Christian Nurture

Lessons from Reformation

2011-10-31T17:17:00.002-06:00

Why October 31st is significant, here.

October 31: transformation of the West

2011-10-29T14:03:00.000-06:00

Americans will celebrate Halloween in ignorance this Monday. They will blissfully party not knowing that their right to party is historically based upon Protestant theology.

Learn why in this series of articles celebrating Martin Luther's nailing of the 95 Theses:

Homeschool Blindspots

2011-10-01T16:42:00.002-06:00

I cannot give a true evaluation of homeschooling as a movement since I have only recently begun my journey.

However, after over a decade of watching and interacting with homeschooling families, I have had my private concerns. Now, some of these concerns have been voiced by a leader of this movement.

Exposing Major Blind Spots of Homeschoolers by Reb Bradley is a hard-hitting article that attracted scathing comments. It received greater exposure since it was republished at Joshua Harris' blog.

He recounts his own personal troubles with idealized homeschooling. And he explains how wide-spread the problems are before listing nine particular traps homeschooling families can fall into.

It is somewhat long as articles go but if you homeschool or wish to understand this culture then this is a must read.

I pray it will bring many to the crying need of homeschoolers and non-homeschoolers alike: repentance from sin and faith in Christ.

Read it now.

Christianity Today's review and critique of Divided the movie

2011-09-29T17:06:00.000-06:00

It's short. Read it here.

Review of Mr. Baucham on youth ministries, Part 1

2011-09-14T11:02:00.001-06:00

I was recently asked my opinion on the uncut interview with Mr. Bauchman (here). This interview was reduced and integrated with the movie Divided. Since many topics were covered in this interview, I will examine some more than others, basically following my notes in order.

Mr. Bauchman first sets up the problem in the church: the "institutionalization of the youth." In other words, age-segregated churches are considered the "norm" and Christians cannot think of anything else. In fact, when radical change is presented "institutional inertia" resists the change and people will not change.

I think there is much truth here. The phrase "institutionalization of the youth" is a good description of my own experience growing up in a typical Evangelical church. "Inertia" is another choice word that aptly describes the inherent conservational attitude of most humans to the institutions and methods with which they are comfortable. The churches need to reject youth-centric cultures.

There is a problem with youth-worship in the church. The cottage industry graphically illustrates this sin. And much money is to be had. And that can be a large temptation to maintain the status-quo. But we should not paint such a broad brush that those against change are necessarily in it for the money or to hold their positions of power.

The history of Sunday school was presented next. Its origins are in late 18th century England for the stated purpose of helping illiterate children, to "teach them generally." Or put another way by Mr. Bauchman, it was "outreach from the church" to the community but was not intended "to be the discipling arm of the church" (5"). Even so, this teaching tool did not "catch on" until the mid- to late 1800s.

As has been demonstrated repeatedly, history is not the forte of this movement. If Sunday school is conceived of as simply instructional time in the bible that occurs on Sunday, then Sunday school is an old practice (historian Schaff is one example of this thinking). On the other hand, if Sunday school is conceived of as something radically different than the catechism classes of yesteryear, then it is a new tool. But newness is not inherently wrong.

Many churches embraced Sunday school early on. In fact, the Presbyterian church early on adopted Sunday schools (and the "bible class") as useful tools for instruction of the young. Sunday school was already lauded by the General Assembly as early as 1816. And by 1830 the Presbyterian General Assembly listed Sabbath schools, along side bible classes and catechizing, as a means of covenant child nurture. In fact, Boylan's scholarly book about Sunday schools concludes that Sunday school was fast becoming integrated into Protestant nurturing methods after 1830 (p.20).

He presented two major arguments used at that time against this "youth ministry" as it began to grow in the 1800s: 1. It will be applied to Christian children 2. Parents will stop catechizing their own children (6"). He ominously concludes that both have now occurred. What is more interesting is the argument not presented: that which cannot be found in the bible should not be practiced; Sunday school cannot be found in the bible, therefore it should not be practiced. This is the implied argument in this interview as well as the movie. Was it used at the beginning of the Sunday school movement?

However, neither "argument" is sufficient. 1. The fact that Christian children may use an outreach tool for their own spiritual nurture is not inherently wrong. Churches could use catechisms as an educational outreach for the lost and have done so (like the New England Puritans) as well as use it for their own children. 2. That lazy parents exist and will always exist is no argument against the use of something that could be beneficial. Titus 2:3 tells the older women to instruct the younger women. Does this negate the responsibility of the mothers to instruct their own daughters?

Mr. Baucham asks: "Where do you go in the Scriptures to justify this ministry? The answer is: you don't" (9"). This new insight occurred to him while at seminary. There he asked: "To reform something is to return something to its original biblically intended purpose. Youth ministry does not have one. Therefore, we do not need to reform it but we need to abolish it" (9.30"). It was a crazy idea to them.

Again, we find the leaders of this movement begging the question in debate. The question is whether or not the church must have explicit positive warrant for non-public worship educational events. They assert yes without reason. If readers do not get this, they will find themselves implicitly accepting the answer given without examining the question carefully.

Again, the question is whether youth ministries can be used without having explicit biblical warrant. Does the church have to find some bible verse to justify the existence of Sunday schools? If so, what is acceptable reasoning and what is not? These are the real questions that should be debated. Readers should not assume that the questions offered are the correct questions. Merely asserting that Sunday school must be found in the bible easily becomes a rhetorical device to bludgeon listeners.

But behind these questions (answered by Mr. Bauchman but never explicated to the audience) is the more basic question: what is a "youth ministry"? If it is anything like the movie, it is apparently any and all bad things rolled up into one. But put that way, who would be for such ministries? Mr. Phillips, in his lecture "A History of Sunday School," defined Sunday school in such a precise and negative light that his argument was won before the debate ensued. Even I could cheer for him!

But as all newcomers to this issue know instinctively: it is not bad youth groups and Sunday schools that the NCFIC is against, it is youth ministries as youth ministries that are rejected. Mr. Bauchman asserts later that the "entire structure" must go (12").

Apparently, after challenging the existence of youth ministries, responses included any and all types of arguments but "never" a biblical argument. There was never a text or biblical principle employed "that this is something we ought to be doing as a church" (11"). The strongest argument he encountered was, "well, there is nothing that says we can't..." He countered: "that's unacceptable."

So far, no actual argument has been presented in the interview. Asserting that youth ministries must have biblical warrant such "that this is something we ought to be doing as a church" is not an argument but an assertion. Why should the churches accept this standard? Upon what biblical doctrine or text does this reasoning rest?

If Mr. Bauchman quoted relevant verses (or even a confession of faith), maybe threw in a syllogism or two, then an argument would have been presented. Until, perhaps, recently, a lack of a clear argument has been the pattern through much of the literature and lectures of this movement.

Mr. Baucham continues this line of undeveloped argument noting that most of the age-segregated requirements cannot be found in the bible (again, so what?). In fact, most of the categories come from "space requirements" (12"). It is "completely arbitrary" with no more "merit" than picking people randomly as couples.

Of note is that this observation about space requirements does not match the NCFIC's confession (article 19) which seems to tie age-segregation to "evolutionary and secular" thinking. Space requirements, I believe, is likely the culprit for many small churches, for instance. Again, so what? Only if I take on faith that I have to find a passage or doctrine that can link "space requirements" with the bible in some way can one follow this line of reasoning.

But there is a biblical doctrine: Christian liberty.

However, such an argument seems not to meet muster: "Philosophically there is no argument. Theologically there is no argument for any of it" (12.40"). It is unfortunate that Mr. Baucham does not present the best argument, Christian liberty, and demonstrate why it is irrelevant to the case at hand. Instead, the audience is suppose to take his word that no real argument has been presented.

"But we do it religiously," Mr. Baucham complains. It is as though age-segregation is the the only thing we know (12.40").

Now, I think I can agree with that. However, that observation is different than some small church with genuine space requirements concerns. Perhaps they separate the children but not "religiously" knowing that the parents are given the final say of which class they think is best. That approach is certainly not an air-tight 23-35.5 year-old age-group that Mr. Baucham ridiculed earlier. In fact, churches have the biblical freedom to reduce their Sunday school to two groups or just one.

Next, he rightly debunks the pragmatic assertion that if something worked for me it should work for everyone (14"). He also shows the unbiblical nature of operating two different worship services serving two classes of people (15"). He laments that youth are no longer part of the church.

I agree. I was unaware that some of these terrible things were happening. I only wish he would clearly separate the worship issue from non-worship issues (many Sunday schools do not overlap worship). And that he would distinguish messed-up youth ministries from well-grounded ones (Mr. Brown in his new book does exactly that). This helps the listener carefully evaluate the assertions offered.
[For numbers on young people leaving the church, see Barna, here.]

Over half-way through the interview, Mr. Baucham decries youth ministers evaluating the problems within youth ministries. Why? Because it is like the fox guarding the hen house (19")! The youth ministers are going to try to "eat less chickens" to preserve their jobs (19.20")! Naturally, he does not want to smear their motives but they would not be youth ministers if they did not believe they were "the answer" or "essential."

Using such language (ad hominems) and such a nefarious illustration betrays more of his own uncharitable mindset than he may realize. Perhaps Mr. Baucham should stop evaluating churches in general since he is a pastor of a church and would naturally wish to maintain his job by denigrating other churches? Or perhaps I should wonder why the NCFIC ignores my articles. Could it be that they wish to preserve their public image. After all they would not keep propogating their views (and errors) if they did not think they were "the answer" or "essential." But I will refrain myself from any such speculations. I believe better things of Mr. Baucham and the NCFIC.

(continued in part 2)

Mr. Baucham on youth ministries, uncut

2011-09-06T11:03:00.000-06:00

Here is the unedited interview with Mr. Voddie Baucham from the movie, Divided.

I was asked my opinion about this segment. That will be the next posting, Lord willing.

(More about the movement here.)

Weak defense of Divided the movie

2011-08-15T21:18:00.002-06:00

Here is a summary of some typical arguments defending the new family integrated movie, Divided, and why they fall short of their intended goal.

Mr. Brown's late-in-coming distinctions for family integrated churches

2011-08-03T17:13:00.003-06:00

The following is from the NCFIC blog by Mr. Brown. He is responding to counter-claims that the bible does not have cars or films just like there is no age-segregation.

My hope is that my questions will help bring differing parties together. Or at the least clarify any real differences between the NCFIC and traditional Reformed thinking.

First of all he writes,

"First, the primary argument of the NCFIC and the film Divided is not that youth ministry does not exist in the Bible...What is more important – and this is the main point we want to make – is that all the positive commands and examples in Scripture call for the practice of age-integrated worship and discipleship in the church and the responsibility of parents to disciple their own children."

First, the reader should note the careful (yet unclear) language "modern form of systematic, age-segregated youth ministry". What does this mean? In the movie, the reviewer is left with the worst possible illustration of such ministries. However, it is not youth ministry per se that is rejected but "systematic age-segregation". The NCFIC confession article uses the words "comprehensive age segregated discipleship." But it never offers a definition of these phrases.

Can a youth ministry have non-systematic age-segregation? This important question will help clarify exactly what Mr. Brown means.

Secondly, an argument from silence is used but it is a secondary argument. As such it is still invalid unless clarified by another premise. Such a premise has not been offered or proven (for example, "that which is not in the Bible is therefore suspect").

Third, it is claimed "all the positive commands and examples in Scripture call for the practice of age-integrated worship and discipleship in the church and the responsibility of parents to disciple their own children." This is not precisely true since no command states: "children should only be family integrated for instruction," neither in so many words or by syllogistic reasoning. Not one. But apparently the bible states that "children should more often than not be age-integrated for instruction" according to Mr. Brown's exceptions (see below).

Consider another important point: the commands and examples offered are not specific enough to determine exactly how the meetings of instruction were arranged. Did the wives sit with the husbands? Did nursemaids watch over the infants? Did families even sit with each other? The texts do not say, except Nehemiah 8 which is (special) pleaded away into an insignificant "exception". Yet history tells us that during the time of Christ families were separated in the temple worship. Where is the New Testament outrage for this practice?

Next he states,

"The Bible is clear about this matter, and it gives the full range of that teaching including who, where, why, what, and when....When you split youth up according to age, you are doing something that is contrary to the explicit, revealed commands and patterns of Scripture...to claim that we can set aside these scriptural methods and employ our own methods because we do things and use means not mandated in Scripture in other areas of church life is a generic fallacy."

Let me take this in reverse: "generic fallacy"--I do not know what that is. I googled it. Perhaps he means the "genetic fallacy." This is a logical fallacy of denouncing (or proving) something based upon its origins. Thus a Christian who would reject Aristotelian logic because it was formalized and expanded by an unbeliever is committing the genetic fallacy.

Even granting this is the fallacy he desired to use I am not sure how it relates to the issue at hand. On the other hand, when the movie points to Plato and Rousseau as the source of modern age-segregated youth ministries that is a genetic fallacy.

Now for the details:

"The Bible is clear about this matter, and it gives the full range of that teaching including who, where, why, what, and when."

I am not sure what this means. For instance, what is what? Is this the subject matter of the teaching? The method? It is noteworthy that how is missing in this list. But age-segregation is a how of instruction.

If the bible gives the what of teaching where is the verse that says: "learn to read, write and type"? Where are the examples? If we are counting examples and lining them up as Mr. Brown appears to do in his book, then in the bible the majority ("primary") of examples are oral examples: people speaking and memorizing. The "exception" is non-verbal.

If these are not the "full range" covered in his assertion then what is covered? This assertion only creates more questions.

Lastly, he elaborates a distinction missing in the NCFIC confession and book:

"Third, methods and means of discipleship are in a different class than microphones and computers. Discipleship methods are defined and commanded in Scripture and are matters of Law (i.e., God’s revealed will that we are to obey), while things like microphones, computers, and film are matters of technology (i.e., practical tools we can use as means to carry out the Law of God). In regard to technology and other practical aspects of church life (where we meet, the length of our meetings, type of seats we use, etc.), these are matters of liberty that are under the biblical guidelines for the practice of liberty. This means that Scripture must be consulted to see if they contradict anything that Scripture maintains."

Not a single bible passage or theological syllogism is offered to prove this point. It is completely arbitrary to assert that "methods and means of discipleship" are substantially different than "microphones and computer." For if the sufficiency of Scripture gives the "full range of that teaching including who, where, why, what, and when" then one would expect technology (a what and how of discipleship) to be sufficiently and explicitly guided by the Bible.

So, since discipleship is part of the law of God. And the "methods and means of discipleship" are matters of the Law. Therefore, these "practical tools" which Mr. Brown admits are "means to carry out the Law of God" must fall into the same category. Unless equivocation of terms is occurring.

Again, upon what biblical principle does he differentiate discipleship methods that are significant from discipleship methods that are not significant (my language)? I believe that using computers for discipleship purposes is significant because instructional time can be hampered if one is using the computer more than a human in some cases. Generally, it is not the tool itself that is a problem but the usage of the tool.

More importantly, the entire paragraph is built upon an unproven premise (as is the entire book): the regulative principle of discipleship. In my own words for clarification: all methods and means of discipleship invented by the brain of man without His own express commandment is wrong.

Now, I have never seen it written out that way. What we have instead are the elements of this premise found in Mr. Brown's posting and book. See especially the "desert isle test." He requires that "all the positive commands and examples" must limit the range of discipleship methods to just those things explicit in the commands and examples of the bible--just like the regulative principle of worship (RPW).

The Scottish reformer, John Knox, explained the regulative principle of worship as, "All worshipping, honoring, or service invented by the brain of man in the religion of God, without His own express commandment, is idolatry." All Reformed creeds follow this principle for worship. Otherwise the Reformers exercised Christian liberty even in the domain of education and discipleship (read the history here).

Now to sum up, why is "systematic age-segregation" rejected? Because all the commands and examples of the bible are age-integrated. But why does a Christian need to find explicit commands and examples of discipleship before using a method of discipleship? I do not know what their answer is. Somehow discipleship (however defined) has a separate moral interpretive tool than other moral fields of everyday life.

But the matter does not end there. Mr. Brown allows for age-segregation!

"There are times when it may be appropriate for various ages of people to meet for specific purposes" (A Weed in the Church, p.231, cp.61).

Then what is the whole debate about? Why is this exception not placed at the beginning of the argument? Where is it in the NCFIC confession?

Has the entire decade long debate been over how much age-segregation is allowed? If so, how much does Mr. Brown think is allowable?

Very little it seems. "However, this is not to be the normative pattern of biblical youth discipleship, but rather an exception." A glimpse of how much is offered on page 225 where he contends that as "little as one hour a week" of age-segregation is "problematic" for those wishing biblical felicity.

In other words, 1/168 of a week is still too radical to contemplate. That is .006% of a child's week! What Mr. Brown gives in one hand is virtually taken away by the other.

At the end of the day, the article offered by the NCFIC did not bring much clarification. I do not know where this leaves the movement. But I do hope that the questions and observations of my article will bring more light than heat.

[Family integrated church series here].

Samples of catechizing over the centuries

2011-08-01T17:43:00.000-06:00

I was asked at puritanboard.com about the history of catechizing. Although I have focused on the broader question of how Christians educated their children over the centuries, I still have much information on this narrow question.

Below was my very short answer:

If you are referring to Divided, please see the comments at the puritan forum here. And my review here.

It is important to know that the organization behind the movie actually has two problems with the modern "youth programs": separation from parents and age-segregation. Thus the history of Christian schooling as well as catechizing are both relevant in showing the gross inaccuracies of this movement.

[To fully understand the NCFIC and her leaders please read my article, What is a Family Integrated Church? (According to a current church member of Mr. Brown's church and one-time intern for Mr. Brown and currently employed with the NCFIC, Mr. Glick, my article was accurate).]

Here is a sample of the history of catechizing (and school class divisions).

Jewish Church:

"In this period a synagogue presupposed a school, as with us a church implies a Sunday school. Hence the church and Sunday school, not the church and the district school, is a parallel to the Jewish system. The methods in these schools were not unlike those of the modern Sunday school. Questions were freely asked and answered, and opinions stated and discussed: any one entering them might ask or answer questions. Such a Jewish Bible school, no doubt, Jesus entered in the temple when twelve years old...in the apostolic period teachers were a recognized body of workers quite distinct from pastors, prophets, and evangelists (see 1 Cor. xii. 28, 29; Eph. iv. 11; Heb. v. 12, etc.). The best commentators hold that the peculiar work of teachers in the primitive church was to instruct the young and ignorant in religious truth, which is precisely the object of the Sunday school." (A Religious encyclopaedia, Schaff, 2262)

Ancient Church:

“These catechetical classes and schools were intended to prepare neophytes, or new converts, for church-membership, and were also used to instruct the young and the ignorant in the knowledge of God and salvation. They were effective, aggressive missionary agencies in the early Christian churches, and have aptly been termed the 'Sunday schools of the first ages of Christianity.' The pupils were divided into two or three (some say four) classes, according to their proficiency. They memorized passages of Scripture, learned the doctrines of God, creation, providence, sacred history, the fall, the incarnation, resurrection, and future awards and punishments..." (Schaff, ibid)

Reformation and Post-Reformation:

The Geneva Academy had two divisions: schola privata and schola publica (the Academy proper). The schola privata (the lower school) was divided into seven grades, admitting children as young as age six. Most boys stayed in each grade a year, but could advance earlier. School began at six in the summer and seven in the winter and lasted until four in the afternoon. Children went home under escort from nine to eleven in the morning. Classes were on Saturday as well and included an afternoon recess. The children sung Psalms one hour a day as well. Catechism classes were held Sunday afternoons. (The History and Character of Calvinism, John T. McNeil (New York: Oxford University Press, 1967), 194ff. cp. Calvin and the Biblical Languages, John Currid (Christian Focus Publications) 2007).

Article 21 of the Dutch Church Order of Dordt (1618) orders that:

"In order that the Christian youth may be diligently instructed in the principles of religion and be trained in piety three modes of catechizing should be employed I. In the houses by the parents II. In the schools by school masters III. In the churches by ministers elders and catechizers those specially appointed for the purpose." (Full quote here).

It also stated:
"That these may diligently discharge their trust the Christian magistrates shall be requested to promote by their authority so sacred and necessary a work and all who have the oversight and visitation of the churches and schools shall be required to pay special attention to this matter."

[This civil enforcement was also enacted in New England and similar oversight in Geneva. Pastor oversight was neigh universally encouraged.]

Now, for the parts more germane to the movie:

"The schoolmasters shall instruct their scholars according to their age and capacity at least two days in the week not only by causing them to commit to memory but by instilling into their minds an acquaintance with the truths of the Catechism. For this end three forms of the Catechism adapted to the three fold circumstances and ages of the young shall be used. The first shall be for the young children comprising the Articles of Faith or Creed, the Ten Commandments, the Lord's Prayer, the Institution of the Sacraments and Church Discipline with some short prayers and plain questions adapted to the three parts of the Catechism. The second shall be a short compendium of the Catechism of the Palatinate or Heidelberg used in our churches in which those who are somewhat more advanced than the former shall be instructed. The third shall be the Catechism of the Palatinate or Heidelberg adopted by our churches for the youth still more advanced in years and knowledge."

[Radical nuts following evolutionary though? I think not. But godly men using the light of nature to differentiate between babes, children, youths and adults--broad categories followed by many cultures.]

"John Knox devised a system of Sunday schools, at the very beginning of the Reformation in Scotland, which system has been in operation in that country more or less extensively ever since. So that the Sunday schools which now exist in Scotland are derived, not from the system of Raikes in England, but are only a revival of the old system of the Reformer. These schools are frequently referred to in the records of that Church, and in the biographies of good men connected with it. In 1647, the General Assembly recommended to all universities to take account of their scholars on the Sabbath dny of the sermons, and of their lessons in the catechism [students at "universities" could be as young as twelve]. John Brown, the godly carrier, had in his day a Sabbath school at Priesthill. It is stated, on the authority of Rev. John Brown, D. D., of Langton, Berwickshire, that Sunday schools were in existence in Glasgow, and other places, in 1707. Ihey were in operation in Glasgow, and other places, in 1759, and also in many places in 1782." (The Congregational Quarterly, 1865, p.20)

The pastors and elders of the Bohemian Unity of Brethren church would assemble the older children of the church after the worship services to examine how well they retained the sermon; “hence our ancestors held separate addresses to the different classes, the beginners, the proficients, the perfect; also to the single, and again to the married by themselves: which practice it is evident was not without its advantage.” "At the conclusion of the noon and afternoon service, the elder youths and girls remain, and are examined by the preacher (one of the elders assisting him with the former, and one of the matrons with the latter) to ascertain what attention they have paid that day in hearing the word of God, and how much each has retained. Moreover, during the Lent season, on Wednesday and Friday evening, meetings are held, termed salva (from the hymn Salva nos Jesu, rex cmli, "Save us, Jesus, heavenly King,") in which the mystery of redemption is diligently inculcated, especially upon the young." (Church Constitution of the Bohemian, 136ff.)

Early America:

The church in Norwich, Connecticut, in the Spring of 1675 covenanted together to instruct their children in the fear and admonition of the Lord: “We do therefore this Day Solemnly Covenant to Endeavour uprightly by dependence upon the Grace of God in Christ Jesus our only Saviour. First, That our Children shall be brought up in the Admonition of the Lord, as in our Families, so in publick; that all the Males who are eight or nine years of age, shall be presented before the Lord in his congregation every Lord’s Day to be Catechised, until they be about thirteen years in age. Second. Those about thirteen years of age, both male and female, shall frequent the meetings appointed in private for their instruction, while they continue under family government, or until they are received to full communion in the church.” (The Ecclesiastical History of New England, p.665 )

"It is well known that every respectable family had a regular weekly exercise in the catechism [in early New England]; and also that once a week in some towns, or once a month in others, the minister gather the children and youth of his parish, at two o’clock, on Saturday afternoon to catechize them." (The Congregational Quarterly, 1865, 21)

As late as 1808 (before Sunday Schools reached critical mass), the General Association of the Congregationalists in Connecticut, “That they [parents] require them to attend public catechisings till they are fourteen years of age, and thenceforward, during their minority, to attend seasons, that may be appointed by their pastor, for the religious instruction of youth.” (Panoplist, 1808, p.159.)

"My first acquaintance with Mr. Donnelly [early 1800s] was when I became a pupil in his school in my father's neighbourhood, in Chester District, S. C. I entered his school at an early age; and as he was my first teacher, (my parents excepted,) so he was also among the last. Under his tuition I studied the elementary branches, such as reading, spelling, etc., and recited to him the Larger Catechism. The Bible was not then excluded from the school, on the ground of its being a sectarian book…the afternoon of every alternate Saturday was spent in reciting Catechisms and portions of Scripture, which had been previously committed to memory- IIe was a rigid disciplinarian of the Old School…” (Letter, 1862, Rev. McMillan to William Sprague, Annals of the American Pulpit, vol. 9, p. 26.)

If you have any more questions please ask.

Fellow blogger with good analysis of Divided the movie

2011-07-25T19:55:00.000-06:00

My fellow blogger, Adam, has a few good thoughts about the semantic confusion from the NCFIC and the Divided movie, here.

"Do parents have the authority to teach kids? Yes. Do churches have the authority to teach kids? Yes. Where is the contradiction, and what is the objection? I don’t know, and I am finding that, the more I listen to these guys speak, the more I am impressed with their ability to say very ambiguous statements with a ton of conviction and passion. That is, honestly, not helpful."

Unity of Church and Family

2011-07-22T18:46:00.000-06:00

Although I have critiqued the family-integrated movement, it is not enough to show its errors. An alternative must be presented. And here it is:

Uniting Church and Family

Divided the movie

2011-06-23T08:57:00.000-06:00

Why are churches losing upwards of 80% of the youth?

Why are Christian youth increasing in childishness?

What can be done to stop the demise of the next generation?

A new, provocative movie, Divided, seeks to give an answer. The movie was shown on June 17th at the Christian Home Educators of Colorado conference in north Denver.

Summary

The movie was fifty minutes long. The producer, Mr. LeClerk, takes the viewer on a grim journey into the heart of youth ministries. He interviews church kids, youth ministry experts, statisticians, and pastors.

In an ever-spiraling descent into marketing madness, the film ably portrays the deep-seated pragmatism of the teenagers and their would-be pied-pipers. One youth leader bluntly told the camera that the youth did not need more Biblical truth but more practical things, more relationships, more fun.

