Why I Want to Teach in a Christian School

My motivation to teach in a Christian school comes naturally from my commitment to teaching and serving in Christian education (described above in my Philosophy of Christian Education). Having taught and served in a Christian school for the past four years, my vocational calling has been confirmed and continues with unrelenting passion. My motivation to teach at a Christian school is found in three primary areas.

First, I am motivated not only to be a part of a positive Christian educational community in general, but more specifically, to be a part of biblical education. This can only be done well within the context of a Christian school. Biblical and theological illiteracy is a major issue facing our culture generally, and the Christian church specifically. We are becoming more and more disconnected from our historical and spiritual roots. One of my specific goals and motivations for working in a Christian school is to increase students’ level of biblical and theological competency in order that they, the next generation, might be able to reach the world more effectively for Christ and His Kingdom!

The second motivation that I have for working within a Christian school is the community found there. I have had the privilege to teach and serve in three different Christian schools, all very different from each other. The common thread that I have found in these differing institutions was an unflinching commitment to Christ among the faculty and staff. The community that results from an entire faculty with the same basic Christian worldview is second to none. It is remarkable to be able to pray for students with fellow faculty members, and to pray and support one another as fellow Christian educators. This is the kind of professional environment that I would strive to cultivate, and in which I want to continue serving.

Finally, my ultimate desire is to teach and serve in an educational setting that is distinctively Christian, while remaining faithful to the pursuit of knowledge and academic excellence. Two slogans used frequently at my alma mater, Gordon College, were “freedom within a framework of faith” and “faith seeking understanding.” As an educative community, we sought out the meaning of these two phrases, both as Christians, and as learners. As a teacher in a Christian school, I seek to cultivate that experience with my students; an intellectual curiosity from a distinctively Christian perspective. Having both a “framework of faith” and a “faith which seeks understanding,” affords students the freedom to be challenged by hard truths and deep questions, yet have the foundation and core beliefs, as well as the support of an authentically Christian faculty, to assimilate answers and new knowledge into an already established framework of faith. I am eager to teach at an institution that is intentional about its endeavors; not merely seeking knowledge for the sake of knowledge, but intentionally engaging with various academic fields from a distinctively Christian perspective!

Soli Deo Gloria!
Peter T. Fitzroy
February 26, 2018

Miracles and the Kingdom of God

This was a one page paper for the class Jesus and Hermeneutics at Boston College with Dr. Daniel Harrington S.J.   After reading selections from various scholars, the purpose was to answer the question: "Using hermeneutical theory, what would you say about Jesus' miracles today?"

Thesis: Regardless of one’s hermeneutical theory, the miracles in the New Testament convey the message of the inbreaking of the Kingdom of God.

The point of the New Testament miracles (and also those today) were not merely a display of ability to suspend the laws of nature, they were to show the inbreaking of the Kingdom of God. This was certainly the case at the level of the historical Jesus (Mt 12:28; Lk 11:20) and the goal of the evangelists communicating this inbreaking to their various communities. As Wright states, “He never performed mighty works simply to impress. He saw them as part of the inauguration of the sovereign and healing rule of…God.”[1] The burning question remains, however, regarding the historicity of such events. The approach taken by both Meier and Vermes, in line with a Hirschian hermeneutic, both want to put off the philosophical/theological question of divine influence, and merely examine these events as historians, trying to assemble some “core” which does go back to the ministry of Jesus.[2] Meier certainly presents a compelling case using the criteria to support the miracle corpus at large, especially multiple attestation (619-623). Both Meier and Vermes rightly recognize that a person’s worldview will ultimately determine his answer to the philosophical/theological question.[3] Vermes presents interesting parallels to Hanina ben Dosa(115-116), however his theological presuppositions preclude him from seeing the purpose of Jesus miracles as demonstrating the inbreaking of the Kingdom. These presuppositions also lead him to conclude that Jesus was “Galilean hasid” who was inept in halakhic matters (118). While Jesus may have been cognizant of this paradigm and while the idea may have been on the minds of the evangelists, to conclude that Jesus was only this, is to misunderstand his self-proclaimed purposes, namely the Kingdom demonstrated.

Schillebeeckx’s approach is one based more on Gadamer. He is not as concerned with the historical level of Jesus so much as what the evangelists want to communicate by the miracle accounts.[4] This also reaches into our day, “…Jesus…healed…what does that mean for humankind” (181). Schillebeeckx may overstress the dualistic nature of the miracles accounts, but his overarching point is clear, they represent the time of salvation, realized eschatology (185), God’s rule visible on earth (189). The in breaking Kingdom is our take-away point just as it was for the first century audience.

[1] N.T. Wright, Jesus and the Victory of God (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1996), 165.
[2] John P. Meier, A Marginal Jew (New York; Doubleday, 1991), 617. (In-text citations from this point on).
[3] Geza Vermes, “Jesus the Jew” in Jesus’ Jewishness: Exploring the place of Jesus in Early Judaism (New York: Crossroad, 1991), 108-109. (In-text citations from this point on). See also Meier, A Marginal Jew, 509, 514.
[4] Edward Schillebeeckx, Jesus: An Experiment in Christology (New York: Crossroad, 1979), 181. (In-text citations from this point on).