Introduction
As was noted in the previous episode, we’ve been interacting with some statements made on public education by J. Gresham Machen in his work, What is Faith? As was the case in
Christianity and Liberalism, so too in What is Faith? Machen stands opposed to the liberalism of his day that had made its way into the church. Machen doesn’t spend his time railing against idolatry and paganism per se. In fact, he states at sundry times and divers manners that there were towering individual minds within paganism.
Machen’s life was singularly dedicated to the clear exaltation of the word of God, which he did by combating the idolatry that had made its way into the church through secularism and that through the watering down of terms and the emphasis on experience and pragmatism. It wasn’t as though Machen was diametrically opposed to either, in fact, it would seem somewhat impossible to have a relationship with someone that is devoid of experience, the likes of which will have a very real practical effect on your life.
However, he was diametrically opposed to both, experience and pragmatism when they were exalted above the mind and even devoid of the mind. The effects of which were to minimize the word of God which garnered all the wrong kinds of experience and produced the worst results.
As a result, many during his day, approximately one hundred years ago, sought to fix the moral decline in the nation and in the public schools with a return to morality (sound familiar?). If people are acting bad, then if we could get them to act good then problem solved, right? This may be a good time to ask, by what standard?
However, this wasn’t a return to biblical morality. This wasn’t a return to God’s law. This
wasn’t a return to a universal, absolute moral authority and standard outside of man to which we must all give an account. No, there was a moral code as developed by the department of truth that taught little boys and girls how to be good citizens, the State being the standard to which all behavior is to be conformed.
Given the state of affairs today in the public schools, we said that most would consider this a welcomed change and is what most Christian parents are pushing for. In fact, they aren’t even going that far in that they aren’t pushing for a positive moral code to aspire too, or even the strong encouragement of self-discipline. The parents that make the headlines today are those crazy radicals that don’t want their kids learning about the merits of anal sex in elementary school. Most would call it a grand victory if they could just get the schools to teach math. However, given that the intelligentsia doesn’t want everyone to be racist, sacrifices must be made.
But as Machen warned,
“It is useless to try and keep back the raging sea of passion with the flimsy mud-embarkments of an appeal to experience. Instead, there will have to be recourse again, despite the props afforded by the materialistic paternalism of the modern State, to the stern, solid masonry of the law of God. An authority which is man-made can never secure the reverence of man; society can endure only if it is founded upon the rock of God’s commands.”
If driving faster in the wrong direction never gets you to your destination, one has to ask the inevitable question, can the public schools be saved? If you remove the foundation, will the structure ever be able to stand? Are the public schools necessary and can they be fixed? Most evangelicals would answer with a resounding yes, because we all know that evangelism didn’t exists before the public school system, but at the end of the day there are only so many ways to gussy up a turd, before you come to the inevitable conclusion that a turd by any other name is still a turd.
Given the state of affairs in Machen’s day, he saw the public school system as a necessary evil,
“Most important of all, we think, is the encouragement of private schools and Church schools: a secularized public education, though perhaps necessary, is a necessary evil; the true hope of any people lies in a kind of education in which learning and piety go hand in hand. Christianity, we believe, is founded upon a body of facts; it is, therefore, a thing that must be taught; and it should be taught in Christian schools.”
Contrary to most evangelicals today, Machen was not in favor of Christianizing the public
system, seeing that this would only delude the water in the church even further. The argument being that all doctrinal distinctives would have to be removed as to appease all parities, leaving you with a vague notion of the fatherhood of God and the brotherhood of man, which unfortunately sounds like most Christian schools today which are licensed by the state – weird.
However, this creates an anti-intellectual environment given that serious inquiry can’t be made, for it will only lead to distinctives which will create conflict and controversy. This is the problem with the liberalism of Machen’s day and our own. God is allowed, as long as we can keep Him in the dock.
So then, can the public schools be fixed?
Can The Public Schools Be Fixed?
My answer to this question, is a resounding and unapologetic, no! By definition it’s a socialist program. The goal of public education is not, and never was, at least as far as the government is concerned to create free thinking individuals that love the Lord with all their heart, mind, soul and strength. Nor was it ever the goal to cultivate individuals who love the truth and are willing to pursue it at all costs.
The goal of government education has always been to create good citizens that are obedient to the sovereign state. As long as it is run and funded by the government (federal or state – you pick the poison), and the curriculum is set by the state and all the teachers are vetted by the state, the result will always be the same. The only difference may be in the way that said idolatry manifests itself in the prevailing culture by-in-large. The reason this will always be the case is that every institution, almost always and without fail…mostly, most of the time, is primarily about self-preservation.
