Twenty years after I graduated from college with my bachelor’s degree, I decided to go back to school to earn a master’s degree. My Hebrew was a little rusty (OK, very rusty!) so I decided to audit a Hebrew course at the local university. There are two ways to audit a course. The first way to audit a course is not demanding—you go to class, you sit and listen, but you don’t have to do anything during the class or during the week between classes. You have the advantage of sitting in class, along with a more relaxed attendance policy, no tests, no compulsion to do homework, and you still get an AU on your transcript. The problem is that when you audit a course that way, you don’t learn much and you can’t do much when you finish. There is a second way to audit a course. You attend every class; you do all of the homework and the teacher grades it. You take the non-mandatory tests to measure your progress. You put pressure on yourself. You benefit, you learn, you grow, you are changed, you act. My ultimate goal in auditing the Hebrew course was to be able to do something—read Hebrew using a minimum of helps. The class was not the goal—the goal was what could occur when I finished the class.
A lot of folks are auditing church using the first method. They sit in class (church) sixty minutes every week, unless something else comes up. They are fulfilling the minimum requirements of their religious audit. They are mostly present, but they are content to let someone else do the studying. A week or two later, they cannot pass a test over the class content (preaching). They do not bring their textbook to class, they do not do any homework between classes; they are not diligent students of God’s Word. They are content to let someone else pray for them—-they leave with the same prayer life they came with. They are content to let others prepare, study, pray, and do the work–before class, during class, and after class.
How can you tell the difference between the academic auditor and the serious student? How can you tell the difference between the church auditor and the serious Christian? Just as in my Hebrew class, the difference is in the results. My goal was to read Hebrew. My success or lack of success was measured by reading Hebrew. Going to church is a good thing, but it is not the ultimate goal. Our commitment to the goal is reflected in how seriously we pursue the course—studying, participating in the discussion group, sharing, practicing, and reviewing. And ultimately, the goal is reflected in how we live, what we do, and how much our lives look like Jesus as a result of our encounter with the Master Teacher.
Bob:
Very thoughtful and very true. I have found in my experience as a teacher and minister that many people generally desire to engage in serious study of the scriptures. The problem is often that we as church leaders do not spend the time in assisting them in doing so. Over the years I have develop study guides for the students. For example, I am presently teaching Dietrich Bonhoeffer’s “The cost of Discipleship.” In doing so, I have developed a 74 page manual to be given out to the students in class, whether at the university or in church. This required a lot of preparation on my part, however, the response of the learners, at both institutions, is remarkable. So, maybe one way to instill within our fellow-Christians a “hunger and thirst” for the Word, is to give them materials that are more than simply fill in the blanks and engaging them more in deeper reflection prior to class than simply sitting and listening to a lecture.
Thank you for taking the time to write this message and for challenging me to continue to seek ways and opportunities to engage my students in the Word. Tom Seals
Thanks, Tom, for taking time to write. I appreciate your kind words. I have almost quit blogging in favor of posting thoughts in other forums. Thank you for reading what I write!