the school, the home and congregation may have little chance of succeeding. Of course, we still have the tremendous influence of the mass media with which to contend, but we do have some control over its influence. Now while I believe that a parochial school's mission must be the same as the church's--namely, to make Christians--it is a school and therefore appropriately will have to live with some paradoxes if Christians are to be in but not of the world. For example, while it has a religious purpose (habits of the heart), it will also need to have an educational purpose (habits of the mind); while it must prepare students for life in God's reign, it will also need to prepare them for life in society, while it must model itself after a community of Christian faith, it will also need to model itself as an instructional institution that teaches science, math, history, English, and so forth. If I were to begin to imagine a Christian school intentionally engage in the making of Christians, it would look something like this: worship would be at the heart of its life, with each day set in the context of prayer and the celebration of the Eucharist. In the place of singing the national anthem and saluting the flag, the community would pray for the nation and its leaders. While supporting athletics, there would be no spectator sports, and non-competitive, non-aggressive games would be encouraged. Students would be rewarded for cooperation and other Christian values. Communal projects would dominate over individual ones as a life in the classroom would be understood as ritual performance.16 The school would order its life and its activities according to the church year and would avoid celebrating secular holidays. Advent would be a contemplative season, Epiphany a season of witness, Lent a season of self-examination and so forth. All of this would influence the curriculum of the school and so that the church's holidays would shape the school calendar and its activities. The school would provide an environment conducive to Christian faith and life. The architectural space would unite the sacred and the secular. The importance of prayer would be highlighted by the presence of meditation chapel. Quality Christian art and artifacts would communicate the Christian story. Every aspect of school life would encourage the practice of behaviors consistent with Christian character. Faculty would be expected to set an example in terms of simplicity of life, compassion and service to those in need, prayer and meditation, and the stewardship of life and resources. The school would provide role models through its faculty and administration, and by celebrating those in the past whose lives were exemplary. Life in the school would be focused on the behavior of persons--past and present--who model faithfulness. The school would develop its curriculum around, work, service, study, and play. The arts would play a significant role in the life of the school so that the intuitive way of knowing would be given as much attention as the intellectual. The school would be concerned about how people treat each other and would encourage relationships between blacks and whites, rich and poor, young and old, wise and simple, and males and females that make friendship possible. Groupings based on age and ability would be avoided. And finally, verbal and nonverbal communications--the way people talk, their vocabulary and grammar, and their use of stories--would be taken seriously. All of this is to say that the school would be radically different from any public school in that its aim would be to make Christians as well as to "educate" persons as human beings. Recall that the early church chose not to avail itself of the protection it could have had under the Roman law as a cultus privatus dedicated to the pursuit of a purely personal and otherworldly salvation for its members. Instead it chose to confront society with a social and this-worldly alternative. In doing so it necessarily embodied aspects of the culture, but also remained separate and distinct. When that society began to disintegrate, the young church was called upon to provide a foundation for a new society. The church accepted that role and sought to construct a society in which all of public and private life was controlled by Christian revelation--a corpus Christianum. As it did so the church became less separate and distinct. And we are its products. But the corpus Christianum is no more, and we cannot go back to it; nor for that matter can we return to the first era of the church's life. The synthesis of church and society has ended. A post-Constantinian era has emerged, an era in which the making of Christians is increasingly problematic. For too long the church has worked at being respectable and desirable by making few demands. For too long the church has attempted to make Christian faith and life credible and acceptable to the rest of the world. It has lost it status as a community of "resident aliens."17 The church must become a more intentional faith community, must stop worrying about church growth, and must begin to shape its people to be Christian in an alien world. To do that it will need to take seriously the creation of Christian schools for the making of Christians. The question that remains is this: Do we who claim to be believers in Jesus Christ, and who by our baptism are members of his church, have the imagination and commitment to do so? Is the church, at least in its mainline Protestant expression, serious about making Christians? Is it willing to give up its commitment to public schools? Are congregations willing and able to create and support Christian schools? Are parents willing to send their children to such schools and to support them? Are there enough faithful knowledgeable and able teachers willing to accept a call to teach in them? Of course, to liberal Protestants all these questions may seem inappropriate. They may consider advocating Christian schools to be a sectarian move. But if they do, the burden is on them to offer a faithful and viable alternative for the fashioning of Christians in our day. _________ Footnotes 1Tertullian Apologetic 18. 2George Lindbeck, The Nature of Doctrine (Philadelphia: Westminster, 1984), p. 133. 3Thomas Green, Education and Pluralism: Ideal and Reality (Syracuse: School of Education, Syracuse University, 1966), p. 7. 4Lesslie Newbigin, The Gospel in a Pluralist Society (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1989), p. 222. See also his Foolishness to the Greeks (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1986). 5See John Westerhoff, "In Search of a Future: The Church-Related College," in The Church's Ministry in Higher Education, ed. John Westerhoff (New York: UMHE Communications Offices, 1978), p. 197. 6See Philip Jackson, "The Daily Grind," in The Hidden Curriculum and Moral Education, ed. Henry Giroux and David Purple (Berkeley: McCutchan, 1983). 7See Peter L. Berger and Thomas Luckmann, The Social Construction of Reality (New York: Doubleday, 1966); Clifford Geertz, The Interpretation of Cultures (New York: Basic Books, 1973); Alasdair MacIntyre, After Virtue (Notre Dame: University of Notre Dame Press, 1984); Stanley Hauerwas, Character and Christian Life (San Antonio: Trinity University Press, 1975); James Wm. McClendon, Jr., Ethics (Nashville: Abingdon, 1988); and Philip Greven, The Protestant Temperament (New York: Random House, 1977). 8See Geertz, The Interpretation of Culture, chap. 1. 9Vernon Robbins, Jesus the Teacher (Philadelphia: Fortress, 1984). 10Aaron Milavec, To Empower as Jesus Did (Toronto: Mellon Press, 1982). 11Willard Sperry, Reality in Worship (New York: Macmillan, 1932). 12Alice Walker, Living By the Word: Selected Writings 1977-1987 (San Diego: Harcourt, Brace, Jovanovich, 1988), p. 27. 13Lindbeck, p. 131. 14Stanley Hauerwas, "The Church as God's New Language," in Christian Existence Today (Durham, NC: Labyrinth Press, 1988), p . 57; citing Hans Frei, "An Afterword," In Karl Barth in Re-View; ed. H.-Martin Rumscheidt (Pittsburgh: Pickwick Press, 1981), pp. 110-11. 15J. L. Austin, How To Do Things With Words (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1975). 16See Peter McLaren, Schooling as a Ritual Performance (London: Routledge and Kegan Paul, 1986). 17An image taken from St. Paul's letter to the Philippians. See also Stanley Hauerwas and William H. Willimon, Resident Aliens (Nashville: Abingdon, 1990).