Mr. LeClerk then "discovers the shockingly sinister roots of modern, age-segregated church programs..." The roots do not begin with Mr. Raikes of late eighteenth-century England but with Plato and Rousseau. And even more, there is no biblical precedent for such programs. Therefore, the solution is to tear down the entire youth ministry--branch, root and all.

To rescue a lost generation it will take churches and families following the Word of God. Churches should stop usurping parental responsibilities. And parents should take back their God-given duty to train and nurture their own children. This will rescue the next generation.

Analysis

The movie was created in conjunction with the National Center for Family Integrated Churches (NCFIC). The president of this organisation, Mr. Brown, figures predominately in the movie.

The photography, mood and music were spot-on. This is obviously a professionally made film. The pacing was good. Its presentation was not over-the-top or in-your-face, but subtle and dramatic. Aesthetically, the movie deserves full marks.

But presentation aside, what of the content? Given the applause at the end of the Friday night showing in Denver, it grabbed the audience. Setting the problem up with multiple teen-interviews, peppered with real-time video of Christian "rock concerts," LeClerk masterfully guides the audience through the entertainment-minded youth ministries of today.

This is a serious problem. Children, teenagers and youth alike are baptized in a sea of childish entertainment all for the sake of "relevance." If the statistics are only partially accurate, they are astounding enough. Too many youth are leaving the church.

And the parental problem is equally heinous: too many parents feel godly sending their children off to youth camp while neglecting family worship, home discipleship and basic doctrinal fidelity. Added to this problem are too many churches willing to accept the status quo.

In fact, a Pew study shows 57% of confessing Evangelicals deny that Christ is the only way to heaven. Barna numbers suggest that being a homeschooler is no sure defense either: half of those polled believe that salvation is not by faith alone.

Although the show does a good job presenting the youth problem, it misses the wider context of that problem. With such wide-spread doctrinal ignorance, is it any wonder the youth leave the shallow churches?

Unfortunately, the history section leaves much to be desired. Pointing out that Plato wished to send children to the state schools is not the same as proving this as the intellectual source of today's age-segregation. The omission of the fact that the Reformers and Puritans practiced age-segregation is another problem.

What of the solution: to demolish youth ministries and incorporate family discipleship?

The solution is wonderful...if understood correctly. But proper understanding cannot come from the movie since it leaves out important pieces of information. For instance, Mr. Brown believes there are times and occasions for the family to be separated (see his book, A Weed in the Church). Likewise, Mr. Phillips thinks there are times to speak to teenagers as teenagers.

In other words, the rhetoric of the movie would forbid any and all age-segregation. When in actuality the leading proponents have a more nuanced position. If the film were twenty-minutes long this lack of nuance could be tolerated.

What family discipleship entails was lightly touched upon. But the proper role of the church was not clearly articulated. In contrast, Mr. Brown's book helpfully clarifies that the pastors and laymen have a role in the life of the youth.

Overall, the movie delivers the content and delivers it well. The problem is that the content is one-sided. There is a youth problem but there is a larger problem of Gospel ignorance. It would be better to read the book, but at least the movie will challenge Christians to rethink the role of youth ministries.

[More about the NCFIC organization here. More about Mr. Phillips here. A Review of Mr. Brown's book here.]

Recent articles about family integrated churches

2011-06-17T13:57:00.001-06:00

This week was full of family-integrated church articles.

For those interested in intelligent interactions on this issue I offer the following. The first is an article I hope many proponents of FICs can agree upon.

1. Uniting Church and Family The proper relation requires the Gospel.

2. A Weed in the Church: A Review. I may expand on this in detail.

3. Family-Integrated Church Series by Prof. Sam Waldron. Part 17 here. It is an irenic engagement.

4. Christian homeschooling conference: who is Doug Phillips? There is a lively exchange in the comment section. Unfortunately, it is not as productive as the discussion with Mr. Glick here. Many ardent supporters of this movement tend to jump the gun and assume that if you critique them then you are against parents having the primary responsibility of instructing their children.

A Weed in the Church: A Review

2011-05-31T16:10:00.003-06:00

Overview
There is a crisis among the Christian youth. They drop out of church. They remain childish. They are biblically illiterate. The church is losing the next generation.

Author Scott Brown, pastor and director of the National Center for Family-Integrated Churches (NCFIC), insists this youth problem is of “epic proportions,” requiring repentance and change right now.

This book is his clarion call to change youth discipleship. It is divided into five sections: orientation, history, solution, objections, and implementation. The first section is a much-needed explanation of what family-integration (FI) is and is not. He offers ten qualifications that help nuance the concern and the solution. He also explains his view of sola Scriptura in relation to not only worship but discipleship.

The second section of the book traces the history of age-segregation. Section three (the largest part) collects the biblical data for youth discipleship for both the family and the church. Section four rebuts eleven arguments against age-integrated discipleship. The last section tersely explains nine steps to planting an age-integrated approach.

The thesis of the book argues that this problem among the youth (drop-outs, childishness, etc.) is caused by (among other things) “systematic age-segregation.” Age-segregated youth ministry “is the result of apostasy in the church,” the supplanting of the Word with man-made traditions of discipleship (p.43). But the modern youth ministry is not only defined by age-segregation or Sunday school but by a curiously long, heavily-descriptive sentence (p.47).

The author offers a two-fold solution: stop age-segregation and start age-integration (especially get the fathers involved). This dual solution is to be implemented en toto and not piece-meal (p.249ff.). Obedience to God is a hard calling, but ministers must persevere for the sake of the families.

Analysis
A Weed in the Church does the church a service by graphically illustrating the corrosive effects of a youth-oriented, niche-market culture. It rightly calls fathers back to their God-given duties to disciple their children and to lead their families. It rightly denounces children worship services.

The opening chapters include details that attempt to clarify the concerns. But the highly-specific definition of youth ministry (p.47) is partly a loaded definition that poisons the well of discussion from the very beginning. For instance, youth ministries are described as methods “that usurp parents’ authority over their children.” Many good churches that are careful in their use of Sunday school and the like would take great umbrage at being labeled thus without evidence.

The book does not make the historical case that age-segregation is secular and evolutionary in origin. There is no explicit tie-in between each historical segment. Lining up quotes is not the same as proving their connection. Further, the omissions of the many age-segregated meetings in history—such as age-specific meetings in Puritan New England—are conspicuous by their absence.

The heart of the book, the theological assertion, is tenuous at best. It is asserted that God did not tell the church to use age-segregation for discipleship; therefore it should not be used (p.47, 85). This appears to be (what I dub) the “regulative principle of education,” a confusion between Christian liberty and the Reformed doctrine of worship (cp. chapter 5). This approach is assumed but never proven.

Further, segregation “does not properly fulfill” the biblical requirements for discipleship and is contrary to the “primary examples” of church gatherings (p.203, 74). What a “primary example” is in contrast to secondary examples is not clear. And since segregation does not “properly fulfill” biblical requirements it is odd that some age-segregation is allowable (p.231).

It is true: churches should stop abusing age- and family-segregated meetings like a drunkard abuses wine. And many families feel godly using the multitude of programs to bypass their own responsibilities. But the author simply throws all such meetings into the waste basket of evolution—almost. He admits there are times and occasions for the family to be separated (p.61, 231), yet never explains when and why such a time should be an “exception.” In contrast, he actually argues that even if fathers were properly instructing their children and youth groups were Bible-centered with only one-hour a week meetings, it would still be wrong (p.57, 218, 222, 225). What is given in one hand is taken by the other.

Conclusion
I am a child of age-segregated discipleship. I grew up with Sunday school. I attended my local youth ministry. I went to school. If Scott Brown was the typical youth group leader, I was the typical teen target for that leader.

Yet I was not a typical youth. By God’s grace, I paid attention to the pastor. And I paid attention to my parents, my father in particular. But, like many today, I was ignorant of much Christian doctrine and practice.

So I tried to obey God’s Law to gain heaven. I tried so very hard until the Law shattered my ego. Around the age of sixteen, I recognized my inability to save myself through good works. I cried out to Christ to save me from myself. A few years later, through the doctrines of sovereign grace, I matured in my faith.

Are youth-oriented, programmatic “ministries” a problem? Yes. Do fathers need to take their duties seriously? Yes. And this book is a needful reminder of these facts. But there is a greater problem that is harming youth and families alike: a soil of widespread ignorance of the Gospel. The basic truths of Christianity are needed in the churches. The conversion of a teen-ager twenty years ago illustrates this dire need.

[More analysis of the book may be forthcoming. A picture of what uniting church and family should look like, here. More about family-integrated beliefs here.]

75th Anniversary of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church

2011-05-28T09:53:00.009-06:00

This summer marks God's faithfulness for sustaining the Orthodox Presbyterian Church for 75 years.

The official celebration time will be during the meeting of the General Assembly, the week of June 8th to the 14th. There will be a banquet celebration on Saturday, June 11 at 5:00 pm at the Sandy Cove Conference Center in Northeast, Maryland.

Tickets are $25.00 for non-GA commissioners (more info here).

There is a Facebook pagefor the younger generation. Otherwise, the older generation can visit the website.

But there is more.

There will be a pre-Assembly Conference arranged by the Committee for the Historian. It is free and open to the public.

The Conference, "The OPC at 75," is on Wednesday, June 8 from 2:00–4:00 p.m. There will be two talks: "Is the Past Really Past?" and "The Church that Calvinists Have Been Waiting For?" The first talk will be by
the OPC Historian John R. Muether. The second talk is by OPC ruling elder Darryl G. Hart.

Even if you cannot make the event or are not part of the OPC, please rejoice with us as we praise God for His faithfulness.

How our spiritual fathers educated their families

2011-05-19T10:55:00.000-06:00

Here is a list of articles explaining the opinions and practices of our spiritual fathers and mothers on the issue of Christian education. It probably goes against everything you have heard in some homeschooling circles:

The Necessity of the Christian Schools, J. Gresham Machen

Children in the Hands of Arminians, B. B. Warfield

Plans of Religious Instruction, Part 1, Hodge

Education, Protestantism and the West, Part 2

The Old Virginia System, Dabney

Comparing State Schools, Dabney

Noble Exercises of Teachers, Baxter

Necessity of Schools, Comenius

Need of Presbyterian Schools, J. W. Alexander

Home Education Defined, Issac Taylor

Preparing for School: Attitude, Comenius

Vindication of Sunday School, A. Alexander

Non-parental Discipline, Comenius

Sunday School, Samuel Miller

History of Christian Education: Westminster Divines

The Importance of Childhood Education, Luther

Recent rejoinder of Family Integrated Church comments

2011-05-10T11:53:00.000-06:00

The original article, What is a Family Integrated Church?, garnered over 80 comments.

Thus I thought it wise to write another article handling some of the issues brought up. It is published here.

In Defense of Homeschooling [repost]

2011-04-28T07:35:00.000-06:00

In my naivete, I thought only the secular school sponsors ranted against home education.

But I was wrong.

I recently discovered that Christians could be against homeschooling. For instance, a professor of theology strongly discouraged homeschooling as a viable option. He may have allowed it under special circumstances but such was not articulated.

I have also heard second-hand from reliable ministers that homeschooling has been discouraged by other ministers. Yet as near as I can tell this is a minority position.

Nevertheless, I think homeschooling should be defended from such detractors.

First of all, parents have Christian liberty in this realm. Sending their children to a good Christian school, using a good tutor, homeschooling or combining all of the above are well within the acceptable parameters of the Bible. What the Bible does not forbid is allowable if used correctly. The Bible does not forbid homeschooling. Therefore, homeschooling is a viable option.

Second, there is no universally acceptable manner to educate children. Naturally, what decision is made in this regard is heavily dependent upon the family's financial, academic, ecclesiastical and similar circumstances. As much as such circumstances change so there are that many combinations of acceptable educational methods. And mature parents are usually the best judges of their own circumstances.

Third, the Bible assigns the parents as the primary guardians, giving them the responsibility to determine the best nurturing method for the child (Eph. 6:4). Although the Word of God does not specify all the areas and ways to nurture a child, the light of nature and the clear assumption of the Word puts questions of diet, exercise, entertainment, etc. as areas in which parents are granted authority. Certainly, this includes education.

Fourth, religious instruction is assigned to parents (Deut. 6:7; Proverbs). Religious instruction has historically been propagated in the family through daily family worship, catechetical instruction and daily impromptu discussions. Religious instruction being a greater subject of education than math, for instance, it follows from the greater to the lesser that parents have the option to instruct in less sublime topics, if able.

Fifth, history demonstrates the acceptability of homeschooling. Some Puritans practiced it. And some church leaders were partly or mostly homechooled. Historically, homeschooling has never been condemned by the church nor denounced by her leaders.

None of this should be taken to excuse bad homeschoooling. As with any enculturation tool, homeschooling can be abused. This defense of properly applied homeschooling does not defend those families that wish to isolate themselves from the local church. The church of God has her own duty to instruct her members, young or old. Nor is this a defense of those who wish to use homeschooling as a new relational center, replacing a common set of doctrine and practice with a new set of emphases.

Rather, good homeschooling does not consider itself in isolation from the Christian community. It is concerned with doctrinal and practical purity. Furthermore, many families in my experience do not exclusively homeschool but mix it with other approaches.

So, the next time someone wishes to dismiss homeschooling as some suspicious aberration, point out these truths to them. And above all, do not become overly agitated--there are bigger concerns we ought to be worried about.

Representative articles

2011-04-26T09:21:00.000-06:00

Here are some more popular articles displaying the various issues covered on this blog:

She Called me "Dadda"

Selling Webster's Dictionary

A Story about Scholarship

In Defense of Homeschooling

The Future of Homeschooling [Repost]

2011-04-26T08:58:00.001-06:00

Over the last two years there has been much brouhaha about the explosion of homeschooling. Statistics and numbers fly readily from the pens of writers and lips of hosts: 2 million nation-wide; double-digit growth; incredible SAT scores. Hyped claims of revival, reformation and the culture-changing power of homeschooling have mushroomed. As one bright-eyed romantic exclaimed, homeschooling has been a “veritable reformation of life” among a dying culture.

Sadly, this optimism is driven by an uninformed idealism. The 2 million number is suspect because unprovable: most of the number includes an assumption about how many homeschoolers have not been counted. The National Center for Educational Statistics has the latest number at about 1.1 million—with 18% of that number including students that attend 25 hours or less of class time outside the home. So, practically the 1.1 million number should ignore 18 percent. And if the 2 million number is accurate, it should shrink proportionally as well: 902 hundred-thousand and 1.640 million respectively.

When the retention factor is analyzed, the future of homeschooling becomes more questionable. The latest 2007 Peabody Journal of Education summary paints a more accurate picture: “much homeschooling occurs in intervals of 1 to 4 years. This implies that the total number of 18-year-olds in 2006 who have been homeschooled at least intermittently is around 375,000, or about 10%.” Only a 63% retention rate exists into the second year of homeschooling. And after year six 48% are still homeschooling (only 15% for secular families). Similar numbers are acknowledged by some homeschooling leaders.

There’s more. Many assume that most homeschoolers are college-educated, middle-class, white conservatives. However, the Barna poll strongly indicates that 49% of these families fit this description. And just over half (51%) are not classified as “born again”. Only 15% are (loosely) Evangelical. Half of the homeschoolers polled consider themselves somewhere between conservative and liberal.

More importantly, the Barna Group numbers display a level of poor spirituality I had only guessed at from my own anecdotal experience: most homeschoolers deny that Satan exists and half believe that salvation is obtained through good works.

The future of homeschooling is decidedly not looking bright. Even if the numbers are actually growing, who cares? If the numbers grow but the spiritual life does not grow what have homeschoolers achieved? What have the leaders wrought? If vast numbers are ignorant of the depths of their sins and the power of the Gospel of sovereign grace, hypocrisy and false assurance will rise. Then the future may be pleasant people, clean neighborhoods, and whiten sepulchers full of dead men’s bones.

The future of homeschooling is bright if and only if the faith grows with it. Hyping it will not help. As a viable option among many, the families that choose homeschooling still need to have their life and methods rooted in the same Gospel as the Reformation.For it is only in the Person and Work of Christ that homeschooling—or any schooling—can be part of a reformation of life and a bright future for mankind.

[More observations on homeschoolnig]

A Review of Peter Enns’ Bible Curriculum [Wes White]

2011-04-11T10:58:00.001-06:00

"...Further concern was raised over the fact that the publisher, Olive Branch Books, is part of Peace Hill Press which is directed by Susan Wise Bauer and Jessie Wise. Susan Wise Bauer is well-known and well-respected within the homeschooling community for her history series, The Story of the World, and book, The Well-Trained Mind. Olive Branch Books has released a statement in which it begs parents to read the curriculum for themselves instead of relying on secondhand accounts.

So, that is what I’ve done. I received my copy of the parents’ guide to Telling God’s Story, and I have now finished reading it. I also read Dr. Enns’ book, Inspiration and Incarnation, to help me understand his views..." [continued here]

Science catches up with biblical nurture

2011-02-05T11:21:00.001-07:00

Those ornery Puritans were right after all: self-control is paramount for healthy adulthood.

A recent study strongly indicates what Christians believed and practiced for centuries.

The Church-Integrated Family

2011-01-11T15:08:00.000-07:00

"We are at the beginning of the end of the American family as it has been known for generations and generations. As I've discussed this over the years with other pastors, we can no longer assume husbands and wives know the duties they owe one another, let alone how the Bible defines those duties. Parents do not teach their children basic manners, let alone the catechism. Hence, it seems to me churches and pastors will be increasingly obliged to teach congregation members what they never learned at home (that is, how to be families), or they will never find men who rule their households well to serve as elders (1 Tim. 3:4)."

continued here.

A Coy Smile

2010-12-01T11:40:00.000-07:00

As I turned her stroller onto the sidewalk, I leaned down to catch her attention and asked, “Who made you?”

She shifted her head up at me with a coy smile.

I continued the one-sided conversation, “God.”

She still smiled at me with those deep brown eyes and soon lost interest as most fourteen-month old children do.

But that didn’t slow me down. For weeks I repeated the same old question that thousands of my Puritan forefathers asked their children.

And she continued to greet me with a coy smile.

Three months go by with varying levels of consistency on my part. But something happened:“Who made you?...”

She replied with a coy smile, “God.”

! I was excited! So I asked her again. And she gave the same response.

I couldn’t wait to tell others. Grabbing my wife, I proudly asked our daughter the same question. And she replied with that coy smile, “God.” Mom was excited. And of course, Mom had been working at the same goal. Training our child in the fear and nurture of the Lord was a cooperative effort.

At church we quickly presented our child to our spiritually adopted grandparents. I excitedly explained that the two of us had been training her to know about God.

“I know,” replied grandma. “I’ve been teaching her that question at church as well.”

My excitement froze; I stared at her, thinking, of course. In my excitement and focus on the task of instruction, I had forgotten what I already knew: that God gave a helping hand to the biological family.

It is the family of God (1 Timothy 5:1-2; Ephesians 2:19). Carrying one another’s burdens and even instructing the younger are commands of God (Galatians 6:10; Titus 2:3, 4)—commands that should be counted as privileges between Christians.

Now with the confidence that I am not alone, as I turn her stroller onto the sidewalk, I lean down to catch her attention and ask, “What else did God make?”

She shifts her head up at me with a coy smile.

I continue the one-sided conversation, “All things.”

She Called Me "Dadda"

2010-10-10T22:49:00.000-06:00

Supposedly, a young child's first words are "dadda" or "momma"--or so I've heard.

That certainly has not been the case for my sixteen-month old daughter.

The first word she learned to understand consistently--and appropriately--was "no". She's not allowed to walk here, she can't touch that and she must wait for dinner.

Quickly following "no"' was "please". In this case, she learned the word as sign-language--as well as "milk" and "all done". She was taught "lets pray" as well, clasping her little fingers together before meal time.

Here first verbal word was "baby". She sees a Gerber baby on the bottle and say "baby". She sees a child and says "baby". There is also "dog" (or "oof, oof") and there is the ever present 'hi'.

Surely after such an extensive vocabulary the words 'mom' or 'dad' would quickly follow.

Not so.

She soon learned "water" ("wa"). And like most toddlers she enjoys a good walk ("wok").

She then picked up "puffs" and "clock" and "hat". But no "dadda".

A few weeks ago she identified the container of baby oil as "o-oi-l". And just the other day she finally put a word to the helium-filled, string-tied rubber toys she is fond of as "ba".

In fact, she even knows the name of a favorite doll, Sally as "Sal"--endearment for a doll but no "dadda"!

How did this vocabulary list grow these many months? Through the hard and diligent work of "dadda" and "momma"! We'd point at an object and state the name. And we did that as consistently as possible.

Repetition is the mother of learning after all. Yet still no "dadda".

Until today. She walked (or rather stumbled) around the room as usual but suddenly pointed at me and said "Dadda"! In shock, I stared at her while my wife pointed at me and asked, "Whose that"?

Renee raised her arm with certainty, pointed at me and opened her mouth: "Dadda".

I stared in wonder. And I smiled. She called me "Dadda".

Reformation Day Conference, Colorado Springs

2010-09-15T15:55:00.001-06:00

Get your calendars out: the 3rd Annual Colorado Springs Reformation Day Conference is coming your way!

Dr. Richard Gamble will be the main speaker, covering the life of John Calvin. It promises to be not only informative but applicable--he was my early church history teacher, so I have some experience.

Besides, I'll be a break-out speaker after the lunch session, explaining the history of Christian education.

October 29, 30th...more info here.

Reformed School Curriculums

2010-07-26T11:35:00.000-06:00

Dear friends,

It is hard for Reformed Christians to find an entire school curriculum that offers faithful books in line with the Reformation. Here are the two companies that offer Reformed curriculum for schooling at home or elsewhere, from kindergarten to twelfth grade. They would even be useful to supplement any current schooling methods.

1. Christian Liberty Academy and Press
Although these are two different websites, they are operated by the same organization. This organization began with a Reformed church in the late 60s (and still associated with that church I believe). The first, the Academy, using the CLASS system, includes a full-curriculum (with alternative textbooks if desired) that is semi-flexible. The family registers with the group and they grade the tests. And includes a parent/teacher planner with scheduled testing and mile markers.

The Press is not registration oriented. You grade your own tests. And it includes the same materials (such as Louis Berkhof's Manual of Christian Doctrine--a high school systematic theology). It too includes the full curriculum and planner or you can buy individual books and custom make your approach.

2. Covenant Home also provides an auditing service if you so desire. It can operate as an "umbrella school" to issue diplomas as well. And it offers a flexible approach to different child learning levels. Grade ten includes Calvin's Institutes. Individual books or an entire curriculum per grade level are available. A day-by-day planner also exists. Covenant Home's distinctive approaches are here. It includes a diagonistic testing program to help tailor the curriculum.

You can request a catalog from either company. Prices vary from 150$ a grade/curriculum to 670$

Naturally, I have not read every book offered. Nor am I familiar with all of them. I do not know if the history and bible books include pictures of Christ. And, ironically, I did notice that there is no systematic catechizing in the lower grades. The Westminster Confession of Faith is not covered at all. Even so, these offers are a great start or finish for your family.

It will take some time to look into these, but I think it worth the effort.

yours in Christ,

PS. Feel free to pass this on to others.

Faith and Liberty 2010 Conference in Denver

2010-07-10T08:40:00.001-06:00

This should be informative to say the least:

Two former Presidential candidates will sound off on the current economic and political climate at the Faith and Liberty 2010 Conference in Denver, Colorado on July 24, 2010. Former UN Ambassador Alan Keyes and Pastor Chuck Baldwin are keynote speakers for the Faith and Liberty 2010 Conference. Website here.

Predicting the Future

2010-07-06T22:06:00.000-06:00

“…a comprehensive and centralized system of national education, separated from religion…will prove the most appalling enginery for the propagation of anti-Christian and atheistic unbelief…which this sin-rent world has ever seen.”
A. A. Hodge, Princeton Professor, 1887

How was professor Hodge able to foresee such wretched consequences of godless, centralized education? Hodge’s ability to see one-hundred years into the future was based upon a solid Christian tradition arising from the Protestant Reformation. That tradition rooted itself into the soil of Scripture Alone.

Is there a question about who should educate children? The Bible has an answer for that.
Is there a question about what a child should learn? The Bible has an answer for that.

We need not feed at the trough of humanistic thinking to deal with the important questions of today. Rather, we should seek out the Words of Life, the Bible.
The hard part is understanding how to properly digest this heavenly Food. Professor Hodge was able to absorb the truth of it so well that he foresaw the doom of America. Again, how?

The fact of the Bible alone as the source of truth and practice also came with the tools of interpretation and application needed to dig into the Truth. The Puritans refined these tools (which are in the Bible itself) into eight simple rules; one of which states: “where a duty is commanded, the contrary sin is forbidden; and, where a sin is forbidden, the contrary duty is commanded.” Ephesians 4:28 offers a clear picture of this truth: “Let him that stole steal no more: but rather let him labor, working with his hands the thing which is good, that he may have to give to him that needs.”

When God states that murder is forbidden, it also means that preserving life is commanded. If we are not to lie, we are to tell the truth instead. And when He commands that God should be the center of our lives and children should be instructed in the fear of the Lord, He forbids education “separated from religion.”

If we wish to see one-hundred years into the future, Christians need to return to their spiritual roots in the Bible. And they need to learn how to once again feed upon the Word for the expansion of the Kingdom, just like professor Hodge.

New Ray Study of Homeschooler Demographics

2010-06-21T21:48:00.000-06:00

Educator and research analyst, Gaither, reviews the details of last years latest homeschooling study by Dr. Ray's NHERI organization:

"This is the latest of a long line of nearly identical studies Ray has been performing for decades now at fairly even intervals. In two previous posts I reviewed this large body of work, which you can read here and here. This new study tries very hard to overcome one of the most persistent deficiencies of his previous work (and the 1999 Rudner study)–the near exclusive reliance on HSLDA’s advertisement to recruit subjects, leading to unrepresentative samples. This time around Ray tried to recruit families from outside of the HSLDA orbit. Did he succeed?" Continued here.

Ligonier 2010 Conference Webcast

2010-06-15T11:31:00.001-06:00

Watch the Live Webcast of Ligonier Ministries' 2010 National Conference

Thousands of people will gather in Orlando this week for worship, fellowship, encouragement, study, and prayer, as we study some of the toughest questions Christians face. Joining Dr. R.C. Sproul will be respected pastors, theologians, and leaders Alistair Begg, Michael Horton, Steven Lawson, John MacArthur, Albert Mohler, Burk Parsons, R.C. Sproul Jr. and Derek Thomas, all of whom will equip us to answer questions that all Christians and non-Christians find perplexing.

