Conclusion

These three different paradigms – religious instruction, interpretation and the community of faith - correspond to Pazmiño’s description of the foci of education, emphasising the importance of content taught to persons in their context, while remaining God-centred. Jesus, the Master Teacher, after whom we are called to model ourselves, exemplifies the keeping together of orthodoxy (right beliefs) with orthopraxy (right practices).[1]

My own approach has been to highlight and identify those aspects of these approaches that have seemed to tie in with this broader perspective, while affirming areas of strength and identifying weaknesses. In particular, the evangelical approach to Christian education described by Pazmiño’s provides a coherent unifying theological theme that lays the groundwork for subsequent reflection upon particular interpretive methods or actions within a faith community. Humility, rather than hubris, will enable the charge of arrogance to be avoided. The strength of Groome’s “shared Christian praxis” is that it intentionally opens up a dialogical space between teacher and learner. However its weakness is exposed by the willingness or ability of the educator to clearly and accurately represent the faith Story. Dykstra’s practices of the faith community are affirmed as a means of grace, but openness to the work of the Spirit is essential if a dry and empty formalism is to be avoided

As God accommodates himself to us in the person of Christ, and the Scriptures represent God’s accommodation of revelation to human capacity, so also must educators accommodate their teaching to their audience. The practical work of the educator is underpinned by their spoken and unspoken assumptions about the nature of Christian education. By foregrounding these underlying issues, Christian educators are enabled to play their part: to follow the example of Christ; to cooperate with the ministry of the Spirit; and to bring people to God.

---

[1] Pazmiño, God Our Teacher, 157.