I remember our anticipation when we went to our first school Christmas program when my oldest daughter was in kindergarten. She had been practicing the words and hand motions to “Up on the Rooftop”. The performance of the song was adorable. Then another class came up and sang another Santa Claus song. Then another class with another Santa Claus song. And yet another song about getting lots of presents. And another song about toys and so it went for more than an hour; a program of children singing songs about getting lots and lots of presents. And I walked away thinking this was not right.
I can understand the First Amendment reasons for not presenting Christian carols and hymns. But we must be honest that to replace them with songs of presents is to create a teaching of another set of spiritual values. They aren’t religious values (in the way we define religion) but they are values that have spiritual implications – implications that probably most religious traditions would say are wrongly directed values: “give me” greed and self-centeredness.
I’ve had a wonderful time with my literature class. I’ve been sharing literature I love and they, in turn, have been sharing their writing and together we have grown quite tight. Something has been growing and as it grows clearer, I can describe it with words better which allows the class to discuss it which allows it to grow more. This last month, Colten did a remarkable reading of his story that allowed me to phrase what was happening in a new way. I said something like “One of my favorite sayings from the Bible is when Jesus says ‘Hide not your light under a bushel basket. Rather put it on a stand that it might light the whole world.’ Colten just let his light shine.” Letting your light shine has become a frequent exhortation in my class now. Shining eye contact is way up. Now, is that religious indoctrination? I feel like I’ve blasted through a glass ceiling that has limited my teaching up ‘til now. Above the glass the sky stretches forever and the freshness of the air is so exhilarating.
An example of all this is the question “Why are we in this class?” The official pubic education answer is “to prepare you for the workplace of the 21st century”. Though there is some truth to this, I feel that such an answer is like singing Santa Claus songs. In avoiding the spiritual, we teach a spiritual lesson that life is about a job, salary, buying things. What I am increasingly inspired by my students to share is that the universe is an exciting place to be and to be consciously alive within it is such a blessing, such a gift and this mind is such a potentially powerful tool for exploring the gift. It’s only when we exercise the gift that we understand its power. So what we do at school is practice being fully alive – which is different from preparing for the workplace.
I have felt for years that one of my callings is to help heal what I see as a great divorce in our culture between science and religion, between mind and spirit. Part of that work has been to show how the implications of science are not reductionist but instead point to an incredible synergy driven by life doing the work of creating possibilities. But my class has gotten me exploring another aspect – the interplay between “religion” (with its Constitutional restraints) and ethics, morality, fundamental goodness. There is an educational upward spiral between letting your light shine, growing toward the light and helping fill the class and world with light. Might it be that in our training of religious tolerance, we have left unexperienced, uncelebrated the feel and spirit of the common ground?
This essay feels incomplete. I haven’t quite expressed what I desire to express. It is related to two quotes that speak to me.
“Should we strive to teach values appropriate to sustainability, or should we present these as only one possible orientation to the world?… Is value-free education possible? Is it desirable? If neither, how can values be integrated into the learning process without jeopardizing objectivity and a fair treatment of facts, data, and logic?
“As difficult as these issues may be, there are good precedents for the integration of objectivity with a strong value orientation. Medical education, for example, has a clear bias toward human health, not disease. The overriding concern of reputable international relations scholars…is the promotion of peace, not war. Likewise, economics is intended to expand our understanding of the conditions for prosperity. Except by pedants, knowledge has never been regarded as an end in itself, but rather as a means to human well-being. By the same logic, environmental studies ought to have a clear direction favoring harmony between human and natural systems while preserving objectivity in the handling of facts, data, and logic.” – David Orr
“The problem of the modern hero is that of rendering the modern world spiritually significant … making it possible for men and women to come to full human maturity.” – Joseph Campbell
Let the second quote lead us to insert near the beginning of the first quote “Is spiritually-free public education possible? Is it desirable?” and leading to a conclusion like “By the same logic, education ought to have a clear direction towards helping our lights shine ever brighter while preserving objectivity in the handling of facts, data, and logic.”
Leave a Reply