Watch It Live on Thursday, June 17

This year, we have partnered with Christianity.com to provide the webcast. We will be live streaming the conference for free (over 22,000 have watched in previous years), and will again have a Spanish language simulcast online as well.

Click here to view the webcast

Helping Foreigners with Education

2010-05-24T09:11:00.000-06:00

What should Christians do for those financially poor African families? Right now in some countries many of them send their children to school hundreds of miles away so they can learn to make money. While there many are corrupted by the schools. Or should they be encouraged to homeschool, working side-by-side with their fathers, digging ditches but staying morally safe.

I think most of the readers would immediately see the fallacy here. Are these the only two options?

Turning the dial back, let us examine what the Puritan forefathers did. The famous Congregationalist, John Eliot, the apostle to the Indians, set up schools. And helped the families learn to work. And, more importantly, preached the Gospel and catechized the tribes, children and all.

The Presbyterians followed the same course. Even into the 1800s various denominations furthered the education of the natives through local schooling.

So, a possible solution to this false dilemma is obvious: give them schools.

The Sock Game

2010-05-18T02:42:00.000-06:00

"Here you go--nice and warm." Mom stood up, satisfied that baby's feet would stay warm in the cold night air.

The baby smiled that crooked smile children offer when only two teeth are visible. Then the little baby girl looked curiously down at her feet. She took one awkward reach toward the toes, missed them and tried again.

Success!

Proceeding with methodological patience only observed in a Ph.D. student deep in an experiment, the tiny child took one sock off. And reached for the other.

"What are you doing you cutie?" Mom lovingly admonished.

"Here, put your sock back on. I know you like to be naked but the socks will keep you warm."

Quickly wrapping the baby in a blanket while secured snugly in the portable car seat, Mom moved the child into the car. After securing her in the back seat, Mom sat in the driver's seat and drove to the store.

When Mom opened the back door, she was surprised to see both socks off. "?--little girl, whatever are you doing? Aren't your feet cold?"

Back at home, baby girl's clothes were changed after a slight indiscretion. As Mom put the onsie over here head, the child put her hands into the sleeve holes.

"Good girl. You know you gotta wear clothes and you're helping Mommy."

But as soon as the socks went on, the baby tried to pull one off. She reached for the other sock, determined to be bare-foot in the dead of winter.

"You silly goose! You don't mind your clothes on but you want those socks off!" Mom gently chided the girl.

"Well, patience is the call of motherhood. I will keep putting your socks on until you learn that you need them." Thus the contest began in earnest.

Mom puts socks on wiggly feet and baby just as certainly takes them off. Mom tries tighter socks. Baby succeeds just the same. Mom tries longer socks. Baby succeeds just the same. Mom tries to distract here. And baby...well, you get the idea.

It is now quickly becoming Summer. With temperatures much nicer, Mom is less zealous for the socks. The baby is still zealous for the bare-foot condition.

By now the contest morphed into a game. Or perhaps the baby always thought it was a game. Either way, Mom is no less pleased with her cute baby girl.

One Year of Christian Nurture

2010-05-10T14:20:00.000-06:00

This blog started out with a bang.

Apparently, writing about common misunderstandings of homeschooling is taboo in some circles. But I persevered.

I first started with a five part mini-series on the history of Christian education.
I also researched the surprising conclusions of homeschooling statistics, summarized here. The claims of revival among homeschooling by radical homeschoolers was challenged as well.

Much of this site is historical. The early 1800s understanding of home education was summarized here. What early American presbyterian thought about private schooling and Sunday schools was explored as well. The irony of the revival of Rouseau still stands as a challenging article.

I explained how I was homeschooled. I looked at questions such as: what if everyone homeschooled? I even defended homeschooling.

A Christian manifesto was analyzed as well. I countered Gary North's diatribe against classical education here. Another historical error was brought out in Selling Webster's Dictionary.

Over all, I was quite busy. And I hope, dear reader, these articles will change the way you view education.

Aasen's Homeschooling Summary & Analysis

2010-04-24T03:23:00.000-06:00

Here is an interesting article:

"Aasen, veteran homeschooling mother of five in Washington State, here summarizes the basics of homeschooling research. She leads off with the 2007 NCES data that estimated there to be around 1.5 million homeschoolers in the U.S. She describes the diversity of motives, pedagogies, and types of people who homeschool. She cites Brian Ray’s NHERI research to show that..."

[continued here]

Growing up environmental and Christian

2010-04-19T09:56:00.000-06:00

I grew up environmentally active. And never knew it.

I was taught to pick up trash. My parents even warned me they would stop the car and make me walk back to pick up any defenestrated trash (it never happened, because I believed them.).

I also walked everywhere.

(continued here).

Free Music...for Education

2010-04-13T23:04:00.000-06:00

That's right--I like free as much as the next guy.
[And I added "education" just to put it on this blog :-) Well, Christian nurture certainly involves various forms of relaxation and even play. And for me, music can be both.]

But I like free things that are also useful and high quality (such demands!).

And by God's grace, I have found two sources of free stuff that's useful and high quality.

For myself, I like good background music when I write. I could use my CD player in my computer but I like mixing things up (multi-CD player anyone?). So, for a while, I ripped most of my old tapes and a few CDs. But that takes time. Then you have to pick a number of MP3s for the mediaplayer to rotate through.

Ha! Why even do that much work when Pandora or Slacker Radio does it for free!

Slacker radio is streaming music based upon genre selection. All you need is a free account (give 'em your junk email address--you do have one, right? Use hotmail for that). And then you pick a station (based upon genre) or look up a song or artist and turn it into a "station". The songs will flow from similar artists and songs.

You are able to pause or skip the current song. You are given so many "skips" before you run out. You can also tag favorite songs or reject the bad ones. It has some visual ads and occasional audio ads too. [A PR from Slacker reminded me, "Once you have created a great station, you can share it via email, Facebook, or even embed the station on your website or blog."]

I ran across Pandora two years ago. And I have never looked back. It is based upon a Music Genome Project that organizes songs by 40 different characteristics. This means that its stations are not so much genre centered as organized by the greatest number of similar characteristics as defined by the Project.

Even so, I prefer Pandora over Slacker. It has fewer ads (I think) and you not only get to skip songs (a limited number of times of course!) you can bookmark the better ones, use them to create a new station or order them.

You can also mix stations (can't in Slacker). Or mix by genre. Or individually chose stations within a genre mix. You can delete stations if they start mixing in songs that detract from your original intent.

And as an added bonus...if you have Firefox you can add the Prism app. This wonderfully amazing app (yes, I like it) can convert any website into an independent web-browser, with a desktop icon. I just double-click the shortcut on my desktop in Windows and up pops Pandora without having to open a new tab in Firefox. (It's also good for email or google calendar).

I think even non technophiles will enjoy these goodies.

The Necessity of the Christian School

2010-04-06T21:17:00.000-06:00

"The Christian school is to be favored for two reasons. In the first place, it is important for American liberty; in the second place, it is important for the propagation of the Christian religion. These two reasons are not equally important; indeed, the latter includes the former as it includes every other legitimate human interest. But I want to speak of these two reasons in turn."

J. Gresham Machen

(continued here)

Is the Shorter Catechism Worth While?

2010-03-27T15:57:00.000-06:00

The Shorter Catechism is, perhaps, not very easy to learn. And very certainly it will not teach itself. Its framers were less careful to make it easy than to make it good. As one of them, Lazarus Seaman, explained, they sought to set down in it not the knowledge the child has, but the knowledge the child ought to have. And they did not dream that anyone could expect it to teach itself. They committed it rather to faithful men who were zealous teachers of the truth, ‘to be,’ as the Scottish General Assembly puts it in the Act approving it, ‘a Directory for catechizing such as are of a weaker capacity,’ as they sent out the Larger Catechism ‘to be a Directory for catechizing such as have made some proficiency in the knowledge of the grounds of religion.’

No doubt it requires some effort whether to teach or to learn the Shorter Catechism. It requires some effort whether to teach or to learn the grounds of any department of knowledge. Our children — some of them at least — groan over even the primary arithmetic and find sentence-analysis a burden. Even the conquest of the art of reading has proved such a task that ‘reading without tears’ is deemed an achievement. We think, nevertheless, that the acquisition of arithmetic, grammar and reading is worth the pains it costs the teacher to teach, and the pain it costs the learner to learn them. Do we not think the acquisition of the grounds of religion worth some effort, and even, if need be, some tears?

For, the grounds of religion must be taught and learned as truly as the grounds of anything else. Let us make no mistake here. Religion does not come of itself: it is always a matter of instruction. The emotions of the heart, in which many seem to think religion too exclusively to consist, ever follow the movements of the thought. Passion for service cannot take the place of passion for truth, or safely outrun the acquisition of truth; for it is dreadfully possible to compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, to find we have made him only a ‘son of hell.’ This is why God establishes and extends his Church by the ordinance of preaching; it is why we have Sunday schools and Bible classes. Nay, this is why God has grounded his Church in revelation. He does not content himself with sending his Spirit into the world to turn men to him. He sends his Word into the world as well. Because, it is from knowledge of the truth, and only from the knowledge of the truth, that under the quickening influence of the Spirit true religion can be born. Is it not worth the pains of the teacher to communicate, the pain of the scholar to acquire this knowledge of the truth? How unhappy the expedient to withhold the truth — that truth under the guidance of which the religious nature must function if it is to function aright — that we may save ourselves these pains, our pupils this pain!

An anecdote told of Dwight L. Moody will illustrate the value to the religious life of having been taught these forms of truth. He was staying with a Scottish friend in London, but suppose we let the narrator tell the story. ‘A young man had come to speak to Mr. Moody about religious things. He was in difficulty about a number of points, among the rest about prayer and natural laws. ‘What is prayer?,’ he said, ‘I can’t tell what you mean by it!’ They were in the hall of a large London house. Before Moody could answer, a child’s voice was heard singing on the stairs. It was that of a little girl of nine or ten, the daughter of their host. She came running down the stairs and paused as she saw strangers sitting in the hall. ‘Come here, Jenny,’ her father said, ‘and tell this gentleman ‘What is prayer.’ ’ Jenny did not know what had been going on, but she quite understood that she was now called upon to say her Catechism. So she drew herself up, and folded her hands in front of her, like a good little girl who was going to ‘say her questions,’ and she said in her clear childish voice: ‘Prayer is an offering up of our desires unto God for things agreeable to his will, in the name of Christ, with confession of our sins and thankful acknowledgment of his mercies.’ ‘Ah! That’s the Catechism!’ Moody said, ‘thank God for that Catechism.’ ’

How many have had occasion to ‘thank God for that Catechism!’ Did anyone ever know a really devout man who regretted having been taught the Shorter Catechism — even with tears — in his youth? How its forms of sound words come reverberating back into the memory, in moments of trial and suffering, of doubt and temptation, giving direction to religious aspirations, firmness to hesitating thought, guidance to stumbling feet: and adding to our religious meditations an ever-increasing richness and depth. ‘The older I grow,’ said Thomas Carlyle in his old age, ‘and now I stand on the brink of eternity, the more comes back to me the first sentence in the Catechism, which I learned when a child, and the fuller and deeper its meaning becomes: ‘What is the chief end of man? To glorify God and to enjoy him forever.’ Robert Louis Stevenson, too, had learned this Catechism when a child; and though he wandered far from the faith in which it would guide his feet, he could never escape from its influence, and he never lost his admiration (may we not even say, his reverence) for it. Mrs. Sellars, a shrewd, if kindly, observer, tells us in her delightful ‘Recollections’ that Stevenson bore with him to his dying day what she calls ‘the indelible mark of the Shorter Catechism’; and he himself shows how he esteemed it when he set over against one another what he calls the ‘English’ and the ‘Scottish’ Catechisms — the former, as he says, beginning by ‘tritely inquiring ‘What is your name?,’ ’ the latter by ‘striking at the very roots of life with ‘What is the chief end of man?’ and answering nobly, if obscurely, ‘To glorify God and to enjoy him forever.’ ’

What is ‘the indelible mark of the Shorter Catechism’? We have the following bit of personal experience from a general officer of the United States army. He was in a great western city at a time of intense excitement and violent rioting. The streets were over-run daily by a dangerous crowd. One day he observed approaching him a man of singularly combined calmness and firmness of mien, whose very demeanor inspired confidence. So impressed was he with his bearing amid the surrounding uproar that when he had passed he turned to look back at him, only to find that the stranger had done the same. On observing his turning the stranger at once came back to him, and touching his chest with his forefinger, demanded without preface: ‘What is the chief end of man?’ On receiving the countersign, ‘Man’s chief end is to glorify God and to enjoy him forever’ — ‘Ah!’ said he, ‘I knew you were a Shorter Catechism boy by your looks!’ ‘Why, that was just what I was thinking of you,’ was the rejoinder.

It is worth while to be a Shorter Catechism boy. They grow to be men. And better than that, they are exceedingly apt to grow to be men of God. So apt, that we cannot afford to have them miss the chance of it. ‘Train up a child in the way he should go, and even when he is old he will not depart from it.’

From The Westminster Teacher, April, 1909.

The Reformed View of Education

2010-03-07T21:32:00.000-07:00

"The Reformed community, we conclude, must follow its own educational program. Much as it appreciates what is done by brethren of non-Reformed Christian persuasion, it is on the Reformed basis alone that a comprehensive Christian view of life can be set over against the world of unbelief. Only the Reformed view shows the full power of Christianity in meeting the challenge of the wisdom of the world and in offering men, with the pleading voice of the Christ who wept over the multitudes of Jerusalem, the reward of their labor for this life and the life to come. The Reformed community takes no delight in building alone. It takes no delight in living in ecclesiastical isolation. But if there is reason for it to live and to work alone ecclesiastically then there is the same reason for working alone educationally. And yet our hope is not to work alone forever. Our aim is the ultimate good of all who love the gospel and all those who should love the truth."

Cornelius Van Til

(continued here)

The Children in the Hands of the Arminians

2010-02-22T15:40:00.000-07:00

"The children certainly must be a source of gravest concern to a consistently Arminian reasoner. The fundamental principle of Arminianism is that salvation hangs upon a free, intelligent choice of the individual will; that salvation is, in fact, the result of the acceptance of God by man, rather than of the acceptance of man by God. The logic of this principle involves in hopeless ruin all who, by reason of tenderness of years, are incapable of making such a choice. On this teaching, all those who die in infancy should perish, while those who survive the years of immaturity might just as well be left to themselves until they arrive at the age of intelligent option...

And that is to say, those who die in infancy, if they are saved at all, must be saved on the Calvinistic principle of monergistic grace."

B.B. Warfield

Continue here.

VIII. Means of Grace: The Maturation Rite

2010-02-12T20:57:00.000-07:00

VIII. Understanding the Means of Grace: The Maturation Rite

Why do I label this the "maturation rite"? It is thus dubbed in order to highlight the Presbyterian understanding in opposition to the paedocommunion position. Paedocommunion so emphasizes the objective element of the sacraments that the subjective and reflective demands are watered down. Infants, toddlers, and young seven-year-olds are encouraged to partake of a meal that requires spiritual discernment as a cornerstone of participation. To "discern" the Lord's body is a spiritual activity that moves beyond simply balancing the church budget. In fact, death is specifically attached to this Meal for those who flippantly or in ignorance partake thereof.

But I get ahead of myself. Let me define the Lord's Supper or the Eucharist (the thanksgiving):

SCQ96: What is the Lord's supper?
A96: The Lord's supper is a sacrament, wherein, by giving and receiving bread and wine, according to Christ's appointment, his death is showed forth;[1] and the worthy receivers are, not after a corporal and carnal manner, but by faith, made partakers of his body and blood, with all his benefits, to their spiritual nourishment, and growth in grace.[2]
1. Luke 22:19-20 2. I Cor. 10:16

The long and short of this summary is that 1) Christ's death (not his resurrection) is especially set forth in visible and tangible elements. This is the sign-signification aspect of the Supper. Thus, in common with Memorialists (who believe the Meal is only a mere recollection of what Christ accomplished), Presbyterians affirm there is a memorial aspect to the Supper.

But there is more. 2) "worthy receivers" receive the body and blood of Christ. The work of the cross as accomplished through his body and death is received by faith alone (WCF 29.7), There may be real spiritual growth that may accompany or follow the taking of the Supper. This is the seal, the confirmation of our faith and increase of our faith in Christ. This is denied by the Memorialists (most Charismatics and Baptists).

On the other hand, the Romish doctrine of transubstantiation is denied because Presbyterians deny the bread and wine become the body and blood o f Christ. Nor do we so affix grace to the Supper that it attends every administration of it almost regardless of the spiritual state of the recipient (some Federal Visionists). There is a proper proportion of the Supper in its objective and subjective dimensions in classical Presbyterian dogma (see Words of Life, here).

This view of the Supper has been taught and is known by many of us--but how many know of the requirements for the Supper? It is not to be taken by just anyone. In fact, the preparatory aspect (both before, during and after the Meal) was taken so seriously during Calvin's time that the session or pastor interviewed the members before administering the sacrament. This seriousness is reflected almost one hundred years later in the Shorter Catechism:

Q97: What is required for the worthy receiving of the Lord's supper?
A97: It is required of them that would worthily partake of the Lord's supper, that they examine themselves of their knowledge to discern the Lord's body, of their faith to feed upon him, of
their repentance, love, and new obedience; lest, coming unworthily, they eat and drink judgment to themselves. (cp. Larger Catechism Q171 for more detail).

Before coming to the Lord's Supper examination is required: discernment of Christ's body (what He did for us), exercising faith and repentance (as daily activities), loving our neighbors (especially the church) and striving in obedience. This is quite a list.

However, the catechism is not stating that perfection is required (cp. LCQ 172), but it is differentiating between the ignorant (children) and the worthy recipients (LCQ 173).

2 Chronicles 30:18-20 brings the issue of proper preparation for the Supper into the foreground. Israel was sick because they had not cleansed themselves (or prepared themselves) for the Old Testament sacraments. After a prayer of forgiveness, the sickness was removed. In like manner, 1 Corinthians 11:30 notes that "For this reason many are weak and sick among you, and many sleep." This is a sober warning. And our Confession takes it seriously.

What this means in practice is a proper mediation, a self-reflection about the state of our souls. Perhaps on a Friday or Saturday night, one could find a quiet time and pray, examine the Bible passage and ask the Lord for more grace. Reflect upon life: are there relationships that need reconciliation? Are you clinging to Christ as your righteousness? Are you seeking repentance? Are you fighting sin, however incomplete your success? This is not an exhaustive nor minimal list. One cannot give a 1-2-3 step as a law to bind all consciences.

The Lord's Supper is a special time not unlike attending a suit-and- tie meal with one's family. Yes, every day you should eat with your family (not unlike weekly preaching), but on occasion a special time requiring special instruction and preparation is required to celebrate the family. Here, we are celebrating Christ and His death. It is a solemn occasion requiring holy awe; yet a humble boldness is also required lest we think too much about ourselves and withdraw from the Supper.

I will quote from J. W. Alexander (from Remember Him) as a proper balance to pre-Communion examination:

"But special counsel is necessary for those who tend to form adverse judgments of their own state. Realize that you are looking for the reality and not the perfection, or even eminence of piety. Life exists in the infant as well as the robust man. Remember that all graces are not always developed in the same degree. Do not be misled by the experience of others. There is infinite diversity in the operations of the Spirit. Do not yield to alarm because you do not have the feelings which others have, or any certain order of exercises; but let the sure Word of God alone be your scales, standard, and touchstone." (p.15)

Understanding the Means of Grace Series:

I. What Are They?
II. Passion for the Word
III. Benefits of the Word
IV. Power of God
V. Foolishness of God
VI. What is a Sacrament?
VII.The Initiatory Rite

VII. Means of Grace: The Initiatory Rite

2010-02-01T20:55:00.000-07:00

VII. Understanding the Means of Grace: The Initiatory Rite

Having explained that a sacrament is a sign and seal of the Covenant of Grace--a sign outwardly displaying what the inward reality should be and a seal testifying of God's faithfulness and encouraging our faith--we proceed to Baptism.

As an initiatory rite, Baptism brings one into the Church visible. This is not seriously debated by any Protestant. As a sign of regeneration, it portrays the truth of the Spirit's work in the lives of His people. As a seal, it confirms our adoptions as children of God. These truths are less known. So, as the goal is more instructional than polemic, let us define our terms:

Q94: What is baptism?
A94: Baptism is a sacrament, wherein the washing with water in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost,[1] doth signify and seal our ingrafting into Christ, and partaking of the benefits of the covenant of grace,[2] and our engagement to be the Lord's.[3]
1. Matt. 28:19; 2. Rom. 6:3; 3. Rom. 6:4

It is 1) a "washing with the water"-meaning that the mode presumably should follow the Biblical pattern. Historically, the Reformed (both Presbyterian, Anglican and Congregational) have understood that mode to follow the prophecies of the Older Testament, pouring or sprinkling (just as the Spirit was promised, Ez. 36, Acts 2). This "washing" 2) signifies, or symbolizes or points to our engrafting into Christ, partaking of His benefits and the demand to be the Lord's own in thought, word & deed. In parallel with the signifying (at least for the elect), there is 3) a sealing aspect to baptism (as just explained in part 6). It more confirms our consciences (increases our subjective awareness) of our part in Christ & all His benefits. As a seal it does not transmit grace, it confirms what is already ours. It highlights what is already ours. It strengthens what is already ours. That is why it is dubbed a "means of grace," for it increases saving faith (cp. WCF 14:1).

Naturally, just as baptism may be meaningless to some adult converts who publicly profess Christ (but inwardly are full of dead man's bones), so too, children may never be regenerate (cp. WCF 28.5). Yet in both instances, they were baptized. This is because baptism does not regenerate nor transmit saving faith to the recipient. That is the work of the Spirit. And the Spirit may work spiritual life before, during or after baptism because His ways are inscrutable (John 3:5, 8). Again, this is a Presbyterian dogma: "Although it be a great sin to contemn or neglect this ordinance, grace and salvation are not so inseparably annexed unto it, as that no person can be regenerated, or saved, without it; or, that all that are baptized are undoubtedly regenerated" (WCF 28.5).

The fact that children are given the sign of Baptism in many Protestant churches (Anglican, Congregationalists & Presbyterians) is because of Abraham (Gen. 17:7) & Peter. Yes, I said Peter. Note Acts2:38-39:

Then Peter said to them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call."

The promise-the Gospel-is "to you and to your children." Just as the Gospel call is given to all, yet only those who are born-again will respond (John 3), so the call is especially given to those children of Covenant households, yet only the elect will respond. The children have greater illumination; hence, they have greater responsibility. To whom much is given much is required. They must own their baptism through public confession.

And that moral truth is the basis of question 167 of the Larger Catechism:

"How is our Baptism to be improved by us?
Answer: The needful but much neglected duty of improving our Baptism, is to be performed by us all our life long, especially in the time of temptation, and when we are present at the administration of it to others..."

What this entails is the fact that our baptism is not a relic of our past. Although objective insofar as God is publicly declaring our entrance into the Church, it is also subjective insofar as it is part of our past and conscience. Our baptism (whether as an infant or an adult) is for our comfort ("in the time of temptation") & our encouragement as we are faced with "the administration of it to others..."

The answer continues in detail how both of these are accomplished (with a plethora of verses!): by considering what baptism signifies and seals; by humbling ourselves for not living faithfully; by "growing up to assurance of pardon of sin..."; by clinging to our spiritual baptism into Christ's death and resurrection (Rom. 6:3-5); by living in faith; by obeying the call to holiness; by walking in the brotherly love because of our unity in the Spirit (1 Cor. 12:13).

Although justification and regeneration should not be confused with baptism, baptism is for our own good. It should encourage us as part of our overall sanctification in righteousness. It should be part and parcel of our living in obedience (1 John 2:3ff.). The Spirit uses this tool to point to His work; confirm our faith; thus having begun in grace, we should continue in grace.

Understanding the Means of Grace Series:

I. What Are They?
II. Passion for the Word
III. Benefits of the Word
IV. Power of God
V. Foolishness of God
VI. What is a Sacrament?
VII.The Initiatory Rite

A Sneaky Eight Month Old

2010-01-21T22:50:00.000-07:00

She smiled her sweet smile--that innocent smile--up at Mom.

"Open up, baby-girl," Mom sweetly coxed.

The Baby opened her mouth wide, taking in the tasty sensation of food, "HMMmmmm..." While swallowing, she turned her head to the left, straining to watch the morning weather--she liked the pretty colors so.

"No," Mom reprimanded. She quickly swiveled her head toward Mom. Looking intently (having pouting lips and furrowed eyebrows) at Mom, she just as quickly smiled.

"Have some more food," Mom continued, scooping more carrots onto the Gerber spoon. The Baby moved her head to the left again, halting half-way when Mom reminded her again: "No t.v." She slowly moved her head back toward the spoon. Looking at it, she opened her mouth for more goodies.

By now, she knew the house rule: no t.v. watching while eating. Even with the t.v.off, she would look for more amazing colors. But of late, she looked less often when Mom was watching her.

Today that changed.

While Mom went for more food, Baby tried a "new" tactic. She sneaked a peek. She thought Mom didn't notice. But the Baby quickly learned what all children learn: Moms have eyes on the back of their heads.

VI. Means of Grace: What Exactly Is a Sacrament?

2010-01-18T20:54:00.000-07:00

VI. Understanding the Means of Grace: What Exactly Is a Sacrament?

The first thing I thought when I first heard the word 'sacrament' come out of the mouth of a Presbyterian was "Roman Catholic"! I suspect I am not the last. However, simply reading the writings of the Reformed readily dispel any such notions. In the first place, the Romish church understands the sacraments as mechanical means of obtaining grace; explicit faith is not a requisite. Pull the lever and out comes more infused grace.

In contrast, question 91 of the Shorter Catechism asks how the sacraments function: "The sacraments become effectual means of salvation, not from any virtue in them, or in him that doth administer them;[1] but only by the blessing of Christ, and the working of his Spirit in them that by faith receive them."

Thus, any mechanistic view of the sacraments are precluded before the Catechism even defines them! Romish sacerdotalism is ruled out.