Now, if you wanted to object to my above statement, “funded by the government” with the fact that nothing is funded by the government, but only by the people. I guess I would agree in principle, but then I would say, “tell that to the government.” If a bully takes your money and then spends it however he chooses, you may protest that it’s your money he is spending, but at that point, it doesn’t much matter, does it?
Given that education is the most religious thing a people can do, having the state as the sole interpreter and arbitrator of what is taught will always make it idolatrous, whether or not we feel good about our idolatry, or whether or not our idolatry is more respectable than our current brand of, crazy off the reservation, completely nutjob idolatry we are currently marinating in, like being stuck in an elevator after someone drops a taco fart.
To even propose that we shouldn’t have government run education sounds blasphemous today, and that’s just among the Christians, but centralized, state-run education is certainly the anomaly in the history of the world, and the results speak for themselves. This was one great big giant experiment that has failed miserably, and we treat it as gospel. It’s been said that the greatest lie the devil ever told was convincing people he didn’t exist.
O.k., fair enough. Maybe number two on that list, is convincing people that they can’t exist, or that society cannot flourish without government education. Or, even that there was a time before government education. Talk to most Christians today and this is how they think. God created Adam and Eve and shortly their after, but certainly before the fall, God created government education. The fact of the matter is, we can’t possibly imagine what life would be like without it, and why is that?
Even Machen, refers to it as a necessary evil. I assume that when he does so, it is because he knows it’s not something that is going away anytime soon. Therefore, it is something that has to be dealt with, and in dealing with it, try and freshen up that turd as much as possible. If the toilets broke, might as well stock up on air freshener.
But why should we think of anything as a necessary evil? Oh, I know, we’ll work on reform and call it something cool and edgy like smash mouth incrementalism. The only incrementalism I have ever seen, works one way and that’s towards the left. Even with Roe. The only reason it was overturned was because of the abolitionists. This will be true in education as well. Don’t believe me, look around and ask yourself how is it going?
If it is evil, why tolerate it? If it is evil why try and reform it? Machen writes,
“But taking the public school as an established institution, and as being, under present conditions, necessary, there are certain ways in which the danger of that institution may be diminished.”
Sure, government education is established, but that doesn’t mean that it should be, and why do we consider it necessary and what kind of dangers are we trying minimize, and is that even possible, not just given the state of things, but given the nature of things?
Machen then goes on to propose seven ways in which the dangers of public education can be minimized. The first, Machen says, is that,
“The function of the public school should be limited rather than increased. The present tendency to usurp parental authority should be checked.”
Most sensible people would agree with this sentiment. Certainly those going to school board meetings to voice opinions about the garbage being taught do. However, this is like asking the fox to count the hens in the hen house.
Who is going to limit the school’s authority? The same bureaucrat’s, on the left or the right, that truly believe it’s in your best interest that they have more authority. I have said it before, but it bears repeating, even if parents successfully get certain things removed from the school, you still have all the same idiots in place that thought all those things were good to teach your children. You may have omitted some things, openly, from the curriculum, but you haven’t changed the system or the teachers. That’s not a win, that’s just dying a little slower.
Back in January of 2022, the Michigan Democratic Party posted this statement on their Facebook page,
“Not sure where this ‘parents-should-control-what-is-taught-in-schools-because-they-are-our-kids’ is originating, but parents do have the option to choose to send their kids to a hand-selected private school at their own expense if this is what they desire. The purpose of a public education in a public school is not to teach kids only what parents want them to be taught. It is to teach them what society needs them to know. The client of the public school is not the parent, but the entire community, the public.”
The next day, they had to delete the statement and then issue a new one that basically blamed those who read it for misunderstanding them for saying out loud what they’ve always believed. I agree with Machen, if Commie douches (my words, not his) have to have authority it’s best that it is limited. But why do they have to have authority in the first place? And, if they have it, the best way to limit it is to take it away altogether.
Second, Machen says,
“The public school should pay attention to the limited, but highly important, function which it is now neglecting – namely, the impartation of knowledge.”
Herein lies the problem, what is knowledge? Machen could make this statement one hundred years ago and have it go unchallenged, but today, everyone is Pontius Pilate before Jesus asking, “What is truth?”
Of course, I agree with Machen, but that’s because I agree with his presuppositions about the world. The vast majority of those teaching in the public schools today do not, and certainly the system which houses them does not. And in fact, they believe that this is what they are doing. That is, imparting knowledge. Unfortunately, they believe truth to be as mailable as someone’s genitalia (irony intended). Machen’s sentiment is great, but I’m not so optimistic.
