Three Christ-like Roles for Educators (The Prince)

We need to keep in mind in teaching and research that the authority accorded us by God as professors of a field of knowledge is provisional authority, not absolute in any way. The royal nature of our calling is also part of the missio dei. The cultural mandate of Genesis to “fill the earth and subdue it; and have dominion” (1:28) is not an excuse for exploitation but the natural extension of being kings and queens under the high kingship of God.

Humans “rule” the world in many ways, and that rule can either be priestly in its care and cultivation, or it can be a destructive rape of our fellow creature the earth. If the prophetic portion of our calling is a sign of the change in direction humanity needs to take to return to God and his purposes, and if the priestly vocation is the holiness of that intended structural growth and development, the princely aspect is a reminder that our authority is that of steward and regent. We have not absolute right to choose as we would.

Pedagogically, we should wear our authority with a certain lightness. We cannot forget as teachers that the prophethood and priesthood and princedom of the Church are possessed by all believers. Our students can be prophets and priests to us, as well as we to them. Academic freedom, I suspect, could be summed up in this: “As slaves of God, live as free people, yet do not use your freedom as a pretext for evil” (I Peter 2:16).

To be prophets, priests, and wards of God's world, and as Christian to be these things often in opposition to an academy that resists these roles, means we must take the time to truly engage the particular frameworks in which their disciplinary make up is assembled. Looking at the broad picture, unpacking the assumptions of a field, and digging deeper into the field's conversation and controversies require that we appreciate the models, applications, and pedagogy that our various academic fields demand. Professorship requires of us a certain examination of the foundations of our subjects, a certain mastery of the content, and a strong sense of how the field is divided into differing schools and approaches. Even this point should not overlook that differing fields and courses and teachers also take differing shapes.

There is no one complete metapedagogy.