But, then, what is a sacrament? The Shorter Catechism summarizes the Biblical doctrine of the sacraments thusly:

A92: A sacrament is an holy ordinance instituted by Christ, wherein, by sensible signs, Christ, and the benefits of the new covenant, are represented,[1] sealed, and applied to believers.[2]
1. Gen. 17:10 2. Rom. 4:11

It is "sensible"-pertaining to the senses of sight, touch, feel and taste; it is a sign-representing outwardly those inward realities. And it is more than a sign. To stop here is to endorse "memorialism," a view that rejects the sealing aspect of the sacraments and emphasizes the human-response element. (Many Christians do not realize that God is present in worship with His Word. There is an objective dimension, not simply a human side only. )

However, if it is granted that the Older Testament was the church in infancy (Gal. 4:1ff.), with a body of spiritual truths to imitate (1 Cor. 10:1ff.), then Paul's contention that circumcision was a "seal of the righteousness of the faith" that Abraham had before he was circumcised (Rom. 4:11) demonstrates that the sacraments of the New Testament are for substance the same as the Old (I Cor. 10:1-4; Rom. 4:11; Col. 2:11-12; cp. WCF 27:5). They were signs and seals for the saints of Old as well as the New; the outward trappings have simply changed.

In short, they are instruments-means-used by God to seal our faith. They help us grow in the Spirit. Our Creator-Father made us with a body. So, simply from the creation account alone we should understand that material things are not wrong in and of themselves. And because of the weakness of our flesh, God uses simple and despised means to strengthen our faith. Men mock preaching, for is it not mere sound-waves bouncing upon the ear? So, too, some Christians despise the sacraments as so much materialistic activity. Perhaps the fear is that to understand the sacraments as means of grace, as seals of redemption, is to follow the path to Rome.

Fear not. The Bible and any informed Presbyterian knows that the sacraments have no power in themselves. Faith is needed. Saving faith "is ordinarily wrought by the ministry of the Word,[3] by which also, and by the administration of the sacraments, and prayer, it is increased and strengthened" (WCF 14:1). The sacraments are not converting ordinances. They save no one. The Spirit especially uses the Word for that. Rather, the sacraments increase our weak faith. God stoops to our level and kindly draws us through audio and visual means. He is encouraging us, saying that He understands our frailties, our doubts.

They are not merely memorials; they are more. They are not merely signs; they are more. As a seal firmly confirms upon our conscience (1 Pet. 3:21) the truth of the content of the letter, so the sacraments confirm the truth of the Word. It is sometimes described as a hug or a kiss that shows "I-really-mean-it"-a token of that Communion already enjoyed through the Word.

"A college graduate receives a diploma to which an official seal is affixed. The seal is of benefit to the recipient, not the giver. The seal does not make the recipient an education person, however; it merely declares officially that the authorities so regard him. The message of Ahasuerus [Est. 3:12] was authentic without the seal; it actually was the king's decree. The seal was added to convince the king's subjects that the message really was his. It is so with the sacraments. Sacraments do not cause grace. Neither is grace dependent upon the sacraments. The sacrament is of benefit only to that man who is the receiver of grace. It is of benefit because it makes known, or declares, the salvation which the believer receives distinct from the sacrament. It is a confirming testimony to the believer concerning what he has received." [The Westminster Confession of Faith for Study Classes, G. I. Williamson, p. 200ff.]

Understanding the Means of Grace Series:

I. What Are They?
II. Passion for the Word
III. Benefits of the Word
IV. Power of God
V. Foolishness of God
VI. What is a Sacrament?
VII.The Initiatory Rite

Selling Webster's Speller

2010-01-11T21:23:00.000-07:00

Noah Webster's American Spelling Book (aka, Blue-back Speller) is currently being republished. As the product description from one site declares:

"His goal was to provide a uniquely American, Christ-centered approach to training children. Little did he know that this remarkable gem would become the staple for parents and educators for more than a century and would help to build the most literate nation in the history of the West. Many of the Founding Fathers used this book to home school their children, including Benjamin Franklin who taught his granddaughter..."

What are Christians to make of these assertions? Is this book even worth buying?

Let us peal back the claims in reverse order.

First of all, the claim that many of the Founding Fathers used this to homeschool their children is dubious. In my experience, many historical claims have been circulated that have no foundation in fact (e.g. Jefferson, Witherspoon and John Jay were homeschooled, more here). The book was published in 1783. A little late for mass circulation for some Founder's children. Yet it could be the case that many of the Founders used Webster's book for their children. Not having easy access to the facts, I can only hold this assertion in abeyance.

Second, the book appears to have been a staple for education and helped raise literacy. This claim is true as far as it goes. It must be remembered, however, that this does not mean that literacy was not already being propagated by other means. The blue-book was popular but did not singlehandedly create a literate society. In fact, in 1765 John Adams noted:

"A native of America who cannot read and write is as rare an appearance as a Jacobite or a Roman Catholic, that is, as rare as a comet or an earthquake." (here)

Third, the book was written for schools. Webster notes in the preface,

"THE design of this Grammatical institute is to furnish schools in this country with an easy, accurate and comprehensive system of rules and lessons for teaching the English language."

Of course, it can be used for homeschooling. The irony is simply that the publisher and catalog are part of an organization that pushes, promotes and proposes homeschooling as the Biblical approach (here).

Fourth, the claims of a "Christ-centered approach" is dubious at best. Using an online transcript of the 1800 text, I searched for common words a presumed "Christ-centered approach" text would use. Here are some results:

Searching for sin and its cognates yielded a total of seven times in one section (lessons of easy words and moral duty). The word is mentioned eight more times in a similar fashion, most notably:

"He that covereth his sins shall not pros-per; but he that confesseth and forsaketh them shall find mercy."

Next, I searched for cognates of 'Christ'. It is used about ten times and once for pronunciation. Another few times it refers to what Christ said. The bulk was in the Moral Catechism section, making no mention of the Gospel.

The word 'Gospel' does not exist. 'Repent' and its cognates occurs once. 'Faith' occurs once as an example of a monosyllabic word. 'Believe' is never used with respect to God or Christ. 'Cross' is found in a list of words and part of a proverb.

Thus far the evidence is a far cry from a "Christ-centered approach." In fact,there is evidence to the contrary: in the appendix is a Moral Catechism. A Catechism without reference to the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Although the Catechism does not mention the Gospel, it does mention the pure in heart:

Q. What reward is promised to the pure in heart?
A. Christ has declared "they shall see God." A pure heart is like God, and those who possess it shall dwell in his presence, and enjoy his favour forever.

Furthermore, in the section describing a "Good Boy" and a "Bad Boy" any reference to God, church and Christ are missing.

In contrast, Christ-centered instruction would point out that Christians (and "good boys") can only see God through the merits of Christ.

Lastly, the biography of Webster explains why this Speller--although useful--was not Christ-centered: he was not converted until 1808. He admits that before that time he preferred the more "rational" religion of doing good to one's neighbor over the more "emotional" doctrines of grace. But God's omnipotent love moved his heart to eschew moralism and accept a Christ-centered education in his life.

The conclusion of the matter is that this book is a mixed bag. It is heavy on the Law with no corresponding Gospel message. With today's weak Christian culture, this book can easily turn into simple moralism.

That does not mean that one cannot use it. It means that a father or mother must use it in an environment that has a clear presentation of the Gospel of Christ's righteousness. Hopefully, with these facts at hand parents will be better able to evaluate the selling and buying of Webster's Blue-back Speller.

A Summary of Gatto's Methods

2010-01-10T03:39:00.000-07:00

Over at Homeschooling Research Notes, the author reviews the latest work of Gatto, Weapons of Mass Instruction. For those not in the know, Gatto is well-known in many homeschooling circles for his book, The Underground History of American Education.

What is of particular note, is the author's opening evaluation of Gatto's general methodology. It is striking how this also summarizes some home education leaders general approach as well:

"First, regarding methodology, it needs to be noted that Gatto has a very frustrating tendency to make claims, quote sources, refer to documents, and so on without ever providing citations that would allow the researcher to check up on him. Sometimes in the body of the text he gives enough information for the assiduous student, with effort, to possibly find his source, but often not. His Underground History suffers from the same flaw, though it does include a brief note at the end promising the reader that he has consulted “somewhat more than three thousand” documents."

I found that book online a year back. I, too, found the paucity of references troubling while reading his Underground.

Another methodological concern also parallels the style of some contemporary leadership:

"A second methodological affliction, common among polemicists, is Gatto’s tendency to cherry pick anecdotes and facts that paint his opposition (public education) in its worst possible light and to do the reverse for his own side. In Gatto’s world every child is infantalized, deformed, and dehumanized by schools, while all dropouts become self-made millionaires. Gatto loves to tell stories of self-made men and women. In every case the moral is that if one can escape the poison of compulsory schooling, a rich and fulfilling life awaits. He also loves to tell horror stories of administrative incompetence, curricular foolishness, and bureaucratic pointlessness in public schools. Nowhere in his prose is there any hint that a child could possibly find school enriching, fulfilling, life-changing. One of the principles I try to teach all of my students is that when engaging an opponent in an argument you want to do your very best to represent the other side fairly."

This is a common advertisement trick. It is fairly common in our society overall. And it (unfortunately) saturates Christian marketing as well. Even the marketing of homeschooling.

Should Your Children Learn Latin?

2010-01-06T14:48:00.001-07:00

My recent rebuttal of North's paper brought a legitimate question: should we teach our covenant children Latin?

Here is a reprint of my response:

Hello ----,

My take on education in general is that the classes needed for children are the classes that first equip them for the glory of God. Thus the basics are required to read the bible and listen to sermons. Beyond that additional training is needed to equip the children for their vocation in life. This part is very flexible since part of equipping children for their vocation in the kingdom of God involves finding out what it is!

Thus, when used aright the great number of options today (compared to our Puritan forefathers) are opportunities to see if these are avenues for our children to further explore. These are the intro classes that may wet their taste buds for advanced studies.

Latin could be such a class. Dr. Coppes taught a summer of Latin for each of his children. This had the double-purpose of giving them a foreign language (one which is primal to many others) that can help them with their vocabulary and the like. And it also gave them a taste of a foreign language to see if they hand language-skills waiting to be expanded.

As for a child aspiring to the ministry, Latin is not required in the least bit. However, it could be useful for the child to get comfortable with foreign languages (such as Greek). And it may help stretch his mind with the memorization and the required logical thinking needed to translate.

Hope that helps,

PolyMathis: Year in Review, 2009

2010-01-04T09:46:00.000-07:00

I thought about doing a year in review the last few years. Finally, after reading my fellow blogger's 2009 in review posting, I decided to go for it! (Hope he appreciates the free plug!)

2009 started out with a bang. I brought out my years-long research on home education to the public with Some Observations about Homeschooling and the Future of Homeschooling. Tired of all the misinformation about Christian education history being perpetuated in some homeschooling circles (and creating false expectations and false guilt), I simultaneously brought a new blog online, Christian Nurture.

This new blog raised some ruckus behind the scenes. Yet all the counter-claims and declamations never rose to a public refutation about my research of the true statistics of homeschooling nor my rebuttal of the amazing claim that homeschooling is a revival. To the surprise of many, I, too, was homeschooled and even defended home education.

This education theme continued with the five-part posting of a Very Short History of Christian Education (on both blogs). I also began an analysis of radical homeschooling and raised a number of eyebrows with a short comparison between some types of homeschooling and Rousseau. Some of these articles were posted on both blogs as well.

But that was not all. This was the Year of Calvinism. This six-part series was dedicated to all the Reformed work in the world, for their encouragement. Several other articles dedicated to this year-long theme, included famous American Calvinists--that surprised many--and a call for a Second Reformation. The church was challenged to focus on the basics instead of being detracted by the culture wars.

Although I tend to write about and for the church, I am never far from politics and a spiritual interpretation thereof. This goes doubly with the Gospel According to Obama. And I once again brought out a gem of religio-political history to shame the ignorance of our politicians.

In the midst of this increase in writing, we were waiting for our first child! This life-changing event was a God-sent. After 8 months of babyhood, we still stand in awe of the Lord's mercy.

Of course, these blogs do not reflect the work of the ministry in the background. My witnessing to atheists on the college campus prepared me for a surprising opportunity to write for a national news source as the Denver Christian Apologist.

This new position gave me an opportunity to defend the Calvinistic roots of America in an ambitious six-part series, October Revolution, reprinted in this blog. It also brought me closer to the New Atheism. So, I critiqued, God: The Failed Hypothesis, written by a local college professor.

Naturally, all this heavy writing can wear on the soul, so I throw in humor at times. Or even comment on the weather.

I ended the year with two critiques. One was requested by a reader, asking my opinion about a "Christian Education Manifesto". The other was a first-time critique of a public Reformed writer. I still have no idea what possessed him to write that article.

It's been a busy year and fatherhood increased that load. But it is a blessed load. And I hope and pray for more opportunities to spread the Gospel in the new year.

V. Means of Grace: The Foolishness of God

2010-01-02T21:38:00.000-07:00

Preaching is highly prized among conservative Evangelicals--even if it may be questionable preaching. Ministers are know in Evangelicaldom by their preaching prowess, stupendous speaking and charismatic chats. In some ways this is a good thing, yet, I fear, in today's inbred entertainment mentality, many churches follow the man and not the message. They like a good speaker, not because of what he says as much as how he says it. His highly charged presentation, flashy outfits, well-timed sighs and bold presence entertain the masses. The flash, the glamor, the ambiance of the stage create an atmosphere readily molded to the visual generation than the audio-rational mentality of yesteryear.

In fact, do many conservatives even understand why preaching has been so highly valued in our past? Or do we just follow along out of blind traditionalism? In true Protestant fashion, we must ask: what says the Lord?

In 1 Corinthians chapter one, Paul begins this book with the famous diatribe against Christian tribalism (group pride) [an upcoming article-see my blog]: "Now I say this, that each of you says, " 'I am of Paul,' or 'I am of Apollos,' or 'I am of Cephas,' or 'I am of Christ.' " (v.12). Paul is quite amazed that the Corinthians so quickly fell away. In remedy to such man-centeredness, Paul reminds them of the supremacy of the Word, specifically preaching: "For Christ did not send me to baptize [or give the Lord's Supper], but to preach the gospel..." He tells them that they should not look to the man but to the message. True, if he is preaching the message it will be reflected in the man, but the root of the matter is preaching.

And such preaching is not based upon clever manipulation of words or rhetorical flourish (as the Greek speakers were wont to do), but upon the power of the doctrine presented. It is a message that is foolish to those drowning in their sins: "For the message of the cross is foolishness to those who are perishing...."

Yet to we who are saved and being saved, it is the power of God! Gospel doctrine is power; biblical ignorance is impotence. Paul continues his reprimand by connecting the message with the method:

"...it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe." It is not only the Gospel that is the power of God, it is specifically that Gospel as preached that the Spirit is pleased to use.

Naturally, being inspired, Paul was consistent in his presentation. In that other famous book, Romans, Paul again aligns preaching with salvation in chapter ten:

"How then shall they call on Him in whom they have not believed? And how shall they believe in Him of whom they have not heard? And how shall they hear without a preacher?" (v.14)

Of note is the fact that writing existed during Paul's time. Thus, the Spirit through Paul could have easily said: "And how shall they read without a reader?" It is the hearing, and, thus, the preaching, that is emphasized in these verses. That is why Paul quotes Isaiah in blessing the feet of the minister who brings the Good News through his speech (v.15). Paul concludes his line of reasoning just as he did in 1 Corinthians: "So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God." (v.17)

Again, latter in the Epistles, Paul ties the Spirit of truth with the message of truth:

"For this reason we also thank God without ceasing, because when you received the word of God which you heard from us, *you welcomed it not as the word of men*, but as it is in truth, the word of God, which also effectively works in you who believe." (1 Thess. 2:13, emphasis added)

This is the foolishness of God that transforms lives, families and churches. This is the power of God! Paul is only echoing Ezekiel's vision of the dry bones: preach and if the Spirit pleases, he will raise up the dead bones and bring life! The Reformation began this way; the first and second Great Awakening began this way; and any future revival will begin this way. These passages are summarized in our catechism: "The Spirit of God makes the reading, but especially the preaching of the word, an effectual means [of salvation]..." (LCQ 155).

Preaching, in an age of sports, internet, television and other more entertaining mediums, is foolishness because it does not please the flesh, that old man. It takes work to sit still, more work to listen, and yet more work to listen intelligently and write notes! But if we take seriously these passages, we will be blessed, we will grow and we will persevere.

The means of grace, those tools used by the sovereign Spirit in His time and way, must begin with the Word. Nowhere else is Christ found. And Christ and His Words are our life. That is why four sections were used to expound the Scriptures as the foundation of the Christian faith and life. It all depends upon the Spirit, but for our part we must obey by reading the Word, inviting friends to hear the truth, and finding good, faithful preaching. Pray that we will.

[Next: What Are Sacraments?]

Understanding the Means of Grace Series:

I. What Are They?
II. Passion for the Word
III. Benefits of the Word
IV. Power of God
V. Foolishness of God
VI. What is a Sacrament?
VII.The Initiatory Rite

Puritan Classical Education Besmirched

2009-12-31T09:51:00.000-07:00

Recently a Reformed magazine re-published Gary North's innocently titled "Classical Education." But the subtitle gives it away: Classical Christian Education is Like Marxist Christian Education, But a Lot More Subtle.

In his typical shocking manner, he contends that "at least a third" of Christian mothers have adopted a curriculum based on the worldview that endorsed homosexuality, polytheism, slavery, and female infanticide--pagan humanism.

Of course, being a short article steeped with unfounded generalizations and assumptions, it is not exactly clear what the author is condemning when he attacks 'Classical Education.' Such an education is a three-step process of grammar, dialectic and rhetoric. And it teaches Latin. But it is the Latin that appears to be the focus of this diatribe:

"To force a child to learn Latin is to encourage him to accept the premises either of medieval Catholicism or the Renaissance"

The unspoken assumption is that learning a little Latin with edited sources will lead the child to read the entire Latin source--the sources being either the original Greeks and Romans or the medieval or Renaissance variations. Then the poisoning of the mind will be complete and humanistic elements will converge into a full-blown pagan worldview (or at least a severely retarded Christian world-view). As though that has not already happened before the popularity of Latin!

Assuming that the typical Christian has a weak grasp on the Biblical antithesis, this is a serious concern. And assuming that Latin is or can only be taught with the classics, this could be a concern as well.

Not only that, the poor near-sided Puritans imbibed the same sewage. North admits that the Puritans used the classical curriculum from the grammar schools to the universities (but fails to mention that Luther, Calvin, Knox, et. al. used it as well). More importantly, he fails to explain the cultural milieu in which the Latin (and the rest of the subjects) were taught.

The English society was homogeneous on a level modern Americans little comprehend. Even when the Puritans were outnumbered (most of the time), many of the laws and social expectations were strongly influenced by the Bible. The same schools that taught Latin, instructed in Bible reading, rehearsed the catechisms and reviewed the Sunday sermon. This religious instruction, integrated with the Protestant Gospel, included the work of the ministers (sermons, catechizing, weekly lectures and home visitations) and especially the household instruction, catechizing and devotions by the parents.

When the young are encircled by such a spiritual phalanx, learning Latin with edited texts was not a means to "separate Christian children from their parents." Not by a long shot.

On the other hand, such a culture no longer exists. And many self-proclaimed Christians are biblically ignorant on a scale that makes the Statute of Liberty appear like a toy doll. So, learning Latin (even without reference to the pagan sources at all) will do little and may even be harmful.

It is claimed that using such a method (or rather learning Latin?) for over 1800 years is a surrendering of education because it violates the Christian antithesis--isn't that what Van Til taught? Using the classical educational approach apparently imported "alien philosophical categories into the Church." Yet these 'categories' are never listed. And the historical "evidence" is vague at best. Many things are linked to unfaithfulness in the rise and fall of churches.

In fact, it is not exactly clear why using some useful tools of unbelievers (like learning a foreign language) is necessarily wrong or will necessarily lead to humanistic compromise. Much of the article is based upon a slippery slope assumption--a logical fallacy taught by unbelieving logicians everywhere. In fact, Aristotle first systematized logic--does that make it suspect? Perhaps the children learning logic may be tempted to read Aristotle?

Such an amazing effort to run Latin into the ground by asserting its negative affects in history leads to a curious logic: the last 150 years has seen the disappearance of Latin with a corresponding increase in secularism and decrease in confessional Protestantism. If this is the fruit of no Latin, give me Latin schools any day!

I do agree with him that a good dose of Calvin's Institutes is more needful than Latin. But then, do I have to have one without the other? Or cannot families and schools teach Latin and Greek (as they used to)?

More significantly, with all this hammering going on North has certainly hit upon something here. It is Calvinism that is needed now, not Latin. It is a renewed knowledge of the Law & Gospel thundered from the pulpit that is the crying need of the hour. To return to the good ol' days of educational superiority, families and churches need to ignore all the educational hype and turn to the good ol' confessions of yesteryear. Rather than hyping up the power of this or that curriculum or method, we ought to return our children to the lost tool of learning that should structure any legitimate method, the Puritan ABCs: Alphabet, Bible & the Catechism.

New Ray/HSLDA Study on Homeschooler Achievement

2009-12-09T16:59:00.000-07:00

"This post briefly reviews preliminary releases of the new study conducted by Brian Ray for HSLDA called “Homeschooling Across America: Academic Achievement and Demographic Characteristics.” The full study is scheduled for release in November 2009..."

(more here)

(for analysis of past studies, here)

IV. Means of Grace: Power of God

2009-12-07T21:30:00.000-07:00

The previous installment demonstrated that the Bible was a beneficial instrument in the hand of the Spirit. Although God could use any means and transform man immediately, He choose to work conviction, conversion, growth, fellowship, sanctification--indeed, salvation as a whole--within the context of the Bible. The Spirit and the Word go together. Thus, to have more of the Spirit is to have more of the Bible.

However, having more of the Bible does not boil down to simply knowing more facts about it, but, like that prophet of old, Ezekiel, we need to consume it into our spiritual bodies (Ez. 3:3). It should move beyond mental assent or even factual acceptance to a heart-felt zeal and motivation. The Word of God is our honey, milk, bread and meat (Ps. 119:103, 1 Pet. 2:1-3, Is. 55:2, 3a, Heb. 5:12ff.). As a matter of fact, our dependence upon the Word of God is our dependence upon the Word of Christ, for the two are one. We cannot live without Christ and His Word. Physical eating is necessary for physical living; spiritual eating is necessary for spiritual living. Feeding upon Christ is so closely associated with the Word, that to eat the Word is to eat Christ. Jesus declares as much:

"Jesus said to them, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink His blood, you have no life in you...Therefore many of His disciples, when they heard this, said, "This is a hard saying; who can understand it?"...[Christ said] It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life. (John 6:52ff).

This means that any other method used by men or Christians to build up the Body of Christ, but bypasses this fundamental truth, is defective and contrary to Christ. Contrary to the Roman Catholic and Lutheran dogmas in which the physical eating of the elements in the Lord's Supper brings spiritual vitality, the Bible declares that the Spirit, through the Word received by faith alone, communicates the life of Christ. Christ declared that it is not the physical act that brings life but that His words bring life. Neither the Sacraments per se nor any other physical act brings spirit and life but only the Words of Christ.

Of course, all of the means, including the Word, depend ultimately upon the grace and power of the Holy Spirit. Yet to create and sustain that union with Christ, one must believe in Christ as portrayed in the promises of the Word. For whatsoever is not done in faith is sin (Rom. 14:23). So, when we pray, fast, fellowship or worship-whatsoever we do--we cling to Christ as found in the Word. He is not separated from the Word, but, as demonstrated previously, is so closely related to it, by the work of the Spirit, that the Word is called milk, honey, bread and even life.

These truths alone should spur us to greater depth of knowledge and breadth of practice. The Bible is the bedrock of our life, yielding a framework of action, a direction in life, and motivation unto holiness. This truth should be instilled in our children so that they might value the Word highly and to hide it in their hearts (Deut.4:9ff.). Why would we wish to have less of the Word? We are sure to eat three meals a day (besides snacks and dessert), or to exercise our bodies, but we don't think twice about how we can arrange our time to hear, read, memorize, study, proclaim and practice the life-giving Word.

Perhaps we don't fully comprehend its power in our lives. Perhaps we are ignorant of how necessary it is for our Christian walk. To receive the Sacraments we need to discern the Christ of the Bible; to pray in faith we need to recognize God's will in the Scriptures; to hide the Word in our hearts we need to know the Bible as we know our car manuals; to lead our families and children we need to accept our duties as expounded in the Word; to fellowship with one another we need the confidence that unity is based upon the Scriptures. Every facet of our life should be hemmed in and supported by, nay energized by, that food which is sweeter than honey, more fulfilling than milk and taster than a fillet-mignon.

Perhaps we don't feel up to the task of feeding upon the Word. One may not be quick on his feet; another may take days to digest what he heard; still others may feel slow and ignorant. These may be true, but God knows what our frailties and weaknesses are and He knows we can learn from His Word. He gives us helps to expound the Word in teachings and actions. Friends, family and church officers are part of that Family given to us. Yet it is especially the minister who is the head chief (under Christ) in God's kitchen: it is his duty to prepare nutritious and tasty meals from that lovely and fruitful garden of the Word. His office is most important in the Household of God because his duty and responsibilities are intimately tied to the Word of God.

If you want to grow, mature and fortify your soul, you need that weak and beggarly vessel of God. Ephesians 4:12ff. explicitly declares this truth. If you wish to grow from the Word, then you must take seriously those whose specialty is that Word. Thus, Catechism classes, Sunday School, and Bible Studies (and any other means to achieve more of Christ & His Word) have been the mainstay of many churches. We would do well to use these times--or make new times (lunch, breakfast, special meetings, etc.)--to aid our learning and living out of the Bible.

The Bible does not come down from heaven onto our laps and through the miracle of osmosis generate spiritual maturity and perseverance. Rather, the power of God is manifested through imperfect vessels, especially ministers. And of the many tasks of the minister in bringing the Word of Christ to His people (counseling, teaching, writing, living, etc.), preaching is one of the most potent and important tasks.