Thirdly, Machen proposes that,
“The moral influence of the public-school teacher should be exerted in practical rather than in theoretical ways. Certainly the (thoroughly destructive and immoral) grounding of morality in experience should be avoided. Unfortunately, the true grounding of morality in the will of God may, in our public schools, also have to be avoided. But if the teacher himself knows the absolute distinction between right and wrong, his personal influence, without theoretical grounding and without ‘morality codes,’ will appeal to the distinction between right and wrong which is implanted in the soul of the child, and the moral tone of the school will be maintained. We do not for a moment mean that that sort of training is sufficient; for the only true grounding of morality is found in the revealed will of God: but at least it will avoid doing harm.”
It is important to note, that what stands behind this statement is that Machen believes parents should be able to pull their children out of the school at any point throughout the day for religious instruction. This gives the parents the flexibility to send their child to the government school for this topic or that topic. But again, Machen is assuming that gay, bluehaired, mermaids aren’t teaching your kids.
I disagree with Machen when he says,
“Unfortunately, the true grounding of morality in the will of God may, in our public schools, also have to be avoided.”
However, by saying this, I think he has in mind direct religious instruction within the schools which he disagrees with for reasons aforementioned.
Fourthly, Machen purposes that,
“The public-school system should be kept healthy by the absolutely free possibility of the competition of private schools and Church schools, and the State should refrain from such regulation of these schools as to make their freedom illusory.”
This sounds good, however, that is the only thing freedom will ever be in this type of a system, namely, illusory. The unavoidable gravitation of centralization will always and inevitably move towards self-preservation. Which for them, by definition, means more control, not less. To ask them to give that up is like asking a leopard to remove some of its spots.
This is why private and Christians schools are so heavily regulated. Competition is illusory. Most of these schools just look like public schools thirty years ago. Even the vast majority of classical Christian schools are structured just like the public schools with a little bit of Jesus sprinkled on top, but they teach Latin too, so it’s cool. There is an old adage that says, “He who controls the definition wins.” If the State determines what is and what is not a “school,” and their guidelines must be followed, I don’t think they much care whether or not your school is private or Christian. Either way, they are setting the terms.
Fifth, Machen says,
“Uniformity in education – the tendency which is manifested in the proposal of the Federal department of education in the United States – should be avoided as one of the very greatest calamities into which any nation can fall.”
To which, I can only add a hearty, Amen.
Until the Department of Education is abolished, and Christians wakeup, you can kiss any notion of a mere Christendom or a new Christendom, or whoever has a cooler moniker before Christendom, good bye.
Sixth,
“The reading, in public schools, of selected passages from the Bible, in which Jews and Catholics and Protestants and others can presumably agree, should not be encouraged, and still less should be required by law. The real centre of the Bible is redemption; and to create the impression that other things in the Bible contain any hope for humanity apart from that is to contradict the Bible at its root. Even the best of books, if it is presented in garbled form, may be made to say the exact opposite of what it means.” J. Gresham Machen
Machen has an excellent point and one that needs to be stressed and thought through because most today would see the reading of any Bible passages in the government schools as a colossal victory. However, the real center of the Bible is redemption…The redeeming work of Christ is the context through which every passage should be read. If you find yourself in agreement with a Jew and a Catholic, best to do some immediate soul searching.
Perhaps a greater threat, because it will seem like such a victory compared to what we have today, is the open acceptance of the Bible into the government schools but taught and handled in such a way as to remove all controversy, leaving us with the things on which we can all universally agree…minus Christ. It is important to remind ourselves that the devil doesn’t care if you have a Bible. He cares whether or not you believe it.
Lastly,
“Public-school children should be released at certain convenient hours during the week, so that the parents, if they choose, may provide for their religious instruction; but the State should entirely refrain both from granting school credit for work done in these hours and from exercising any control whatever either upon attendance or upon the character of the instruction.” J. Gresham Machen
It is very hard to disagree with this, so I won’t. However, I think we should ask ourselves why any of that necessarily has to be done through the public schools? Are there cheaper and more effective alternatives to teaching your children certain topics, than supporting the government education behemoth?
Machen, then concludes with these words,
“Such are in general the alternative proposals that we might make if we were dealing with the problem which has led to the efforts at ‘character building’ of which we have spoken. We recognize to the full the good motives of those who are making such efforts: but the efforts are vitiated by the false principle that morality is based upon experience; and so they will only serve, yet further, we fear, to undermine in the hearts of the people a sense of the majesty of the law of God.”
Conclusion
I love J. Gresham Machen, and far be it from me to disagree with him. However, if I may be so bold, and humble, as to provide seven alternative proposals that will help fix the government schools. Now, I probably shouldn’t have waited until my conclusion to propose these most important proposals so you will have to forgive me for being brief.
1. Get your kids out of government schools.
2. Get your kids out of government schools.
3. Get your kids out of government schools.
4. Get your kids out of government schools.
5. Get your kids out of government schools.
6. Get your kids out of government schools.
7. Get your kids out of government schools.
_edited_edited.png)
Commenti