[Next: The Foolishness of God]

Understanding the Means of Grace Series:

I. What Are They?
II. Passion for the Word
III. Benefits of the Word
IV. Power of God
V. Foolishness of God
VI. What is a Sacrament?
VII.The Initiatory Rite

Cursory Thoughts about "A Christian Education Manifesto"

2009-12-01T07:59:00.000-07:00

Recently a commenter on this blog asked if I would evaluate Israel Wayne's A Christian Education Manifesto (here).

Instead of a thorough evaluation of this document (which would include an in-depth examination of the author's other works), I decided to mostly take it at face value: after all, is that not the intent of manifestos? To summarize to the world what one deems important.

At the outset, it ought to be noted that the manifesto is helpful in certain ways. Presumably he is writing against the many lazy parents in Christian households. The copious proof-texting (in both a good and bad sense) could help many of these families get their acts together. It also heavily critiques the secular public school system.

1. Upon a short examination of the writer's credentials, it is striking that a man with no known theological training and examination thought he could write such a broad-sweeping manifesto single-handedly. In the council of many there is wisdom.

2. Where is the church? With such a conspicuous absence of such an important institution in the lives of all family members the manifesto ought to be re-titled: A Christian Family Education Manifesto.

3. Although claiming a Biblical worldview background, it is not at all clear that listing Bible verses with minimal commentary suffices as a manifesto let alone something part of a worldview. In what ways are these unique (?) elements of a Christian worldview?

4. Unfortunately, this spartan commentary lends itself to absolutist language, e.g., "Instruction of the young is given to parents and grandparents."--only, mostly, what?

5. Exodus 20:12 section clearly speaks to the modernistic mentality in education but seems to impugn all "government" education (however vaguely defined). A knowledge of Christian history will demonstrate otherwise.

6. The same section essentially calls the early church, Medieval church and Reformation churches well into the late 1700s 'socialists'. This seems to be a more modernistic Libertarian viewpoint that bypasses any historical dialogue. I may be in favor of localism in education but I would hesitate to label all of Christian education history as 'socialistic'.

7. 2 Chronicles 17:7-10 clearly ties the kingship with the priest and lay-leader's educational efforts to good effect. At the least, one should cautiously evaluate such Biblical evidence before announcing broad-sweeping declamations.

8. The Deut. 6:7 comment is brief and thus vague: what is a "24/7/365 discipleship paradigm"? In some homeschooling circles such language and proof-texting leads to a "homeschooling-is-commanded-by-God" doctrine (or at least it is the best educational option [and who wouldn't want the best for God?]).

9. Common grace is a concept that appears to be decidedly missing in this document. "A Christian parent must not turn the leading of their child over to someone who is spiritually blind." So an unbelieving piano teacher cannot instruct my daughter? A better question is to ask what is the Biblical basis of this assertion.

10. I am glad that the revisionist approach to history is renounced. Unfortunately, in most Christian circles such revisionism still exists in the form of a Deistic interpretation of history that downplays any theological distinctions in Christendom (hint: how many know that America was substantially founded by Calvinism?).

11. What was suspect earlier (that only parents may instruct their own children) is now made explicit: "It is assumed that the father and mother are doing the teaching. No one else is mentioned in Scripture as having that role." No one else...not even ministers? godly deacons? what about catechizing children?

12. This leads to a point about equivocation: what is the definition of education? nurture? etc.? Either no one can educate other people's children (contrary to the Bible) or the author is using more than one definition without informing the reader.

13. Apparently the OT plays a selective role, hence the absence of Deut. 30:9ff: "So Moses wrote this law and delivered it to the priests, the sons of Levi, who bore the ark of the covenant of the LORD, and to all the elders of Israel...gather the people together, men and women and little ones...that they may hear and that they may learn to fear the LORD your God and carefully observe all the words of this law and that their children, who have not known it, may hear and learn to fear the LORD your God as long as you live in the land which you cross the Jordan to possess." The Great Commission comes to mind as well.

14. There is curious logic here as well. Proverbs 9:10 is argued thusly: "Government schools lack the fear of the LORD,therefore cannot properly transmit wisdom, knowledge,and understanding." Just fill in ignorant or unfaithful parents in place of government schools and similar reasoning can be invoked.

15. Such family-centric emphasis makes good Reformed and Presbyterian (and old-fashioned Reformed Baptists) wonder about the educational, modeling and instructional role of the whole community of God? Does not Titus 2 encourage the older women (no mention of mother here) to instruct the younger women. By commonality of principle (LCQ 99) the same would hold for men and boys.

16. A misunderstanding of statistics is a common problem in America. In this case the 65-88% number does not include the actual training accomplished (or not accomplished) at home and at church. If the families and churches are weak, then sending the child to college is a dangerous thing indeed.

17. The point about leaders leading by example with the training of their children is much needed. However, too many Christians ignore such leaders anyway, seeking out popular leaders or (inexperienced) young men with young children.

18. "Education must be predicated on the foundation of Christ, not on humanistic thought." AMEN.

19. Unfortunately, since this manifesto is not clearly Reformed, it is not clearly "predicated on the foundation of Christ." Calvinistic education is different than the run-of-the-mill education.

20. In fact, this manifesto supplements the author's more explicit teaching in Homeschooling from a Biblical Worldview. One glaring problem in that book is a dangerous dance with legalism: "If parents focus on giving their children a Biblical worldview, I can assure you, their children will excel in everything they do. It's that natural cause and effect of the blessing of God. When we obey, we are blessed; we we don't, we are cursed" (p. 150, cp. 43, 13).

This is the moral summary of the author's approach--implicit in this document but explicit in his book.

The explicit Gospel message that we cannot obey and are cursed already is missing. Christians are sinners saved by grace so that even when we 'obey' we do not 'obey' enough to cause any blessing (Rom. 7:12ff.). If such a message is not the cornerstone of Christian education then Christian children will either grow up hypocrites or renounce the faith in anger as too many already do.

Plans of Religious Instruction--Hodge, Pt. 1

2009-11-20T22:43:00.000-07:00

The following is an abbreviated reprint of "Religious Education Enforced in a Discussion of Different Plans," an address delivered by Professor Charles Hodge to the Presbyterian General Assembly of 1847.

The Presbyterian church at that time was concerned about the education of their covenant children. The local school system--so long a bastion of conservatism--was becoming neutered by the influx of immigrants and sectarian Christians. The local leaders and school districts were beginning to limit the amount and type of religious instruction in the schools to make way for a common denominator. In some cases the Bible was no longer being read; in most cases the unique denominational distinctives--Presbyterian, Congregational, etc.--were no longer being taught.

This alarmed the Presbyterians, those so proud of their history of catechizing and schooling. As a body they decided to create parochial schools. This address was a learned outline of the issues facing the church and her children. It points to interesting historical conditions. In light of today's discussion, it is quite illuminating. Read on:

"Our subject refers to the early, constant, and faithful religious instruction of children by the assiduous inculcation of the truths and duties taught in the Bible.

... If the soul were uncorrupted, if still by nature, as at the creation, it were instinct, with holy desires and aspirations, it would gather knowledge and nourishment from every thing within and without, and grow, by the law of its being, as do the flowers of the field, to be beautiful exceedingly, through the comeliness which God gives to all creatures in fellowship with himself. It is precisely because the mind is by nature dark, that it needs illumination from without; it is because the conscience is callous and perverse, that it needs to be roused and guided; it is because evil propensities are so strong, that they must be counteracted. To leave a fallen human being, therefore, to grow up without religious instruction, is to render its perdition-certain.

The same cause which makes religious instruction necessary at all, requires that it should be assiduous and long continued. It is not enough that the means of knowledge be afforded to the child: it is not enough that he should be once told the truth; such is his indisposition to divine knowledge, such the darkness and feebleness of his mind, that he must be taught little by little, early and assiduously; or as the Lord said to Moses, "when thou sittest in thy house, when thou walkest by the way, when thou liest down, and when thou risest up." It is a slow, painful, long continued process to bring a child born in sin, and imbued with evil, to a competent knowledge of God, and truth and duty, and to cultivate in such an ungenial soil the seed of eternal life. This, however, is the process which our apostasy renders necessary, it is that which God has enjoined, it is the one which he has promised to bless, the neglect of which is followed by his severe displeasure, and the all but certain ruin of our children.

This, therefore, is not the point which needs to be argued. It is universally conceded. The great questions are, On whom is this duty incumbent ? How is it to be discharged ? On whom does the Responsibility OF The RELIGIOUS EDUCATION OF THE YOUNG BEST?

In the First instance, on Parents. As to this there .can be no dispute. The relation in which parents stand to their children, implies an obligation not only to support, but to educate them, because they are bound to do all they can to promote the well being of those whom God has committed to their charge. Parents also have facilities for the discharge of this duty, which none others can enjoy; they have at least the competency for the work which strong interest in the welfare of their children can supply; and on them this duty has been laid by the express and repeated command of God. The neglect of this duty is at once one of the greatest injuries a parent can inflict on his children, and one of the greatest offences he can commit against society and against God. But while it is universally conceded that the obligation to provide for the religious instruction of the young, rests primarily on parents, it is almost as generally acknowledged that the responsibility does not rest on them alone. If a parent cannot support a child, it cannot be left to perish; the obligation to provide for its support, must rest somewhere. The ability of the parent failing, there must he some other person or persons on whom the duty devolves. In like manner, if parents are unable to provide for the religious education of their children, those children cannot innocently be allowed to grow up in ignorance of God; the responsibility of their education must find another resting-place. Men do not stand so isolated, that they may say, Are we our brother's keeper? they cannot innocently sit still and see either the bodies or souls of their fellow-men perish, without an effort to save them. This is too evident to be denied. Nor will it be questioned that so large a portion of parents are unable to provide adequately for the religious education of their children, as in all places and at all times, to throw a heavy responsibility as to this duty, on the community to which they belong. The inability in question arises in many, cases from the moral character of the parents; rendering them at once indifferent and incompetent. In other cases from ignorance. They need themselves to be taught what are the first principles of the oracles of God. And in other cases still from poverty, i. e. from the necessity of devoting so much time to secure the mere means of life, and of calling their children so early to share in their labours, that they are unable to attend in any suitable manner to the education of those whom God has committed to their charge.

If therefore, we look over any community, or over the history of the Church at any period, we shall find that a very large and constantly increasing portion of the young are left to grow up without religious instruction, where that duty has been left exclusively to parents. If, therefore, the work must be done; if the best interests of society, the prosperity of the Church, the salvation of souls, demand that the young should be brought up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, others, besides parents, must undertake the work. Accordingly in every age of the Church, among every people calling themselves Christians, provision has been made, beyond the family circle, for the religious education of the young.

[to be continued]

III. Means of Grace: Benefits of the Word

2009-11-20T21:12:00.000-07:00

The first and foremost theological relationship of the Word is with the Spirit. The Bible, either preached or read, is mightily used by the Holy Spirit to convert, sanctify and preserve the elect. As Ezekiel 37 demonstrates, the Spirit of Christ is pleased to use this humble tool of the Word to even resurrect spiritual Israel from the dead.

The Confession clearly echoes the Bible's own insistence that the Word of God is the sword of the Spirit (Eph. 6:17). It is an instrument so closely aligned with the work of the Spirit that Paul claims that those who call upon God need the Word preached (Rom. 10:14ff.), for "it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe" (1 Cor. 1:21). Indeed, the power of preaching the Word is the power of the Spirit (1 Cor. 2:4). Turretin explains:

He [the Spirit] is not given to us in order to introduce new revelations, but to impress the written word on our hearts; so that here the word must never be separated from the Spirit (Is. 59:21). The former works objectively, the latter efficiently; the former strikes the ears from without, the latter opens the heart within. The Spirit is the teacher; Scripture is the doctrine which he teaches us.

Thus the Word has no intrinsic power but only that which the Spirit is pleased to bestow through it. Through the history of redemption, we find the Word of God commanding, explaining, transforming, admonishing and even chiding the people of God. It brings revival, reformation, renewal as well as discipline, rebuke and judgment. We see the transformation of Israel under Josiah's discovery of the Pentateuch (2 Kgs. 22:1ff). The New Testament Israel exemplifies this fact by its life-sustaining growth through the Word (Acts 4:4; 6:7; 8:4; 13:49; 19:20).

Of the various means of grace (Sacraments, prayer, family worship, etc.), only the Word of God inscripturated is the means of grace par excellence; it is the means of the Spirit upon which the other means depend. Any conscience event in the life of the believer--prayer, worship, fellowship, Bible study and all other means broadly considered--necessarily builds upon and requires the Word. From it flows the efficacy of the Spirit: whether the Sacraments, public or private worship, prayer or any other means of Christian growth, the Bible as read, and especially preached, is the foundational and continuous primary instrument of spiritual growth. This is manifested in the nature of the Word and its functions.

Firstly, the nature of the inscripturated Word is that it is the will of God to the Church. It is the mind of God in written form and as such is infallible, inerrant and God-breathed (1 Tim. 3:15ff.). It abides forever (Is. 40:8); it is living, active and sharper than any two-edged sword (Heb. 4:12); it is sanctifying truth (John 17:17); and it is spirit and life (John 6:63). These characteristics set it apart from the other means of grace: the power and energy of the Spirit is closely aligned with the Word. Indeed, faith operating in the environment of the other means, whether public or private, cannot exist without the object of Christ, and Christ is found nowhere else than in the truthful and inspired Word.

Secondly, the Word functions in a much broader manner than the other means of grace. Broadly it is profitable for every aspect of the Christian's life: "...that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work" (2 Tim. 3:16). Narrowly, as it contains the Law of God it convicts, restrains and guides. It exposes sin, holds back wickedness in society and shows the will of God for believers. As it contains the Gospel of God it calls men to salvation, converts the sinner, and strengthens believers in the Spirit of Christ.

The Spirit is the prime mover and energizer in the life-birthing and spiritual growth of Christians, but He is pleased to ordinarily utilize the Word as the foundation of the believers who were "born again, not of corruptible seed but incorruptible, through the word of God which lives and abides forever..." (1 Pet. 1:23). The Word convicts sinners and calls them to repentance, and it places Christ and Him crucified vividly before the sinner as the object of faith and conversion (1 Cor. 1:18ff; Gal. 3:1). Within this context regeneration by the immediate hand of the Spirit marvelously transpires.

Moreover, the Word continues its function through initiation into the covenant by the Spirit who seals with the Word (Eph. 1:13). The Church, by Christ's power, is sanctified and cleansed by "washing of water by the word" (Eph. 5:26). Her fellowship and unity are based upon it (Acts. 2:46). The Bible as used by the Spirit of Christ guides believers into a closer walk with God (Prov. 3:1ff). Pointing out the depths of sin and the wiles of the devil, it lightens the path of godliness (Ps. 119:105, 130).

These truths alone should attract us to the Word and to find ways to learn more about Jesus as He is in the Scriptures. The Spirit is the energizing power of the Church, but He works in an environment of His choosing. And that is the Word heard, read, memorized, studied, proclaimed and practiced. Thus, why would we wish to spend less time in the Word?

Next: The Power of God

Understanding the Means of Grace Series:

I. What Are They?
II. Passion for the Word
III. Benefits of the Word
IV. Power of God
V. Foolishness of God
VI. What is a Sacrament?
VII.The Initiatory Rite

II. Means of Grace: Passion for the Word

2009-11-11T13:38:00.000-07:00

II. Understanding the Means of Grace: Passion for the Word

We live in a society saturated with images: from still photos and billboards to magazines and television, to movies and Internet, Christians are bombarded with demands upon their time, energy and attention. Quiet (or even passionate) discourse and reflective thinking is not the excitement of the day: if there are no raging, emotional debates, then C-SPAN 2 is ignored for the easier-to-digest shallow one-minute sound-bytes on CBS. The visual medium lends itself readily to the exciting and exhilarating-as far as our eyes are concerned.

Adult Americans spend almost 4.5 hours a day watching television-this does not even count Internet or videos! Children watch even more television, not to mention video games. We are a society inundated with the visual. It can be very alluring. These mediums (TV, movie, art, etc.) are not evil per se, but they can be entrapments (and every age has its weaknesses) to a generation reared on the visual medium of stunning images and one-hour "documentaries." It is not simply that society teaches us to follow temptation with our eyes; we ourselves know the allurement of images and the difficulty of reading words. It is hard to concentrate on a book. Images are more "real" to us than the abstract words on a page.

Indeed, these images are so real that people are more excited when they find themselves on TV than with the simple fact that they actually participated in the televised event. These images become an existential moment-a personal encounter that rises above (below?) rational discourse. It is so real and personal that words are lost. When watching a movie we tend to suspend reality to such an extent that we are moved to tears, rage or joy. That is the power of the image. So, we need reminders of the supremacy of the Word and to have a passion in our lives and in our families that rivals Mel's Passion.

The positive side of the second commandment is further illustrated by the history of redemption. God spoke creation into existence; God spoke judgment and salvation to Adam and Eve; God spoke and Noah believed; God spoke and Abraham followed; God spoke His will to Moses, as the great prophet of the Old Testament, and spoke it to all subsequent prophets. Miracles did occur; visual surprises did arise; but these symbols were never suspended in the air, they were explained by the Word.

But there is more. The spoken Word, however powerful, was still not enough: God inscripturated His spoken Word. The Old Testament was as a child under age (Gal. 4:1ff.), but we have been privileged to live even beyond that age when the Bible was still incomplete. As even children today first learn through pictures and concrete items and then grow into adulthood-words and abstract thoughts-so the Israelites of old were given many visual signs. But in the New Age these have been vastly reduced to two: baptism and the Lord's Supper. Since God is merciful and knows our frailties, He has given us these visible signs and seals for our infirmities and weakness. Yet, these sacraments are useless without the preached Word Jn. 6:63). There must still be a passion for the Word.

The images of this world can be extremely alluring. I John 2:16 warns us against the lust of the flesh, the lust of the eyes and the pride of life. Thus, this is a serious issue that needs to be addressed in our day and age. We must recall our Biblical roots. From the temptation of the fruit in Eden that was attractive to the eyes to the temptation of Christ with a vision of the world's kingdoms, we know from the Bible the dangers of the eye-gate. On the flip side, there is a positive presentation of what should be done to combat this weakness in our flesh: the Word of God stresses the written or spoken,not the visual. Consider:

1) "In the beginning was the Word...."
2) The Bible gives little to no physically pictorial information about its heroes and villains, let alone about Christ.
3) The Second Commandment emphasizes the dangers of images.
4) From God's stern reproach in the Garden to the audible chiding by Christ on the
Damascus Road, God's revelation of salvation is predominately through words.
5) God chose the foolishness of preaching to raise the dead, Ezek.37:1ff.
6) The Bible itself is written-it is not a picture book for children.

Why is this important? Because when we realize and practice the centrality of the Bible in our lives, we will be daily transformed more and more into the image of Christ while dying unto sin. Thus, it should be our passion.

How is this so? Why is sanctification so tied to the Word? And in what ways does the Word challenge our lives? That's the next installment.

Understanding the Means of Grace Series:

I. What Are They?
II. Passion for the Word
III. Benefits of the Word
IV. Power of God
V. Foolishness of God
VI. What is a Sacrament?
VII.The Initiatory Rite

I. Means of Grace: What Are They?

2009-11-01T13:35:00.000-07:00

Today there is little understanding of the public means of grace, what they are and how they impact our lives. This is especially so in the realm of Christian nurture: children and adults are properly encouraged to read the Bible and pray but public worship is omitted. How can there be growth and revival in the nurture of our children and our own lives if we ignore mother church and the public means of grace? It is my prayer this series will help remedy this defect.

I. Understanding the Means of Grace: What Are They?

In today's Christian bookstores you can barely find one book on the subject of the means of grace. Indeed, many Christians are not even sure what that phrase entails. Furthermore, these means of grace are either ignored (think of the many Christians wandering from church to church without a regular diet) or taken lightly (think of the lack of proper preparation). Hopefully, in this upcoming series the significance and proper place of the public means of grace will be explained in a useful fashion for all of us.

The Larger Catechism summarizes exactly what these means of grace--"outward means"--are:

Q154: What are the outward means whereby Christ communicates to us the benefits of his mediation?
A154: The outward and ordinary means whereby Christ communicates to his church the benefits of his mediation, are all his ordinances; especially the word, sacraments, and prayer; all which are made effectual to the elect for their salvation. [Matt. 28:19-20; Acts 2:42,
46-47]

Just as exercising and eating helps create a healthy body, so, too, spiritual exercise, using the means of grace (both private and public), helps us grow our spiritual body. Many Christians intuitively understand this fact. Thus, they strive for a five-step plan toward better living, or seek after forty-days of a purposeful life. Yet, examining the Bible shows a more simple approach to spiritual growth: the Word, sacraments and prayer. The proof texts used above show that continuing in the truths of the Bible (Acts. 2:42 "apostles' doctrine"), partaking of the sacraments ("breaking bread", v. 42; baptism in Matt. 28), and exercising prayer endorses a healthy church: "And the Lord added to the church daily those who were being saved." These "outward means" are used by the Spirit of God to grow the church. This is proper church growth. Again, many Christian friends of ours intuitively understand this fact and attend weekly worship.

In the Reformed faith we distinguish between public and private means of grace. Such a distinction is implied in the above Catechism answer when it differentiates between "all his ordinances" and "especially the word, sacraments and prayer."

As used in theological works and the Confessions, the means of grace are strictly limited as public and official elements of public worship. It is not simply any such action of a believer that is a means of grace in this stricter sense, but only the preaching of the Word, the Sacraments and prayer. It can be argued that there is also a broader, private or unofficial means of grace in the lives of the Christians: Bible reading, study and memorization, daily prayers, fellowship, and private and familial worship. Although neither public nor official, the reason these could be called "means of grace" is found in the fact that they are tools used by the Spirit for spiritual growth--it is inconceivable that Reformed communities would downplay the significance of private and familial worship let alone Bible reading, Bible studies or private prayers. Thus, there must be some sense in which these are means of grace.

The importance of this distinction is discovered in the balance that it presents. If the public ordinances are emphasized to the neglect of the private ordinances, an unnatural Christian life develops. Amongst other problems, believers more readily become mechanical in their worship and less spontaneous in their private devotional lives. On the other hand, with a neglect of the public ordinances through a disproportionate emphasis on the private means (as especially demonstrated in contemporary Evangelical circles), the public ordinances are regulated to a position between tradition and irrelevance. In short, both sets of means are needful for a healthy Christian life. They must be properly integrated. (excerpt from Words of Life, Mathis)

Christ does not call us to be spiritual couch potatoes. Rather he calls us to an active life of faith and obedience through the power of the Spirit and the tools He fashions for our benefit. Most Christians grasp the private means of grace. So, it behooves us to take seriously the public means of grace.

Next: the Word.

Understanding the Means of Grace Series:

I. What Are They?
II. Passion for the Word
III. Benefits of the Word
IV. Power of God
V. Foolishness of God
VI. What is a Sacrament?
VII.The Initiatory Rite

October 31st: Protestantism & the West, Pt. 6

2009-10-31T10:34:00.000-06:00

October 31st is the historical catalyst of Western liberties.

It is time to re-consider the vitality and viability of Christianity once again. Pragmatism is the only native American philosophy. And Americans live it to the hilt. Yet if we follow what 'works' why not follow Christianity?

This series is directed at encouraging American Christians to reconsider their roots and modern detractors to reconsider the historical significance of Protestantism. America is one of the best socio-historical evidences for Christianity.

Our freedoms were forged in the fires of the Reformation. And expanded through her children. And yet too many Americans wish to divorce these freedoms from the framework in which they were erected. They want the fruits without the Christian roots. If there is any cause and effect in the world, then this spells disaster for future generations.

Freedom & the Reformation

How is that so? Let a liberal historian from Yale explain the logical and psychological connections in a three-fold manner:

"How is it, then, that Calvinism is acknowledged, even by foes, to have promoted powerfully the cause of civil liberty? The reason lies in the boundary line which it drew between church and State. Calvinism would not surrender the peculiar notions of the Church to the civil authority. Whether the church, or the Government, should regulate the administration the Sacrament, and admit or reject the communicants, was the question which Calvin fought out with the authorities at Geneva, in this feature, Calvinism differed from the relation of the civil leaders to the Church, as established under the auspices of Zwingli, well as of Luther, and from the Anglican system which originated under Henry VIII…"

Thus, separation of church and state (a legal term not clearly defined until last century) began budding during the Reformation.

"A second reason why Calvinism has been favorable to civil liberty is found in the republican character of its church organization. Laymen shared power with ministers… Men who were accustomed to rule themselves in the Church would claim the same privilege in the commonwealth…"

The Presbyterian model is three-fold: a layer of courts (local church, regional church (Presbytery) and a national church (General Assembly)), joint-rule by laymen (elders) and ministers, and a written constitution. The people vote for their leaders and local issues. The people's voice is exercised through their elders at the regional and national levels. This republican system pre-dated America's by over two-hundred years.

"Another source of the influence of Calvinism, in advancing the cause of civil liberty, has been derived from its theology. The sense of the exaltation of the Almighty Ruler, and of his intimate connection with the minutest incidents and obligations of human life, which is fostered by this theology, dwarfs all earthly potentates. An intense spirituality, a consciousness that this life is but an infinitesimal fraction of human existence, dissipates the feeling of personal homage for men, however high their station, and dulls the luster of all earthly grandeur. Calvinism and Romanism are the antipodes of each other." (George Park Fisher, The Reformation, revised, (New York: Charles Scribner’s Sons, 1920), 207ff.)

In fact, historian and founder of Annapolis, George Bancroft (son of a Unitarian minister and no friend of Calvinism) declared:

"The fanatic for Calvinism was a fanatic for liberty; and, in the moral warfare for freedom, his creed was his most faithful counselor and his never-failing support. The Puritans...planted...the undying principles of democratic liberty" (A History of the United States, vol. 1 (New York: Harper & Brothers), 464)

He even declared:

"Calvin infused enduring elements into the institutions of Geneva, and made it for the modern world, the impregnable fortress of popular liberty, the fertile seed-plot of democracy."

(Literary and Historical Miscellanies, (New York: Harper & Brothers, 1855), 405-406)

The Point of It All

The influence of the Reformation was not monolithic. And other factors were involved. And historians do debate on how and to what extent Calvinism influenced early modernity. Yet influence it did.

The theological influence of Luther and the Reformers is the most fundamental factor. As such I must mention again that the Gospel calls men to repent of their wayward actions and beliefs. Men, being bound in their sin, have guilty consciences they try to assuage, even to the point of creating entire new worldviews whole-cloth. But the Gospel of Christ, that He died for the sins of those who believe in Him and His work, can free such fettered consciences.

And a free conscience is a free man.

This entire series can be summed up by a modern encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics:

"In general it may be claimed for Calvinism that its influence has been an elevating and invigorating one. Abasing man before God, but exalting him again in the consciousness of a newborn liberty in Christ, teaching him his slavery through sin, yet restoring his freedom to him through grace, and leading him to regard all things in the light of eternity, it contributed to form a grave but very noble and elevated type of character, and reared a race not afraid to lift up the head before kings."

James Hastings, Encyclopedia of Religion and Ethics, Part 5, (Kessinger Publishing, 2003), 153.)

Part 1, October Revolution
Part 2, Education
Part 3, Birth of America
Part 4, Early America
Part 5, Political Roots
Part 6, October 31st

For more info: For a scholarly assessment of Calvinism's influence read, The Reformation of Rights: Law, Religion & Human Rights in Early Modern Calvinism, Witte; for evidence that resistance to tyrant was part of the middle colony Reformed thought read, Revolution and Religion, Griffin.

Political Roots: Protestantism & the West, Pt. 5

2009-10-30T16:25:00.001-06:00

“He that will not honor the memory, and respect the influence of Calvin, knows but little of the origin of American liberty.”

George Bancroft, historian, founder of Annapolis

October 31st was a revolutionary day, the birth of Protestantism. This series has explored in summary fashion the Christian influence upon Western civilization and America in particular.

Introduction

The freedoms we enjoy as Americans have their historical roots in Christianity.

This is not simply an assertion from a biased observer but the assertion of several respected historians. The Reformed doctrines are being explored once again as meaningful beliefs that shaped and formed the early modern period. From Gorski's The Disciplinary Revolution to the detailed legal and historical examination of Witte and Berman, the Christian worldview is being examined as a real historical source of society, policy and legal rationale. It is certainly the case that these historians do not necessarily agree with the major tenants of Reformed thought, only examining how they impacted the thoughts and laws of those time periods.

And yet if our society and legal code have any historical connection to the past (and any nation will claim continuity with its own past), it is certainly a deep connection with Christianity. Other influences were certainly there but Christianity overshadowed them all.

Political Freedom

John Adams bluntly acknowledged the wide-spread influences of both the French-Calvinist’s work Vindicus Contra Tyrannos and the English Calvinist work of Ponet (A Shorte Treatise of Politike Power), both which defended the right of the people to rise against tyrants (The Works of John Adams [1851] Vol. 6, p. 3-4.)

Certain elements in the Declaration of Independence echoed past religious thought such as “all men are created equal,” which was originally expressed in the Puritan work Lex, Rex in 1644. Even further back in time, a Dutch Calvinist, Johannes Althusius, wrote Politica (1603), a complete systematic presentation of a representative Republican government including political resistance theory. Pre-existing resistance theories existed, but were not as fully developed until the Reformation under the likes of Calvin, Bucer, Knox, and others.

Daniel Elazar, professor at Temple University, member of presidential committees and founding member of the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs, asserted:

“In all of the places where Reformed Protestantism was strong, there emerged a Protestant republicanism that opposed tyrants even as it demanded local religious conformity. Reformed Protestants in England became the Puritans, whose name indicated that they wanted to purify the Anglican Church as much as the Catholic, which they had rejected. In the seventeenth century they launched the first of the great modern revolutions, the English Civil War, against royal absolutism, opening the way for modern democracy.” (World History Curriculum, Article 2)

In fact, he edited a work of fourteen essays written by various scholars and professors exploring the religious connection between the political idea of federalism and the Reformed idea of covenant. The Covenant Connection is a must read for Christians and detractors alike. He further claimed:

“A majority of the delegates to the Convention were affiliated with covenant-based churches…The Presbyterians, however, were already moving toward full-scale federalism. As Arthur Schlesinger, Sr., noted: 'More than either [the Congregationalists or Anglicans] the Presbyterians in their reliance on federalist and representative institutions anticipated the political makeup of the future United States.' Indeed, as the first government came into office under the U.S. Constitution in 1789, the Presbyterians held their first nationwide General Assembly. In the Presbyterian system, congregations in a local area formed a presbytery; several presbyteries in a region formed a synod; and then came the General Assembly. As a result, the system of federal democracy established by the U.S. Constitution has often been referred to as Presbyterianism writ large for civil society..." (Covenant & the American Founding)

The War

The Revolutionary War was partially fueled by religious concerns. John Adams explained:

"Where is the man to be found at this day, when we see [various bishops]...who will believe that the apprehension of Episcopacy contributed fifty years ago, as much as any other cause, to arouse the attention, not only of the inquiring mind, but of the common people, and urge them to close thinking on the constitutional authority of parliament over the colonies? This, nevertheless, was a fact as certain as any in the history of North America." (Works of Adams, Letter to Morse, December 2, 1815)

If parliament could institute a spiritual lord (Bishop) then certainly they could institute political lords. One of the most well-known political cartoons of that time, "An Attempt to Land a Bishop in America," shows a crowd of colonists harrying a Bishop back to England, throwing books titled "Locke," "Sydney on Government" and "Calvin's Works," shouting "no lords spiritual or temporal" (1768, see picture).

In fact, on May 20, 1775, the Presbyterian Synod was the first religious body to send a public letter to their churches reminding them to respect the Crown even while they encouraged their readers to obey the Continental Congress and to prepare their lives and souls for war. Most of the Continental army were Presbyterian laymen even as most of the New England minutemen were Congregationalists. These ministers--defending the Revolution or even fighting in it--were dubbed the "Black Regiment". Horace Walpole told Parliament that "there is no use crying about it. Cousin America has run off with a Presbyterian parson, and that is the end of it."

(to be continued)

Part 1, October Revolution
Part 2, Education
Part 3, Birth of America
Part 4, Early America
Part 5, Political Roots
Part 6, October 31st

More info: October Revolution, Mathis.

Early America: Protestantism & the West, Pt. 4

2009-10-30T10:26:00.001-06:00

“If we call the American statesmen of the late eighteenth century the Founding Fathers of the United States, then the Pilgrims and Puritans were the grandfathers and Calvin the great-grandfather..."

Von Kuehnelt-Leddihn

October 31st is not just Halloween, it is the birthday of Protestantism. Luther's theological challenge changed the West. And this multi-part series summarizes some of those changes.

Introduction

What many detractors of Christianity do not realize is that Protestants do not believe the Bible micromanages life. Even though the conservative Christians today wish to go "back to the Bible" they generally do not mean they wish to quote chapter and verse for any and all social or governmental decisions.

The same was true for early Americans. Yes, many more laws were directly tied to Biblical precepts (such as the Sabbath/Sunday laws), yet many other local laws were not. The doctrine of general revelation (here) gave rise to natural law and the freedom to apply Biblical principles to unique local circumstances.

In other words, any given law in the early American period was assumed (or argued) to be compatible with God's written Word.

Law & Christianity

Historically, the modern world--Modernity--began with the Reformation. Now more historians are publicly acknowledging what their older predecessors already knew: the substantive impact of Reformed thought in history.

One book in particular, Law & Revolution II, traces the theological outlooks that shaped both German and English legal thought from the Reformation through the 1600s. Published through Harvard University Press (Belknap), Professor Berman's well-documented book is a ringing challenge to many preconceived assumptions.

Ironically, from a non-Christian viewpoint anyway, the historical underpinnings of many modern legal assumptions--separation of church and state, freedom of religion and conscience--are found in Puritan Massachusetts. In fact, the jurisdictional distinction between church and state was already articulated in the 1600s: church censure (discipline) was not allowed to "degrade or depose" any government official (Puritan Political Ideas, Edmund Morgan).

The cultural assumptions at the time included the importance of Christianity as the social basis of the government. A Republic required knowledge, morality and religion as a cohesive tripartite foundation for good government. This is what the 1787 Congress stated (and the 1789 Congress re-adopted) two-hundred years ago when it adopted the Northwest Ordinance regulating the new American territory:

Art. 3. Religion, morality, and knowledge being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged [in the States to be formed from this Territory].

Although well-known as the chief architect of the Virginia "Bill for Establishing Religious Freedom" Jefferson also sponsored (along with Madison) a "Bill for Punishing Disturbers of Religious Worship and Sabbath Breakers" and a "Bill for Appointing Days of Public Fasting and Thanksgiving."

In fact, Christianity was considered part and parcel of the common law of the land. US Supreme Court Justice Story argued as much and this fact was asserted several times by several courts over the history of the 1800s ("When Christianity was Part of the Common Law," Law & History Review, 16:27 (1998)).

Quotes

"[T]he prevailing spirit of Americans before and after the War of Independence was essentially Calvinistic in both its brighter and uglier aspects"

Von Kuehnelt-Leddihn, “The Western Dilemma: Calvin or Rousseau?” Modern Age, no. 1 (1971)

“Hence the constitutional democracy that we all know today has its roots in that Reformed Protestant revival of the biblical idea of covenant which was not only important in the fight against tyrants and hierarchies but could be made operational in political systems that would protect liberties.”

Daniel Elazar, World History Curriculum, Article 2

Hamilton, a legal historian, an expert on constitutional and copyright law and a former assistant to Supreme court judges, discovered that:

"This [American] marriage of distrust in individuals but hope in properly structured institutions is no mere historical accident but has its roots in the Reformation theology of John Calvin…Others have made the more general case that Calvinist precepts permeated the culture at the time of the framing. Many of the Framers brought to the convention a background in Calvinist theology, with Presbyterians predominating among the Calvinists"

“The Calvinist Paradox of Distrust and Hope at the Constitutional Convention,” Christian Perspectives on Legal Thought, 2001

Modern detractors to Christianity are standing upon a legal foundation wrought in the refinery of the Reformation. The question is: if the foundation shifts from Protestant roots to atheistic assertions what will become of our liberties?

Part 1, October Revolution
Part 2, Education
Part 3, Birth of America
Part 4, Early America
Part 5, Political Roots
Part 6, October 31st

For more info: Separation of Church & State, Hamburger; Religion & the American Constitutional Experiment, Witte; The Covenant Connection, ed. Elazar.

Baby's First Snow

2009-10-29T21:28:00.000-06:00

Yes, we got our October snow storm. It was actually a blizzard in some areas (like ours).

I had to shovel snow drifts over our northern exposed driveway. It was heavy and I was tired. I went out further to meet mom in the car.

Then the car got stuck on the hill. I got it further up the hill, just outside the driveway.

And it got stuck again.

Our neighbor helped us push it some and I revved the engine up the driveway. With the tires spinning and sliding on snow and ice, my hands spun quicker on the wheel.

Then I helped dig out someone's high-centered car. And shovel out a path to park it in.

I was even more tired.

But not as tired as my little baby girl.
She was napping the whole time, safe and sound during her first snow.

Birth of America: Protestantism & the West, Pt. 3

2009-10-28T17:53:00.001-06:00

This Saturday marks October 31st, the birth of Protestantism. The last two parts of this series included a general overview of Protestant influence upon the West and especially its impact upon education.

Christianity birthed America thanks to Luther (sxc.hu)

This part will emphasize the less well-known religious social foundations of America.

Introduction

It is important to note the adjective 'social' as many today seem to only think in political terms. In the early modern period, before the rise of large, integrated, bureaucratic states, politics was only one of many aspects of a nation.

The social aspect, the institutional structures of family, school, church, government, etc., is the formal organization of the underlining cultural organism. The culture is the local, private and semi-private expectations and worldview outlooks that affect society. Naturally, there is a reciprocal relationship, but usually the larger institutions (such as the government) reflect the beliefs of the culture as a whole.

Jamestown, Plymouth and Massachusetts Bay

In both aspects of early America, religion played a dominate role. The wide-spread localism of this period allowed for religious and social diversity within a Christian context. Naturally, the localism arose from the vast size of the Eastern coast. Even so, Protestantism tied these diverse settlements together.

In 1607, Jamestown, although starting as a business venture of the Virginia Company of London, included a minister. And worship services were required morning and evening every Sunday. Catechizing the young came a few years later after women showed up. The particular denomination was Anglicanism. And its 39 Articles were clearly Protestant with a strong strand of Reformed thinking (the sovereignty of God and the depravity of man, here).

Presumably, many Americans know that both Plymouth and Massachusetts Bay were founded by Protestants: Separatists and Puritans respectively. Both groups were ardent Calvinists. And they came for religious freedom.

Culture & Christianity

Parents were to inculcate their children with Christian practice and doctrine. That included especially the Bible and the catechisms. Church leadership especially encouraged this in the families all the while they catechized the same families and their children. The schools simply reinforced this Protestant outlook with Bible readings and the Puritan New England Primer.

Although church membership was low (probably due to the high admittance standards), attendance was over 50% through the 1700s. Virtually all Americans were Christians of one stripe or another.

From Bibles, catechisms and sermons, most of the books were religious in nature. One of the most popular children books for over 100 years was a Puritan poem about judgment day, the Day of Doom. Newspapers, speeches and debates were couched in religious language, especially the Calvinist language of "providence." Even Paine's Common Sense used Christian language and imagery.

Politics & Christianity

Election day sermons were the mainstay in New England, while practiced occasionally elsewhere. This old tradition gathered the state leadership into one building to hear the chosen minister expound their duty to God. Several such sermons included a public defense of resistance to tyrants. Sermons were also preached during artillery drills, funerals and public holidays.

Political leaders, one and all, spoke the language of Christianity. Many were devout Protestants (John Jay, Patrick Henry, Roger Sherman). A few may have been borderline Deists (Washington). And even fewer were outright Deists (Jefferson). And some were hard to figure out (Madison).

Yet the Deism of Jefferson was not publicly known. And the Christian climate of the time was such that the stigma of the title 'deist' was even avoided by Jefferson. During his run for president in 1800, he was accused as such (without any real evidence). He publicly denied the charge.

The Declaration of Independence (as the organic foundation of America) explicitly mentions God and providence, rooting American liberties in Christianity. The Continental Congress pronounced several days of prayer and thanksgiving in explicitly Christian language, enacted public prayer and implemented chaplains.

All those state constitutions mention God and religion explicitly. The lack thereof in the Constitution makes sense in light of the state and local concerns of a nation-wide establishment of a single Christian denomination--what mother England had at the time.

Nevertheless, the new Congress still funded chaplains, asked for days of thanksgiving (via Washington), attended public facilities for worship services, and even condoned an American edition of the Bible (more here).

Several state constitutions still had a form of Christian establishment after the formation of the Constitution, with some including religious vows. In fact, the 1778 South Carolina constitution stated:

"The Christian Protestant religion shall be deemed, and is hereby constituted and declared to be, the established religion of this State."

(Article 38)

(to be continued)

Part 1, October Revolution
Part 2, Education
Part 3, Birth of America
Part 4, Early America
Part 5, Political Roots
Part 6, October 31st

For more info: Religion and the American Experiment, John Witte, Jr.

Education: Protestantism & the West, Pt. 2

2009-10-28T10:39:00.000-06:00

October 31st is the birthday of Protestantism. This short series is designed to bring to light the lost history of the revolution of 1517 and how it substantially created most of the West as we know it today.

Introduction

Many American's think that the Enlightenment was the only significant force for change in early modern Western history. Yet some of the ideas of that movement already existed. And more importantly such ideas of education, liberty and democracy already existed and were promulgated by the Reformers and Puritans alike.

Part one of this series gave quotes about the historical importance of the Reformation in the formation of the West; this second part will focus on the educational impact of the Reformation.

If history has any lessons for modern Americans, certainly the success of the Reformation ought to be one of them.

Ancient Education

The idea of teaching each and every citizen of a nation has probably existed in the isolated corners of history. The Greek states and Rome never had universal education, reserving any serious formal education for the wealthy (almost always the male) and certainly not for the slaves.

Christianity changed all that.

Already in the centuries after the resurrection of Christ, catechetical schools were established to teach rudimentary skills and doctrines to prepare for church membership. And such education included both sexes. The local pastors would tutor as well. Some of these catechetical schools were virtual colleges in their own right.

With the collapse of the Roman Empire, it was left for Christianity to hold together the remnants of civilization. So alongside homeschooling, other schools were created, expanding in type and number during the Middle Ages: monasteries, city-schools, cathedral schools, guild schools and the famous grammar (Latin) schools. From the 800s onward more and more universities were formally established, expanding the source of knowledge while preserving past wisdom.

Reformation Education

In many ways, the Reformation was an educational endeavor so deep in its impact that Americans still feel its reverberations today. The Bible that the Middle Ages had little access to was written in Latin. The Reformation changed that. It was now translated into the local languages. The Bible now became central once more in the life of the church, families and society.

Martin Luther and other Lutheran leaders pushed for the erection of more schools to help the poor peasant families. Some of the Lutheran states even made literacy a mandatory requirement for full church membership. Likewise, Calvin and other Reformed leaders in Scotland and the Continent promoted formal education by establishing catechetical classes (religious training) and local schools for boys and girls. The Reformed Moravian Bishop, Comenius, is considered by many the father of modern education.

As strange as it may sound to modern ears, preaching and the weekly lectures were educational events in the lives of many Protestants because the minister was typically the most educated man among them (being university trained). It was these university-trained preaches, the Puritans in particular, that influenced our modern educational system both in Britain and America. While depending on home-based literacy, they pushed for wide-spread literacy and basic theological training for everyone.

Early American Education

"We boast of our common schools; Calvin was the father of popular education, the inventor of the system of free schools."
George Bancroft, Historian, Founder of Annapolis

The Old Deluder Satan Act of 1647 in Massachusetts decreed the erection of schools in various towns. Such an attitude toward education was embedded in early America:

"Through the Puritans who settled in New England, and later through the Huguenots in the Carolinas, the Scotch Presbyterians in the central colonies, and the Dutch in New York, Calvinism was carried to America, was for long the dominant religious belief, and profoundly colored all early American education.” (Cubberley, 299)

Even the curriculum reflected Reformed beliefs. The New England Primer, with its "In Adam's fall/we sinned all", included the Westminster Shorter Catechism (question and answer format). It was the most popular school book for over 100 years. It was a common practice for minister to teach in school or tutor in private. All the while these leaders promoted schooling.

Many of the first state constitutions before 1800 included some form of provision for education: Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Vermont, Pennsylvania, Delaware and Georgia. Other states, such as New York, similarly provided for wide-spread education even without a constitutional mandate. In the spirit of Puritanism, the famous Northwest Ordinance of 1887 of the US Congress declared: "Religion, morality, and knowledge, being necessary to good government and the happiness of mankind, schools and the means of education shall forever be encouraged."

What It All Means

"In the countries where Calvinism became dominant the leaders included general education in their scheme of religious, political, and social reform.” (Cubberley, 330)

The historical irony is clear: the contemporary detractors of Christianity were educated in a system historically rooted in and propagated by Christianity and the Reformation in particular.

Part 1, October Revolution
Part 2, Education
Part 3, Birth of America
Part 4, Early America
Part 5, Political Roots
Part 6, October 31st

More info: Godly Learning, John Morgan; History of Education, Cubberley; American Education, Cremin.

October Revolution: Protestantism & the West Pt. 1

2009-10-26T23:37:00.000-06:00

On October 24, 25, 1917, after overthrowing the tsar in February, the Bolsheviks and Soviets united in toppling the newly establish Russian government. This is popularly known as the October Revolution.

On October 31, 1517, an Augustinian monk nailed 95 Thesis to the Wittenberg door, beginning the overthrow of papal power. This too is an October Revolution.

The former brought about repressive communism. The latter brought about the beginning of liberty and democracy.

Introduction

Naturally, any logical, historical or religious arguments that this author could employ would be held with great suspicion. Such a claim about the transforming power of the Reformation requires more substantiation than the clever writing of a pro-Reformation pastor.

Many scholars of the past and present readily, if not begrudgingly, admit to the dynamic and positive impact of the Reformers and their progeny. In fact, the fire of liberty of conscience lighted by Luther was fanned ever brighter by Calvin and the Puritans.

The influence these scholars write about is not a monolithic force that transformed Western civilization in one fell swoop. It was not the only historical source of change either. And as a rising force in the early modern era, Protestantism, especially the Reformed/Presbyterian brand, matured in its self-understanding and application of the basal principles nascent within its religious soul. Such nascent (and sometimes fully articulate) principles included liberty of conscience, liberty of vocation (work), liberty of church from state and liberty of the people from tyrants.

Unlike today, religion was determinate of that time period. Even though many of the historians to be quoted are not Reformed (Calvinists) themselves and may even repudiate it in favor of another system of thought, they honestly admit to its importance in the historical development of the West in general and in particular wide-spread education, republican self-rule, political revolution and the formation of America.

First Principles

The quotes from various notable historians are best understood against the fundamentals of the Reformation. One of the first principle doctrines of the Reformers (Lutherans and Calvinists alike) is the primacy of the Bible. As God's written will for His people it is considered not only the guidebook for the individual but for the society as well. This belief so permeated the early modern period that the US Congress condoned an American edition of the Bible, and the public schools included Bible reading well into the 20th century.

Three other basal principles included the sovereignty of God, the moral depravity of man and covenant theology. The first doctrine emphasized God's rule over all creation (providence), eventually becoming the bedrock for resistance to tyrants who claimed absolute rule. The second doctrine emphasized the sinfulness of man, even in his intellect, eventually becoming the bedrock for limited government. The third idea of covenant was especially developed in Reformed churches, emphasizing that formal and public agreements between different parties. This became the social glue for republican self-rule.

These and other Protestant doctrines are now being explicitly analyzed by historians for their social impact. Even if many readers deny these Christian doctrines, they were certainly believed by many in the past and acted upon. What a man believes that he will do.

In General

Let not Geneva be forgotten or despised. Religious liberty owes it much respect, Servetus notwithstanding.

John Adams, Essay XIX, Works, vol. 6, 1851

“While the Calvinistic faith was rather grim and forbidding, viewed from the modern standpoint, the Calvinists everywhere had a program for political, economic, and social progress which has left a deep impress on the history of mankind."

Ellwood Cubberley, A Brief History of Education, 1922, 175.

"In general it may be claimed for Calvinism that its influence has been an elevating and invigorating one. Abasing man before God, but exalting him again in the consciousness of a newborn liberty in Christ, teaching him his slavery through sin, yet restoring his freedom to him through grace, and leading him to regard all things in the light of eternity, it contributed to form a grave but very noble and elevated type of character, and reared a race not afraid to lift up the head before kings."

Religion and Ethics, Hastings, Part 5, 2003, 153.

“Grave as we may count the faults of Calvinism, alien as its temper may in many ways be from the temper of the modern world, it is in Calvinism that the modern world strikes its roots, for it was Calvinism that first revealed the worth and dignity of Man. Called of God, and heir of heaven, the trader at his counter and the digger in his field suddenly rose into equality with the noble and the king.”

John Green, History of the English People, vol. II, 1903, 280.

Part 1, October Revolution
Part 2, Education
Part 3, Birth of America
Part 4, Early America
Part 5, Political Roots
Part 6, October 31st

More readings: Law & Revolution II: The Impact of the Protestant Reformations on the Western Legal Tradition, Harold Berman, 2003.

Money for Homeschooling Will Fix America

2009-10-26T13:32:00.001-06:00

I received a letter begging for money. But the begging was couched in less beggarly-language than other letters. It painted a gloomy socio-political picture of America's woes. Clearly things are moving from bad to worse.

But (the letter continued) there is hope for such abysmal times as this!

Homeschooling!

That "Christ-centered education, one-on-one discipleship, and the liberating principle of individuality." Of which very "few political leaders, schools, media sources, or even churches that would encourage something as transformational as homeschooling."

Movements abound, draining time, money and energy for the small faithful churches that fall under their shadows. They don't get the same promotional power of homeschooling. And apparently very few churches would encourage something as transformational as homeschooling--and that is a good thing. They ought rather encourage something as transformational as the Gospel.

On the other hand, homeschooling is on the rise. Everyone is jumping on this bandwagon. It is now a cultural phenomenon. And it does change lives--but then so do many other things in life.

What will change the world for the better? What is a veritable reformation of life? What is the hope for the future?

The Gospel of our Lord & Savior, Jesus Christ. And that Gospel is found in faithful churches with uncompromising pastors and zealous members--whether they homeschool or not.

Want to change the world, to have a better place for your children, to contribute to something healthy, strong and growing?!

Then support the Gospel. Join a Reformed church. A Calvinist church. Give them your money. Pray. Fast. Use the means of grace in conscious realization of your unworthiness.

And pray the Lord of the Harvest to come with power and grace.

The Fate of Faith, Family and the Future

2009-10-01T10:13:00.000-06:00

Sixty-five percent of Mosaics and Busters in America (ages 18-41) “have made a personal commitment to Jesus Christ that is still important.” Twenty-nine percent of that group is “absolutely committed to the Christian faith.” Three-percent of that same group have a Christian worldview.

Three-percent.

Does that shock you? It shocks me—that’s my age group!

The Barna group statistics define a worldview as believing that “Jesus Christ lived a sinless life, God is the all-powerful and all-knowing Creator of the universe and he still rules it today,” salvation is a free gift of God, Satan is real, Christians should witness, the Bible is accurate and the source of moral, absolute truth (unChristian, p.75).

What does this mean for the faith, the family and the future?

First of all, it means the objective content (faith) of Evangelicals is rapidly disappearing. Without the Biblical worldview as the guiding principle of millions of Christian’s lives, wrong decisions and actions will increase; holiness will decrease. Churches will become businesses and entertainment centers. Truth will die by a thousand qualifications. And more importantly, we will shame Christ.

Second, the Christian family will crumble. Religious speak will still exist, but it will be hollow and mechanical. Families may act Christian but believe falsehood. Parents will live and act in ignorance of Biblical truth. Children will be swallowed whole by cults and outright unbelief. Generations will be lost.

Third, (and I speak as a man) the future will be lost—the future of America at any rate. We are even now seeing that loss. As the culture goes so goes the nation; and as the churches go so goes the culture. Culture is religion externalized.

“Why did this happen? What can I do?” you may ask.

Hosea 4:6 is God’s warning to those who know Him but do not know Him: “My people are destroyed for lack of knowledge: because thou hast rejected knowledge, I will also reject thee…”

Strong but true words. American churches and families must take it to heart. It is certainly not the case that conservative Christians as a whole are purposefully trying to avoid more knowledge of God and His Word. It certainly is not that. Yet the statistics (from the last ten years at least) point to increased deviation from the Bible in principle and practice. Something is amiss.

Unfortunately, this is not all. Barna’s poll of born-again Christians shows that almost forty-percent believe “if a person is good enough” they can be saved. 57% of Evangelicals allow for other ways to heaven than solely through Christ (2008 Pew study). Even learning a “worldview” is for naught if the Gospel is missing from its foundation.

The Barna study should be a wake-up call. But it will not be a wake up call if no one takes it to heart. I take it to heart. It grieves me. Does it grieve you?

Although increasing in understanding and wisdom does not automatically bring salvation or even sanctification, it is certainly fundamental. Without proper knowledge there is no growth. How can the spiritual tree of your life increase in Christ if you don’t know the difference between rotten and healthy fruit?

Perhaps you have heard this all before. Do you believe it? In which case, continue the struggle, pray for a revival and continue to help your family and support faithful churches. Do you still doubt? Reread those statistics. Either way, take Hosea 4:6 to heart. Re-examine your beliefs in detail:

1. Who is God? Is He omnipotent, omniscient? So what?
2. What is sin? How extensive is sin? How does this impact my family?
3. Who is Christ? Was He sinless? Why is this important?
4. How are we saved? By works? What is faith alone? So what?

This is just the tip of the iceberg: for to simply define terms is not enough, we must know how they relate to other truths and why they are important in the Christian life. The admonition in Hosea is not to only have intellectual knowledge of God (is God really satisfied with that?)—no, Hosea wants us to know the what as well as the how and why.

Do you want to be the generation that was destroyed for a lack of knowledge? Do you want our churches to be bastions of Biblical truth, seminaries of in-depth learning that challenge your preconceptions? Or do we want to remain spiritual children feeding on milk instead of feeding upon solid food? (Heb. 5:12ff.)

The Reformation of Luther, Knox and Calvin began as a return to the Word of God, specifically the Gospel—both the knowledge and use of it. The First & Second Awakenings followed the exact same path. That means you have to get your hands dirty and dig into the rich soil of the Bible—learning theology, doctrine and terminology. Difficulties and differences will arise (there is no growth without spirit-wrought effort and conflict), but the rewards will be rich.

To change the fate of the faith and family in America, we must awake from our collective slumber, leave our old ways and turn to Christ, learn from godly ministers (even of old), train our children and desire the sincere meat of the Word--nothing less than an entire generation is at risk. Can you do less?

The Old Virginia System--R. L. Dabney

2009-09-26T22:41:00.000-06:00

"This system of our fathers had superiority in its principles, as great as in its practical workings. Of these, I will, in concluding, present two. One was, that the State government left to parents those powers and rights which are theirs by laws of God and nature, and which cannot be usurped by a just, free government: those of directing the rearing of their own children, and choosing its agents and methods. Clusters of parents were left to create schools, to elect teachers, to ordain the instruction and discipline. When the parents had used their prerogatives, then the State came in as a modest ally and assistant, and by providing for the teaching in those schools of such children as their helpless poverty made proper wards of the State's charity, helped on the work of education, and supplied that destitution which private charity did not reach. There was a system conformed to the good old doctrine of our fathers, that 'governments are the servants of the people.' . . . The other [superior principle] was, that our wise fathers, by this simple plan, resolved the otherwise insoluble difficulty about the religion of the schools. The State, which knows no church in preference to another, did not create schools; did not usurp that parental authority, did not elect the teachers; did not ordain their discipline that parental function, did not elect the teachers; did not ordain their discipline or religious character. Parents have the right to do all these things in the light of their own consciences and spiritual liberty, and the parents made the schools. No other solution will ever be found that is as good."

The Beginnings of Public Education in Virginia, p.60,
qtd. R.L. Dabney

Family Integrated Irony

2009-09-18T23:28:00.000-06:00

Vision Forum website:

"Sunday-school teachers! you have a high and noble work, press forward in it. In our schools you do not try to bring children to the baptistry for regeneration, you point them away from ceremonies; if I know the teachers of this school aright, I know you are trying to bring your classes to Christ."
(Charles Spurgeon)

Comparing State Schools--R. L. Dabney

2009-09-10T22:10:00.000-06:00

It is an interesting historical fact that as much as Robert Lewis Dabney was against "universal State-schools" he thought it tolerably better to have Georgia's system than his beloved Virginia's system. It is interesting--and instructive--because some people seem to think anything that smacks of state involvement is so necessarily evil that it must be avoided at all costs. This excerpt, from his "Free Schools" article, compares the evils of the Virginia system (1870s) with another state he thought had a better approach:

"Now, if we must have the Yankee system, why cannot our Legislature imitate the wisdom and moderation of Georgia? Let all property-taxes, State and local, for school purposes, be abolished. Let the poll-tax be dedicated to that use, with the proviso, that the parent must at least pay the poll-tax, in order to enter his children. And, if this would not make a sum sufficiently splendid for our enthusiasts, let us imitate Georgia again, and devote the liquor-tax to the schools. The Auditor estimated that the Moffet law, properly applied, would yield $600,000. Is not that, added to the poll-tax and the income of the literary fund, enough to glut the rapacious maw of the School Board? Give them this; and we shall at least have the consolation of knowing, that we are not plundered to support a mischievous system, unless we choose to commit the folly of tippling...

"One other excellent feature of the Georgia law is secured by the very Constitution of the State Art. viii, Sec. 5. "Nothing contained in Sec. 2 of this Art. shall be construed to deprive schools in this State, not common schools, from participation in the educational funds of the State, as to all pupils therein, taught in the elementary branches of an English education.

"The meaning of this provision is, that all schools created and regulated by parents themselves, shall have the same title to a share in the school fund to pay for instruction in the English rudiments with those created by the State, provided the teachers of the former come under a few simple regulations ensuring the useful performance of their duties. The vital advantage of this is, that the State of Georgia restricts and limits that intrusion into and usurpation of parental rights and responsibilities within the narrowest limits permitted by her conquerors, which our system studies to push to the most sweeping and enormous extent. The State of Georgia recognizes the right of parents to say where a school is needed, how it shall be regulated, who shall be its teacher, what shall be its text-books, what its moral or religious regimen. The State of Virginia does all that can be done to wrest these inalienable rights and duties from the parents to whom God and nature have given them, and vest them in three "school trustees." The State of Georgia says to parents: "Exercise your rights of choice, and the Commonwealth will acquiesce and pay the portion of the fund equitably due your families, to the teacher of your choice." The State of Virginia virtually says: "I claim, like pagan Sparta, to be parent of all children, and to usurp the rights of natural parents in dictating by my officials, where, how, and by whom your children shall be educated; and if any parent insist on his rights of doing his own natural duties to his own offspring, he shall be punished therefore, by having his property taken from him to educate other people's children in ways he did not elect." There is the difference.

"The experience of every practical man will teach him how conducive this feature of the Georgia law is to flexibility, convenience and economy. The parents of a neighborhood create a school; they are the best judges where it should be situated, and who had best teach it; for they are actuated by disinterested love for the children, and sound common sense. They furnish the house and appliances. Hence, every dollar the State contributes is applied to the cost of actual instruction. The plan has the flexibility needed for a sparse population; the wishes of parents, desiring higher tuition for their children, co-operate with the wishes of the State desiring primary tuition for all; and public and private interests work together for the mutual benefit of the property-class and the poor."

Noble Exercises of Teachers--Baxter

2009-09-01T11:35:00.000-06:00

Richard Baxter, the famous practical divine of the 17th century, was a Puritan--of sorts. He was actually rather eclectic theologically, but excelled about everyday piety. Here (in truncated form) he summarizes important attitudes and piety of teachers.

I. Determine first rightly of your end...1. That your ultimate end be the pleasing and glorifying of God. 2. And this by promoting the public good, by fitting youth for public service. And, 3. Forming their minds to the love and service of their Maker. 4. And furthering their salvation, and their welfare in the world.

II. Understand the excellency of your calling, and what fair opportunities you have to promote those noble ends ; and also how great a charge you undertake; that so you may be kept from sloth and superficialness, and may be quickened to a diligent discharge of your undertaken trust.

III. Labour to take pleasure in your work, and make it as a recreation, and take heed of a weary or diverted mind. 1. To this end consider often what is said above; think on the excellency of your ends, and of the worth of souls, and of the greatness of your advantages. 2. Take all your scholars as committed to your charge by Jesus Christ; as if he had said to you, Take these whom I have so dearly bought, and train them up for my Church and service. 3. Remember what good one scholar may do, when he cometh to be ripe for the service of the Church or commonwealth! How many souls some of them may be the means to save! Or if they be but fitted for a private life, what blessings may they be to their families and neighbours!

IV. Seeing it is divinity that teacheth them the beginning and the end of all their other studies, let it never be omitted or slightly slubbered over, and thrust into a corner; but give it the precedency, and teach it them with greater care and diligence than any other part of learning: especially teach them the catechism and the Holy Scriptures. If you think that this is no part of your work, few wise men will choose such teachers for their children...Therefore teach them betimes the words of catechisms, and some chapters of the Bible; and teach them the meaning by degrees as they are capable. And make them perceive that you take this for the best of all their learning.

V. Besides the forms of catechism, which you teach them, speak often to them some serious words, about their souls and the life to come, in such a plain, familiar. manner, as tendeth most to the. awakening of their consciences, and making them perceive how greatly what you say concerneth them. A little such familiar serious discourse, in an interlocutory way, may go to their hearts, and never be forgotten; when mere forms alone are lifeless and unprofitable. Abundance of good might be done on children, if parents and schoolmasters did well perform their parts in this.

VI. Take strict account of their spending the Lord's day!—how they hear, and what they remember, and how they spend the rest of the day; for the right spending of that day is of great importance to their souls! And a custom of play and idleness on that day doth usually debauch them, and prepare them for much worse. Though they are from under your eye on the Lord's day, yet if on Monday they be called to account, it will leave an awe upon them in your absence.

VII. Pray with them and for them. If God give not the increase by the dews of heaven, and shine not on your labours, your planting and watering will be all in vain. Therefore prayer is as suitable a means as teaching, to do them good: and they must go together.

VIII. Watch over thom, by one another, when they are behind your backs, at their sports, or converse with each other; for it is abundance of wickedness that children use to learn and practise, which never cometh to their masters' ears, especially in some great and public schools.

IX. Correct them more sharply for sins against God, than for their dulness and failing at their books. Though negligence in their learning is not to be indulged, yet smart correction should teach them especially to take heed of sinning; that they may understand that sin is the greatest evil.

X. Especially curb or cashier the leaders of impiety and rebellion, who corrupt the rest. There are few great schools but have some that are notoriously debauched; that glory in their wickedness; that in filthy talking, and fighting, and cursing, and reviling words, are the infecters of the rest. And usually they are some of the bigger sort that are the greatest fighters, and master the rest, and by domineering over them, and abusing them, force them both to follow them in their sin and to conceal it. The correcting of such, or expelling them if incorrigible, is of great necessity to preserve the rest; for if they are suffered, the rest will be secretly infected and undone, before the master is aware. This causes many that have a care of their children's souls, to be very fearful of sending them to great and public schools, and rather choose private schools that are freer from that danger; it being almost of as great concernment to children, what their companions be as what their master is.

[The Nobler Exercises of His Profession, 1680]

Online Articles Examining FIC

2009-08-30T20:12:00.000-06:00

Here are some thoughtful analyses of the Family Integrated Model:

Believe to Reason is lead by a pastor of a mixed church: FIC and programatic.
The Family Integrated Ministry Model.

He also has an analysis of the program church.

Book Review: Family Driven Faith--by one who likes the book but has one reservation...

Educational Hubris

2009-08-24T16:29:00.000-06:00

Here's an excerpt from a thoughtful article on what was called patriarchalism (which in many circles may properly be dubbed Radical Homeschooling and Family-Integrated Churches):

Hubris

"The new patriarchalists would be less offensive if they couched their hegemonic views, well, less hegemonically. Why not simply say, “We’re attempting to recover a more consistent view of the family, and we know some dear Christians will not agree, and we know that most of orthodox Christianity stands against us, but we would humbly ask that you consider these things.”

No, it often is something like this: “Fathers, until we came along, have been irresponsible, and they are irresponsibly sending their daughters off to college, and they are sending their children to Christian day schools, and they are irresponsibly attending churches that sponsor age-graded Sunday School. They need to quit sinning, and start taking responsibility.”

I am exaggerating, but not by much. Christians, like all humans, are susceptible to fads, and this hegemonic patriarchalism is one of the latest fads that has emerged popularly, and will eventually die quietly."

If Everybody Homeschooled...

2009-08-03T09:07:00.000-06:00

Imagine in the not-too-distant future that almost every Christian family homeschooled.
That every church jettisoned its Sunday schools and youth groups.
That every family practiced discipleship and the fear of God.
That every father nurtured his children with daily prayer and Bible reading.
That every child said 'yes sir' and 'thank you.'

That drunkenness would be gone. And pornography outlawed. And abortion eliminated.
That the churches would be full every Sunday.

Full of dead man's bones.

You see, dear reader, having homeschooling (or whatever-schooling) and discipleship and nurture and upstanding citizens and white picket fences are about as useful as building a perfect outhouse but not cleaning up the inside. Why? Because preaching methods without the Message can lead to hypocrisy.

The Pharisees were masters at preaching method (obedience to the Law). And they railed against external wickedness while leaving the internal heart untouched. They had all Law and no Gospel.

Heretics--those denying the fundamentals of the Protestant Reformation--can homeschool, disciple and nurture their children--even better than orthodox Protestants. So, is the sufficient difference between godliness and ungodliness activity, obedience and doing?

No.

Although obedience is important and required, it is meaningless if the obedience is toward a god of one's own making. If all the self-professing Christians in America disciple, correct, love and perpetually nurture their children for the name-it-and-claim-it 'god' what has been accomplished??

Many self-identified Christians--even in homeschooling circles--believe they are saved by works (just go to the Barna group statistics). Many others believe that Jesus sinned or that God changes His mind. Others believe that baptism saves. Or deny original sin. Still others believe that God is impotent to save. Or that faith plus works justifies.

The list goes on.

Imagine if everyone homeschooled but worshiped the wrong god. Then what? The educational goal would be gained but the soul lost.

Necessity of Schools--Comenius 1630s

2009-07-27T14:53:00.000-06:00

Johann Amos Comenius
The Great Didactic
Chapter VIII
THE YOUNG MUST BE EDUCATED IN COMMON, AND FOR THIS SCHOOLS ARE NECESSARY

Having shown that those plants of Paradise, Christian children, cannot grow up like a forest, but need tending, we must now see on whom this care should fall. It is indeed the most natural duty of parents to see that the lives for which they are responsible shall be rational, virtuous, and pious. God Himself bears witness that this was Abraham's custom, when He says : " For I have known him, to the end that he may command his children and his household after him, that they may keep the way of the Lord, to do justice and judgment" (Gen. xviii. 19). He demands it from parents in general, with this command : " And these words, which I command thee this day, shall be upon thine heart, and thou shalt teach them diligently unto thy children, and shall talk of them when thou sittest in thine house, and when thou walkest by the way, and when thou liest down, and when thou risest up " (Deut. vi. 7). By the Apostle also He says: "And ye fathers, provoke not your children to wrath, but nurture them in the chastening and admonition of the Lord" (Ephes. vi. 4).

2. But, since human occupations as well as human beings have multiplied, it is rare to find men who have either sufficient knowledge or sufficient leisure to instruct their children. The wise habit has therefore arisen of giving over children, for their common education, to select persons, conspicuous for their knowledge of affairs and their soberness of morals. To such instructors of the young the name of preceptor, master, schoolmaster, or professor has been applied, while the places destined for this common instruction have been named schools, elementary schools, lecture-rooms, colleges, public schools, and universities.

3. On the authority of Josephus we learn that the patriarch Shem opened the first school, just after the flood. Later, this was called the Hebrew school. Who does not know that in Chaldsea, especially in Babylon, there were many schools, in which the arts, including astronomy, were cultivated ? since, later on (in the time of Nebuchadnezzar), Daniel and his companions were instructed in the wisdom of the Chaldseans (Dan. i. 20), as was also the case with Moses in Egypt (Acts vii. 22). By the command of God, schools were set up in all the towns of the children of Israel; they were called synagogues, and in them the Levites used to teach the law. These lasted till the coming of Christ, and became renowned through His teaching and that of His Apostles. The custom of erecting schools was borrowed by the Romans from the Egyptians, the Greeks, and the Jews, and from the Romans it spread throughout their whole empire, especially when the religion of Christ became universal through the care of pious princes and bishops. History relates that Charlemagne, whenever he subjected any heathen race, forthwith ordained for it bishops and learned men, and erected churches and schools; and after him the other Christian emperors, kings, nobles, and magistrates have increased the number of schools so much that they are innumerable.

4. It is to the interest of the whole Christian republic that this Godly custom be not only retained but increased as well, and that in every well-ordered habitation of man (whether a city, a town, or a village), a school or place of education for the young be erected. This is demanded :—

5. (i) By the admirable method of transacting business which is in common use. For, as the head of a household makes use of various craftsmen when he has no leisure time to prepare what is necessary for his household economy, why should he make any difference in the case of education? When he needs flour, he goes to the miller; when flesh, to the butcher; when drink, to the inn-keeper; when clothing, to the tailor; when shoes, to the cobbler; when a house, a ploughshare, or a key, to the builder, the smith, or the locksmith. Again, we have churches for religious instruction, and law courts and assembly rooms in which to discuss the causes of litigants and make weighty announcements to the assembled people ; why not schools also for the young ? Farmers do not feed their own pigs and cows, but keep hired herdsmen who feed them all at one time, while their masters, free from distraction, transact their own business. For this is a marvellous saving of labour, when one man, undisturbed by other claims on his attention, confines himself to one thing; in this way one man can be of use to many, and many to one man.

6. (ii) By necessity, because it is very seldom that parents have sufficient ability or sufficient leisure to teach their children. The consequence is that there has arisen a class of men who do this one thing alone, as a profession, and that by this means the advantage of the whole community is attained.

7. (iii) And although there might be parents with leisure to educate their own children, it is nevertheless better that the young should be taught together and in large classes, since better results and more pleasure are to be obtained when one pupil serves as an example and a stimulus for another. For to do what we see others do, to go where others go, to follow those who are ahead of us, and to keep in front of those who are behind us, is the course of action to which we are all most naturally inclined.

Young children, especially, are always more easily led and ruled by example than by precept. If you give them a precept, it makes but little impression; if you point out that others are doing something, they imitate without being told to do so.

8. (iv) Again, nature is always showing us by examples that whatever is to be produced in abundance must be produced in some one place. Thus, for instance, wood is produced in quantities in forests, grass in fields, fish in lakes, and metals in the bowels of the earth.

Specialisation, too, is carried to such an extent, that the forest which produces pines, cedars, or oaks, produces them in abundance, although other kinds of trees may be unable to grow there; and, in the same way, land that produces gold does not produce other metals in like quantity...

9. (v) And, finally, we see the same tendency in the arts, if a rational procedure be used. When a tree cultivator, in his walks through woods and thickets, finds a sapling suitable for transplanting, he does not plant it in the same place where he finds it, but digs it out and places it in an orchard, where he cares for it in company with a hundred others...And therefore, as fish-ponds are dug for fish and orchards are laid out for fruit-trees, so also should schools be erected for the young.

Why Homeschoolers Need the Gospel

2009-07-21T13:37:00.000-06:00

Why should it be presumed that orthodox doctrine is believed among homeschoolers?

If, say, discipline and nurture are emphasized in a context of presumed orthodoxy but the presumption is wrong, then what?

If a family nurtures their children into theological error then nurture has only hurt the children. If a family disciplines their children into the name-it-and-claim-it mentality then discipline has harmed the children. If a family prays together but prays to a 'god' who changes his mind then such prayer has damaged the children.

To assert the necessity of discipleship without taking into account the sorry spiritual state of most Evangelicals is as helpful as a soap commercial for cleaning a house full of spiritual babes--what baby can clean his or her own mess?

Are all Evangelicals, even homeschoolers, spiritually babes or even spiritually dead? I don't know that. But I can discern the times and the seasons through my own years of experience--and the experience of those older than me--and listen to the statistical evidence gathered over the last twenty years. And more importantly I can evaluate the creeds of these families and churches--if their creed believes that Christ sinned while on earth can I not safely assume that there is a spiritual crisis of vast proportions? That perhaps these people are fooling themselves? That radical surgery is required?

My experience as a Dispensational, Arminian, Charismatic of a decade of my life speaks volumes. My church was a mega-church before mega-churches became well-known. We had 2,000 members--well, attendees, church membership was not required.

I was confused; always in fear of losing my salvation. Sure I was saved by grace--but what kind of grace is it that cannot hold onto me in spite of my sins? What was grace? I had no doctrinal footing to stand upon. Did not creeds divide and love unite? Yet I was so full of 'love' that I sank in an ocean of chaotic emotions because I was not taught the teaching (doctrine) of swimming. Even though I was a good student, at church and school, and had an open relationship with my parents, I struggled with sin.

Such doctrinal confusion lead to my lack of assurance and spiritual stagnancy. The practical consequence of such spiritual ignorance was that I was trying to save myself. What if I sinned and died before I repented? Did I believe God enough? Was I obedient enough? The agony was unbearable until God's goodness brought me to sound doctrine which changed my faith from introspection to extrospection--seeing Christ and Him crucified.

Statistically, Barna has been polling American Christians since the mid-80s. Their frustration with the chronic ignorance of such Christians lead to the publication of UnChristian. It was there that I discovered that "out of ninety-five million Americans [aged 18-41]...about sixty million say they have already made a commitment to Jesus that is still important" but only three million (3%) of the total have a nominal Christian worldview (nominal because the very definition used by Barna is non-trinitarian!). Of those aged 42+ only 9% have a nominal Christian worldview. Whose to say that homeschoolers are immune to such doctrinal and therefore practical ignorance?

Barna certainly does not let homeschoolers off the hook. Their 2001 random survey (the best type) suggests that just over half (51%) are not classified as “born again”. Only 15% are (loosely) Evangelical. Half of the homeschoolers polled consider themselves somewhere between conservative and liberal. More importantly, the Barna Group numbers display a level of poor spirituality I had only guessed at from my own anecdotal experience: most homeschoolers deny that Satan exists and half believe that salvation is obtained through good works.

Doctrinally, the situation is worse. Experience and statistics can only go so far but what a person believes with their mouth will reveal their heart (Rom. 10.10). It is certainly true that actions do not always follow beliefs, but they should. And God is not pleased if someone confesses that God is all-sovereign yet frets about the future. At the same time it is wrong to confess that God is impotent among the sons of men and live accordingly.

Professor Horton's excellent book, Christless Christianity, sums the problem of conservative Evangelicalism--whatever their educational proclivities--as moralistic, therapeutic Deism: God created the world; God wants us to be good; God wants us to be happy; God will solve your problems on demand; good people go to heaven (p.41).

Deism is not Christianity. It is the belief that there is a distant Being who created everything and left it alone. Redemption is being good. And the chief end of man is to be happy.

Yet more specific doctrinal errors are frequent as well: God the Father did not choose His own people (that's our job); God the Son did not obey the law for us (that's our job); God the Spirit cannot raise the spiritual dead (that's our job); there is no original sin; infants are innocent; and man's depravity is a lack of information not will.

I know these dangerous errors exist because I have heard them with my own ears. I have examined many churches and their confessions. And I conclude that homeschoolers, as much as any Christian, still need the Gospel.

Thoughts on Education--J. Gresham Machen

2009-07-15T22:18:00.000-06:00

Sentiments on education by one of the premier defenders of orthodoxy in the 1920s & 30s, J. Gresham Machen:

"A public school system, in itself, is indeed of enormous benefit to the race. But it is of benefit only if it is kept healthy at every moment by the absolutely free possibility of the competition of private schools. A public-school system, if it means the providing of free education for those who desire it, is a noteworthy and beneficent achievement of modern times; but when once it becomes monopolistic it is the most perfect instrument of tyranny which has yet been devised."
Liberalism and Christianity, p. 15, Introduction, pdf.

"It never seems to occur to many modern teachers that the primary business of the teacher is to study the subject that he is going to teach. Instead of studying the subject that he is going to teach, he studies "education"; a knowledge of the methodology of teaching takes the place of a knowledge of the particular branch of literature,history or science to which a man has devoted his life...

"I wonder when we shall have that revival of learning which we so much need, and which I verily believe might be, in the providence of God, as was the Renaissance of the fifteenth century, the precursor of a Reformation in the Church. When that revival of learning comes, we may be sure that it will sweep away the present absurd over-emphasis upon methodology in teaching at the expense of content. We shall never have a true revival of learning until teachers turn their attention away from the mere mental process of the child, out into the marvellous richness and variety of the universe and of human life. Not teachers who have studied the methodology of teaching, but teachers who are on fire with a love of the subjects that they are going to teach are the real torch-bearers of intellectual advance."
The Importance of Christian Scholarship, p.3, pdf

"In the modern Church, this important work of edification has been sadly neglected; it has been
neglected even by some of those who believe that the Bible is the Word of God. Too often doctrinal preaching has been pushed from the primary place, in which it rightly belongs, to a secondary place: exhortation has taken the place of systematic instruction; and the people have not been built up. Is it any wonder that a Church thus nurtured is carried away with every wind of doctrine and is helpless in the presence of unbelief? A return to solid instruction in the pulpit, at the desk of the Sunday School teacher, and particularly in the home, is one of the crying needs of the hour." ibid, p.14

From "The Necessity of the Christian School" (online, PCA):

"What, then, should the Christian do in communities where there are no Christian schools? What policy should be advocated for the public schools? I think there is no harm in advocating the release of public-school children at convenient hours during the week for any religious instruction which their parents may provide. Even at this point, indeed, danger lurks at the door...But what miserable makeshifts all such measures, even at the best, are! Underlying them is the notion that religion embraces only one particular part of human life. Let the public schools take care of the rest of life -- such seems to be the notion [today]..."

"It is this profound Christian permeation of every human activity, no matter how secular the world may regard it as being, which is brought about by the Christian school and the Christian school alone. I do not want to be guilty of exaggerations at this point. A Christian boy or girl can learn mathematics, for example, from a teacher who is not a Christian; and truth is truth however learned. But while truth is truth however learned, the bearings of truth, the meaning of truth, the purpose of truth, even in the sphere of mathematics, seem entirely different to the Christian from that which they seem to the non-Christian; and that is why a truly Christian education is possible only when Christian conviction underlies not a part, but all, of the curriculum of the school. True learning and true piety go hand in hand, and Christianity embraces the whole of life -- those are great central convictions that underlie the Christian school."

"I can see little consistency in a type of Christian activity which preaches the gospel on the street corners and at the ends of the earth, but neglects the children of the covenant by abandoning them to a cold and unbelieving secularism. If, indeed, the Christian school were in any sort of competition with the Christian family, if it were trying to do what the home ought to do, then I could never favor it. But one of its marked characteristics, in sharp distinction from the secular education of today, is that it exalts the family as a blessed divine institution and treats the scholars in its classes as children of the covenant to be brought up above all things in the nurture and admonition of the Lord."

At the founding of the OPC:

“’In presenting its report, the Committee on Christian Education wishes to express its conviction that the triumph of unbelief in the old organization was due in no small measure to the prostitution of existing educational agencies through compromise with unbelief on the one hand, and to the lack of a full-orbed and consistent system of Christian education on the other.’

“Acting on this conviction and proceeding in the direction outlined, the work of the committee began by recommending to pastors evangelical and Reformed educational materials already available, urging pastors and congregations to support Westminster Theological Seminary with their prayers and gifts, and requesting pastors and congregations to form Christian school societies with a view to the establishment of Christian day schools. Public meetings at general assemblies were sponsored by the committee, during which basic aspects of Christian education were proclaimed by such able exponents as John Murray and Comelius Van Til. Seeds were being sown.”

The Orthodox Presbyterian Church 1936-1986, The Committee for the Historian of the Orthodox Presbyterian Church, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 1986. 35-36

In Defense of Homeschooling

2009-07-10T22:34:00.000-06:00

I Was Homeschooled

2009-07-06T21:02:00.000-06:00

Coming home, my mind swirled with a thousand and one questions. Questions about politics and Christianity. Evolution and science. God's will. Prayer in school.

I spent that night--as I had many a night for years--with my family. Focusing my thoughts like a laser-beam, I asked my parents one or two choice questions. We discussed them. We opened the Bible and examined it. Talked about it. And resolved the questions.

Of course, Friday night was not talk-about-life night because is was game night. Although my Dad was the least interested in the family, in love he consented on most Friday's to engage in a little fun. It did help that we had no TV.

When possible, as a family, we would walk with our lovable doberman (they are actually faithful family dogs). I dressed conservatively. I never dated. I never listened to rock 'n roll.

My sister did once. Some song longing for peace: "People are people, so why should it be that you and I get along so awfully." Reading the lyrics out loud, she laughed: "People don't get along because they are sinners!" I snickered.

With my father the local ecclesiastical black-sheep, I quickly learned some critical thinking. We attended Sunday worship: morning, evening and mid-week. I listened to radio preachers. Together we listened to Dobson at night.

We talked. And discussed. Or more precisely, my father fulfilled Deuteronomy 6 by taking impromptu opportunities to discuss life and God.

Yet our weak spot was action flicks. We saw them at the dollar theater. We never once used the concession stand. It cost way too much. I never knew it then, but I was poor. Not dirt poor just poor. And that poverty meant that we could not attend the new local Christian school. Or any private school for that matter.

Instead, I attended public school. My entire childhood.
And yet I was homeschooled.

In an interview with the online book service, Christianbook, a well-known homeschooling advocate notes that while he went to private and government schools growing up, "life was a constant homeschool program."

Just so: my life as a teenager was a "constant homeschool program".

It is just such an understanding of the Biblical mandate to train children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord that should unite Christians. In an age when America's foundations are crumbling around us, Christians--especially the Reformed--ought to focus on what is important and not spend large amounts of money, energy and rhetoric defending one specific educational method against others.

History and Christian liberty ought to instruct us otherwise. Among other things parental involvement, attitude and especially a Gospel-centered faith transforms a house into a home. This integrates the family from mere physical closeness to spiritual unity. This type of nurture will have our future children telling their children, "I was homeschooled--and you will be too."

Need of Presbyterian Schools---Alexander

2009-07-01T12:21:00.000-06:00

"Such being the neglect of our own body [Presbyterians], and the zeal and diligence of our opposers [Roman Catholics], we are ready to conclude, that next to the ministry of the word, and the instruction of the family, there is nothing which, under God's blessing, promises so much for the sustentation of our covenanted truth, as schools, Presbyterian schools, thorough-paced and above-board; such schools as shall, every day in the week, direct the infant mind, not only to a meager natural religion, but to the whole round of gracious truth, as it is in Christ Jesus. The principles herein asserted are not new among us: but it is high time that we should carry our principles into action."

--J. W. Alexander, old-school Presbyterian

[Report on Parochial Schools to the General Assembly of the Presbyterian Church, 1846]

Home Education Defined--Isaac Taylor, 1838

2009-06-29T12:23:00.000-06:00

Most Christians are under the deep impression that homeschooling was universally accepted until the late 1800s. Although such a broad-sweeping affirmation cannot be conclusively proven (nor unproven), it can be examined one era at a time. One such approach would be to examine the books of the early and mid 1800s which stressed "fireside education"--that renewed emphasis on family life.

One such book was written by Isaac Taylor, "Home Education".

The following is from the opening chapter of the 1838 edition:

"I am not about to compare public and private education as if intending to disparage the one, that the other, which is my chosen subject, may appear to the greater advantage...The reader would have good reason to distrust the judgment of a writer who, for the purpose of enhancing the importance of the particular task he has undertaken, should speak of Home Education as if it were abstractedly and universally preferable to the opposite system; or should affirm that it might be adopted by the generality of families: the contrary of both suppositions I fully admit."

"Having thus precluded a probable misunderstanding of my intention, I may with equal explicitness, profess the belief, first, that Home Education, if the principles and methods proper to it are well understood, is both practicable and preferable in more instances than has often been supposed..."

Such up-front nuance is a breath of fresh air in comparison to some contemporary rhetoric. The author continues with the all important necessity of definition:

"I ought to premise that the phrase, Home Education, is not, in my view, to be strictly confined to the training of the children of a single family, under the paternal roof; but may embrace any instances in which the number assembled for instruction is not greater than may well consist with the enjoyments, the intimacy, the usages, and the harmony that ought to attach to a family."

Although, he is more in favor of small group learning--a theme most Christians are in favor of today--he never assumes or asserts an all or nothing position. He does not endorse homeschooling as conceived in some modern circles. In fact, he does not endorse homeschooling as many people would recognize it today--who would name a school with a small class 'homeschooling'?

No, his concern is not about the method per se but about the atmosphere--a familial milieu of love. Something many Christians can agree upon.

Swift Kick in the Pants

2009-06-24T23:12:00.000-06:00

One of the perennial temptations for parents is to farm out their responsibilities for their children. I did not say delegate; I do not mean letting others help, direct or instruct their children. A parent can do that and still retain their responsibility in the matter.

No. I mean actually abdicating their responsibility. For example, when junior is failing at school, the parents blame the tutor. Or junior. When, in this instance, one key problem could be the total lack of involvement from mom and dad. They are so busy through-out the week--tennis, bible study, over-time, vet, house-hold chores--neither parent bothered to organize their time to sit down and find out how junior was progressing intellectually and spiritually: was junior disciplined with his own time? or did his mind wander? was his attitude about math good, bad or indifferent? Perhaps he has unrepentant sin that is distracting him?

The parents probably thought they were delegating their schooling when it actually became an excuse to put their kids out of the way of their own pleasures. Or the parents were too myopic. Or even lazy.

In such cases, the parents need a swift kick in the pants.

More families are realizing the importance of their duty before God: to train their children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord. They are getting their collective pants kicked by faithful teaching and preaching of the Word. More churches are realizing that they were demanding too much time and energy from families. Something many Reformed churches have realized for centuries.

But God not only uses church officers to call his families to faithfulness, at times he also uses friends, and Christian teachers and even homeschooling.

Homeschooling has been a swift kick in the pants for many a family. And that is a good thing. Forced to be intimately involved with junior's education--his ABCs & 123s--many quickly learn that education is more than mere intellectualism.

Junior has a lazy attitude. He disdains learning. He cheats on tests. Mom and Dad are beginning to realize that when they let junior keep his room a mess, he keeps his education a mess too. The importance of character comes to the fore. The character of not only junior but the attitudes and expectations of the parents. Disdaining Sunday worship. Watching TV all day. And chronically skipping family worship. Such parental slips add up.

And they influence junior.

Homeschooling for a number of families creates physical closeness that may help facilitate a familial closeness. Mixing homeschooling with strong parental willingness, wisdom and Spirit-wrought effort is a powerful combination. But it is only lasting if the Gospel cements the family together. Knowledge of that Gospel which wrought the Reformation is a must.

God uses many methods to point his children toward their responsibilities. Some subtle and kind and others more direct and blunt. We prefer the former but usually need the latter. And homeschooling can provide that swift kick in the pants.

Calvinism, History & Homeschooling

2009-06-19T23:01:00.000-06:00

Many homeschoolers--like many conservative Evangelicals--imbibe on the glories of yesteryear: when Christianity dominated early America. In fact, it is not uncommon that homeschoolers pride themselves as a continuation of that past generation.

But what if what you know about that past generation was wrong? Would that make you think twice about cause and effect--that the cause of what we deem a successful Christian past was anchored in a specific form of Christianity and not some generic, vague and amorphous Deism that many Americans believe today?

Consider:

1. The founders of the three main settlements, Jamestown, Plymouth and Massachusetts, were creedal Calvinists.
2. The Huguenot settlers in the South, the German Reformed of the middle colonies and the Dutch of New York were all Calvinists.
3. In 1780, the number of Calvinist churches (of one stripe or another) in America ranged from 60-80% (Religion and the American Experiment, Witte, 120)
4. The most popular school book for 100 years, The New England Primer, was Calvinistic!
5. Many state legislatures (and the national body) called for days of fasting and prayer in the Calvinistic language of Providence:

“…it becomes the indispensable duty of these hitherto free and happy colonies, with true penitence of heart, and the most reverent devotion, publickly to acknowledge the over ruling providence of God; to confess and deplore our offences against him;… Desirous, at the same time, to have people of all ranks and degrees duly impressed with a solemn sense of God's superintending providence, and of their duty, devoutly to rely...on his aid and direction and…through the merits and mediation of Jesus Christ, obtain his pardon and forgiveness; humbly imploring his assistance to frustrate the cruel purposes of our unnatural enemies; and by inclining their hearts to justice and benevolence…” Continental Congress, March, 1776.

And not only were the general contours of American life Calvinistic, many of the little known and well-known leaders were or were raised Calvinists: Patrick Henry, John Jay, John Witherspoon, Roger Sherman and Noah Webster.

Yes, that dictionary on your shelf was written by a Calvinist.

Even the political resistance theory was greatly influenced by Calvinism. John Adams bluntly acknowledges the wide-spread influences of both the French-Calvinist’s work Vindicus Contra Tyrannus and the English Calvinist work of Ponet (A Shorte Treatise of Politike Power), both which defended the right of the people to rise against tyrants.

Much of our political, social and economic freedoms hail from Calvinism.

But why? Is there something deeper to Calvinism than a system of thought that spawned the early Modern Era?

Yes. It is the Gospel.

Ask yourself, Is it coincidence that Luther, Calvin, Tyndale & the Puritans all believed in the Five Points of Calvinism? In TULIP--Total depravity, Unconditional election, Limited atonement, Irresistible grace and Perseverance of the saints?

God the Spirit raised up Luther and Calvin and a hundred other pastors who taught that creeds and deeds must be rooted in the Five Solas--that the Bible alone teaches justification through faith alone by grace alone on account of Christ alone to the glory of God alone. And those Solas were carried to the four corners of Europe by the original Protestants of old and their public creeds: Presbyterian Westminster Confession of Faith, Anglican 39 Articles, Dutch, Swiss, Irish, Polish, Hungarian, French Huguenots, Congregational and Baptist--all with a Calvinistic creed in their origins.

What about those American revivals? Started among the Calvinists first. Whitefield and Edwards--Calvinists. Wesley came a bit later. The Second Great Awakening was started among the Calvinist--Congregationalist, Baptists and Presbyterians. Later on it was hijacked (25 year later!) by Finney and his free-will salvation.

Dear homeschooler: consider well this summary of historical facts. Do you want something greater for your family, your children and their children? for this nation?

You want to bring it back to the good old days don't you? I know I do.

Then learn the lesson of one of the most popular and well-respected Calvinists of the 1800s:

"I have my own opinion that there is no such thing as preaching Christ and Him crucified, unless we preach what nowadays is called Calvinism. It is a nickname to call it Calvinism; Calvinism is the gospel, and nothing else. I do not believe we can preach the gospel if we do not preach justification by faith without works; nor unless we preach the sovereignty of God in His dispensation of grace; nor unless we exalt the electing unchangeable eternal, immutable, conquering love of Jehovah; nor do I think we can preach the gospel unless we base it upon the special and particular redemption of His elect and chosen people which Christ wrought out upon the cross."

Charles Spurgeon
Sermons, p.88, 1858.

AMEN.

[Hungry for more truth? here for more detailed info or post. Hungry for what the Gospel really is, email me: pastor mathis at gmail dot com]

Preparing for School, Dedication--Comenius

2009-06-13T16:09:00.000-06:00

In his book, the School of Infancy, Comenius, the 17th century leading Reformed pedagogue, included dedication and prayer as proper preparation for young six-year-olds before they began formal schooling:

Chapter XII

"6...the present matter necessarily requires, that parents should in devout prayer again commend their children to God, begging Him to grant His blessing on their scholastic instruction, and to make out of them vessels of grace, nay, if it please His benignity, the instruments of His glory. So Hannah with prayer delivered her Samuel to Eli; so David delivered Solomon to the prophet Nathan; so the mother of John Huss, the Bohemian martyr, as she was taking him to school, occasionally during the journey, falling on her knees with him, poured out her prayers. And how God heard and blessed these prayers, all Christians know. For how can God thrust away from him what is dedicated to him with a full and warm heart, with prayers and tears ; first, in the womb, afterwards in faithful dedication, and now a third time ? It is impossible for Him not to receive so holy an offering."

"7. Therefore, the father or mother may use the following prayer: "Creator, Father, and most merciful Lord God, with profound humility, that Thou mayest be my God and the God of my offspring for ever. O the vast benignity and mercy conferred upon us who believe, that we, having been ransomed from mankind, have been made first-fruits to God and the Lamb! Do Thou therefore ratify and confirm this blessing in this the fruit of my womb, O most merciful God, that the child may be in the number of Thine elect, and receive a portion with Thy sanctified ones. And since I now deliver it, to obtain richer knowledge, to the director of youth, I pray Thee, add Thy blessing, that being instructed by the internal Leader, Thy Holy Spirit, it may learn more and more what pleaseth Thee, and walk in Thy commandments. Fear of Thee, O Lord, is the beginning of wisdom, therefore fill its heart with Thy fear, 0 holy God, and enlighten it with the light of knowledge according to Thy will; so that its advanced age, if Thou shouldst deem fit, may be glorious to Thee, useful to its neighbours, and salutary to itself. Hear me, most beloved Father, and fulfil the prayer of Thy servant, (or thine handmaid) for the sake of the intercession of our mediator Jesus Christ, who received little children when brought to Him, embraced them in His arms, imparting to them a kiss and benediction."

Preparing for School, Attitude--Comenius

2009-06-05T20:24:00.000-06:00

Comenius was a leading pedagogue in Europe during the 1600s. Dubbed the "teacher of the nations," Comenius is considered the father of modern education (at least any good that he would claim) and promoted universal education (not to be confused with compulsory education). This two part series includes thoughtful ideas for preparing young children (around age six to seven) for any godly schooling. Part two includes dedication and prayer.

School of Infancy

Chapter XII.

How parents ought to prepare their children for school.

"Parents, therefore, ought not to hand over their children inconsiderately for instruction in the schools, but they themselves seriously reflect what is suitable to be done in this matter...

"2. Parents act imprudently, who, with no preparation, lead their children to schools as calves to market, or flocks to the herd. Afterwards the schoolmaster becomes harassed with them, and will punish them as he thinks fit...parents or domestics incautiously declaim in the presence of children respecting scholastic punishments and the severity of preceptors, and that they will no longer be allowed to play, and the like, by saying, "I will send you to school," "you shall be made gentle," "they will beat you with rods," "only wait a little," etc. By this means occasion is supplied them not for gentleness, but for greater ferocity, despair, and slavish fear towards parents and preceptors."

"3. Therefore prudent and pious parents, tutors and guardians, should act in this matter as follows: First, as the time for sending children to school draws near, they should endeavour to inspire them with pleasure...Their father or mother may also promise them a very beautiful dress, an elegant cap, a polished tablet, a book, and the like ; or they may occasionally shew those things which they have ready for them. They ought not, however, to give them until the proper time, but only promise that they will give them, so as to increase their desire more and more; saying to them, such words as these: " Come, my dear child, pray diligently that the time may soon come; be pious and obedient, etc."

"4. It will also be beneficial to tell them how excellent a thing it is to frequent schools and acquire learning, for such become great men,Provosts,Doctors, Preachers of the Divine word, Senators, &c.; all of them excellent men, celebrated, rich, and wise, whom the rest of mankind are necessarily bound to honour; likewise, that it is better and more becoming to attend school than to drone away in idleness at home, or run about the streets, or learn any grovelling habits, &c.; moreover, that learning is not labour, but that amusement with books and a pen, is sweeter than honey, and that of this amusement children may have a foretaste."

"5. Parents, moreover, should endeavour to incite in their children confidence and love towards their future preceptor, and this may be done in various ways; for instance, making mention of him as amiable, calling him father's friend, mother's friend, or good neighbour; and generally praising up his learning, wisdom, kindness, and benignity: that he is a distinguished man, knows many things, and yet is kind to children and loves them; and though it be true, that some are punished by him, yet that these are only such as are disobedient and wicked, and deserve to be punished by everybody ; but that he never chastises obedient children; besides which that he shews children every thing, how to write, how to say by heart, etc...the father or mother should send occasionally some little present to the schoolmaster by the child, either alone or with a servant, when the preceptor, if he is mindful of his duty, will speak kindly to the child, shewing him something he may not have seen before..."

SDG

Year of Calvinism: America's Teacher

2009-05-25T22:00:00.000-06:00

These, my dear brother, are some of my views of the calvinistic doctrines and their effects. These doctrines, in the main, I do believe to be evangelical...

Noah Webster, 1809

Yes--the man that wrote your 1828 dictionary was a Calvinist.

He was born-again by the power of the Spirit during the Second Great Awakening in 1808. The year of his conversion his two older daughters and wife attended the local Congregational church to his chagrin. They were attracted to the local revival. He disliked "enthusiasm" in religion, preferring a "rational religion" of being good to the neighbor and acknowledging a divine Being. He could not swallow the doctrines of Calvinism found in the confession of the Congregational church. He even desired to attend the Anglican church instead, yet he was torn to see his family thus divided. He rationalized his resistance to the revivals of the town,

"The impressions [religious concerns] however grew stronger till at length I could not pursue my studies without frequent interruptions. My mind was suddenly arrested...I closed my books, yielded to the influence, which could not be resisted or mistaken and was led by a spontaneous impulse to repentance, prayer and entire submission and surrender of myself to my maker and redeemer."

This account, written to his brother-in-law, explained that his life was radically changed by the sovereign power of the Spirit,

"This my dear friend, is a short but faithful narration of facts. That these impressions were not the effect of any of my own passions, nor of enthusiasm is to me evident, for I was in complete possession of all my rational powers, and that the influence was supernatural, is evident from this circumstance; it was not only independent of all volition but opposed to it. You will readily suppose that after such evidence of the direct operation of the divine spirit upon the human heart, I could no longer question or have a doubt respecting the Calvinistic and Christian doctrines of regeneration, of free grace and of the sovereignty of God. I now began to understand and relish many parts of the scriptures, which before appeared mysterious and unintelligible, or repugnant to my natural pride...in short my view of the scriptures, of religion, of the whole christian, scheme of salvation, and of God's moral government, are very much changed, and my heart yields with delight and confidence to whatever appears to be the divine will."

Such a change in his heart brought a public boldness missing today. The opening quote about Calvinism is found in the article, "Doctrines of the Gospel Explained and Defended," which was published in the Panoplist in 1809, two-hundred years ago. It highlights key doctrinal points, as summarized above, explaining in a newborn way the doctrines of special Providence (God is intimately involved in every-day life), regeneration and predestination and free-will. Webster concludes:

"I am therefore of opinion that the doctrines of divine sovereignty, the divinity of Christ, regeneration by the Holy Spirit, and free grace through Christ, are fundamental in the gospel scheme of salvation. Those who reject these doctrines appear to me to tear out the vitals of Christianity, leaving nothing but a lifeless skeleton. The cold doctrines of Arminianism almost exclude the divine agency in man's salvation...In short, they never reach the heart, and appear not to alter the life and character."

He responded to a rebuttal of this article (under the pseudonym Calvinist) but ceased anymore public debate thereafter. Being a young Christian he felt unequal to the task. Yet such an attitude did not reflect a weak man. For soon after his conversion his fatherhood and career were radically changed. He began anew his domestic fatherhood with daily family worship. And he began anew his destined role as the father of American education.

[Biographical information from Notes on the Life of Noah Webster, p.44ff.)

Malachi 4:6--Cotton Mather

2009-05-18T21:17:00.000-06:00

Another historical figure giving a different sense to Malachi 4:6 than the one propagated among some homeschooling leaders, is the great American Cotton Mather. In the introduction to the third book of his Magnalia Christi Americana (p.234), he summarizes his exegesis of that passage:

“It was mentioned as the business and blessedness of John Baptist, 'To turn the hearts of the fathers to the children.' After a deal of more ado about the sense of the passage thus translated, I contented my self with another translation, 'to turn the hearts of the fathers WITH the children;' because I find the preposition ‘epi [greek], as well as the prefix ‘bet’ [Hebrew], in Mal. iv.6, whence the passage is taken, to be rendered ‘with,’ rather than ‘to.’ The sense therefore I took to be, that John should convert both old and young. But further thought hath offered unto me a further gloss upon it: ‘to turn the hearts of the father to the children,' is to turn the children by putting the hearts of the fathers into them; to give them such hearts as were in Abraham, and others of their famous and faithful fathers.

“Reader, the book now in thy hands is to manage the design of a John Baptist, and convey the hearts of the fathers unto the children.”

God Bless You & Your New Baby Girl

2009-05-11T15:09:00.000-06:00

Your daughter is a miracle,
part of God's special plan,
A gift that he has had in mind
since the world began.

He chose the color of her eyes,
her smile, her talents too...
And as her parents, you must be
so thankful God chose you!

[a hallmark poem sent by a friend...]

Prayer of Expecting Moms--Comenius

2009-05-06T21:29:00.000-06:00

Form of Prayer for pregnant matrons.

"Omnipotent God, Creator of all things visible and invisible, of whom all the whole family in heaven and on earth is named; to Thee, most revered and beloved Father, we, Thy rational creatures, have recourse, inasmuch as Thou, with special counsel and deliberation, didst found our race, forming the body with wonderful wisdom from the dust of the earth, and inspiring the soul from Thyself, that we might be Thine image; and although Thou mightest have produced us all at the same time, even as (Thou didst) the angels, yet it seemed otherwise to Thy wisdom, so that a human race might be multiplied by male and female, in accordance with holy wedlock instituted by Thee; therefore Thou didst deign to bless them that they might increase and multiply, and fill not only the earth, but also the choirs of angels.

"O eternal God and Father! may praise and glory be to Thy name because of all thy wonderful works in us. I likewise give grateful thanks to Thy clemency that Thou hast willed that I should not only be born of this thy celebrated creature (so that I also should fill up the number of the elect), but likewise hath deigned to bless me by placing me in the matrimonial state, and given unto me the fruit of the womb. The gift is Thine, the paternal grace is Thine, O Lord, Father of spirits and of all flesh! wherefore, with humble heart, seeking counsel and aid, I fly to Thee alone, that what Thou hast formed in my womb may be guarded with Thy strength, and preserved to a happy delivery. For I know, O Lord, that man's steps are not in his own power, and no one is able (of himself) to direct his way ; since then we are weak and infirm, we ought to guard against all the snares which, by thy permission, the evil spirit lays for us, and to prevent the calamities into which we are precipitated through our own inconsiderateness. With Thee, however, wisdom is infinite; Thou renderest safe and secure from all evil whomsoever Thou wishest well, through Thine angels.

"Wherefore I also betaking myself to Thee in this my necessity, 0 Father, full of mercy, beg that Thou wouldst look upon me with the eye of Thy mercy, and preserve me safe from every dangerous accident. Be Thou a consolation to me and my beloved husband, O God of all consolation! so that we, having seen Thy blessing, may, with joyful heart, adore Thy fatherly love, and with all willingness servo Thee. I complain not of the chastisement which thou hast imposed upon our sex, that our conceptions and birth are accompanied with pain. I humbly beg this only, that Thou wouldst enable me to bear Thy chastisement, and do Thou grant a happy issue. If our prayers in this behalf be heard, and Thou dost grant to us offspring sound and perfect in its members, we promise to consecrate and return it to Thee; so that Thou may continue to be our and our offspring's most clement Lord and Father, as we, with our posterity, purpose to remain Thy faithful children.

"Hear, O most merciful Father, the prayer of Thy very humble handmaid and the desire of our hearts; for the sake of Jesus Christ, our Saviour, who, for our sakes, being made an infant, deigned to assume flesh in the womb of the blessed Virgin; now lives with Thee, and with the Holy Spirit lives and reigns, God blessed for evermore."

Amen.

[The School of Infancy, p.20, c. 1633]

Waiting

2009-05-05T15:28:00.000-06:00

No cigar to smoke.
No gum to chew.
No more nails to gnaw.

Pre-labor all weekend.
No sleep.
False start on Monday.
Now the real thing.

The REAL THING?

A baby brought by Almighty.
A precious soul to wait upon.

The Real Thing takes patience.
The Real Thing takes time.

I pace; I race.
I walk.
I trekked a trench in the hardwood floor.
My feet pounded the ground into powder.

Waiting.
Waiting.

God be praised I'm here to wait.
To learn patience. To endure for another.
As God was longsuffering with me.

To wait for our little Nora Renee.

Soli Deo Gloria