Consider the following lengthy quotation in support of Christian education:
—
There is probably no more important duty than that of the education of our children. The future success of the Kingdom of our Lord is, to a great extent, dependent upon the successful education of covenant children in the knowledge of our Lord and in a biblically consistent world and life view. The following quote from Robert Lewis Dabney is particularly pertinent in this regard:
“Seeing the parental relation is what the Scripture describes it, and seeing Satanhas perverted it since fall for the diffusion and multiplication of depravity and eternal death, the education of children for God is the most important business done on earth. It is the one business for which the earth exists. To it all politics, all war, all literature, all money-making, ought to be subordinated; and every parent especially ought to feel, every hour of the day, that, next to making his own calling and election sure, this is the end for which he is kept alive by God — this is his task on earth. On the right training of the generation now arising, turns not only the individual salvation of each member in it, not only the religious hope of the age which is approaching, but the fate of all future generations in a large degree.”
The duty of education is (from the biblical perspective) a parental duty.
According to Scripture, children are a gift from the Almighty God and thus are a sacred trust. Therefore, the Lord requires that parents provide all that their children need! Parents are required to feed, clothe, house and protect their children and prepare them for adulthood. Dr. Norman Harper states this very clearly in his book Making Disciples: The Challenge of Christian Education at the End of the Twentieth Century:
“The authority and responsibility of the training of children is delegated primarily to the parents. It was to the parent that the command was given: “…provoke not your children to wrath: but bring them up in the nurture and admonition of the Lord” (Ephesians 6:4, KJV).”
The duty of education is therefore a family responsibility. The family is the fundamental unit of society under God, and it is the duty of parents as led by the father to prepare their children to function righteously under God’s rule in all spheres of life (Genesis 1:26-28; 2:18-25; 18:19; Psalm 127:3-5; Ephesians 6:1-4).
In order for this task to be successful, education must be distinctively Christian; i.e., based upon God’s revelation of His Truth in His Word (Psalm 36:9; Exodus 20:16; John 17:17; John 14:6; John 8:32). Education is a necessary task for equipping children to glorify God in work and worship that is according to His Word. Thus, Christian education is necessary and essential for a godly use of talents (Psalm
78:1-8).
This responsibility cannot be abdicated by parents, for God holds them accountable. Parents may delegate this responsibility to surrogate parents who meet biblical qualifications while retaining the responsibility of education and the authority over their children.
The modern concept of children belonging to the state is anti-Christian. The responsibility for educating children does not belong to the state and therefore the state should not usurp this responsibility from parents. Robert Lewis Dabney comments very lucidly on whose responsibility the education of children is:
“Is the direction of the education of children either a civic or an ecclesiastical function? Is it not properly a domestic and parental function? First, we read in holy writ that God ordained the family by the union of one woman to one man, in one flesh, for life, for the declared end of “seeking a godly seed.” Does not this imply that he looks to parents, in whom the family is founded, as the responsible agents of this result? He has also in the fifth Commandment connected the child proximately, not with either presbyter or magistrate, but with the parents, which, of course, confers on them the adequate and the prior authority. This argument appears again in the very order of the historical genesis of the family and State, as well as of the visible Church. The family was first. Parents at the outset were the only social heads existing. The right rearing of children by them was in order to the right creation of the other two institutes. It thus appears that naturally the parents’ authority over their children could not have come by deputation from either State or visible Church, any more than the water in a fountain by derivation from its reservoir below.”
The state is assigned a ministry of the sword in the execution of justice against evildoers (Romans 13:1-4). The state is not assigned the duty of educating our children. It is highly questionable whether it is wise for Christian parents to send their covenant children to a school system operated by the state which is openly or otherwise hostile to the Christian faith. It is inconceivable that Abraham would have sent Isaac to the Canaanites to learn about the world God had created. Christian parents who send their covenant children to state schools to learn about God’s world (science, etc.) and God’s activities (history, etc.) should seriously consider whether it is possible to equip their children to function responsibly in this world under God according to His Truth when their children are subject to prolific falsehoods and open hostility (Psalm 1:1-3; Exodus 34:12-16), whether it is possible to send their children to public schools (which are to a great extent dominated by Humanism) and at the same time fulfill their duty to rear their children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord (Ephesians 6:1-4).
Some educators believe that covenant children must not be shaped by a non-Christian religious educational institution:
“The choice is between a Christian religious education and a non-Christian religious education. If this is true, there are no material circumstances that can justify a Christian parent in giving his child an education that is man-centered and thus dishonoring to God. Would you send your child to a Buddhist shrine to worship because it was nearer your home or because it was already paid for by the state? Of course not! Then we can say with equal certainty that we cannot send our children, in the most formative years of their lives, to be shaped religiously by a non-Christian religious educational institution.”
…..The ideal situation would be for Christian parents to have their covenant children educated in a thoroughly Christian atmosphere. Such an atmosphere would certainly include a thoroughly Christian curriculum which recognizes all truth as God’s truth and teaches nothing as true in subject matter contrary to God’s revealed word. It would also include Christian teachers who love God and seek to convey God’s truth as well as demonstrate a concern for the spiritual well-being of their students. It would as well be an atmosphere in which the Scriptures are regularly consulted and prayer is regularly offered….
—
Who wrote this? Doug Wilson — after all, it quotes Dabney, not once, but twice? Corenelius Van Til? Actually it comes from the PCA’s position paper, “Education and Parental Responsibility” from 1987. Yes, the PCA.
The report continues:
—
Churches and Presbyteries should consider how they might encourage parents in the task of providing their children with an education that is consistent with biblical Truth and that will prepare them for effective service for God’s Kingdom in all spheres of life. Churches should seriously consider providing thoroughly Christian and biblical schools for their covenant children as well as many other children in their respective communities. If necessary, the church should assist in providing the means by which a parent can educate his child, whether it be through establishment of a Christian school or financial assistance to the parent to provide for a Christian or private education elsewhere.
Undoubtedly, many problems with respect to adolescent rebellion in covenant children can be partially attributed to the schizophrenic world view that is absorbed where church and family embrace a wholly different world view than that which is promoted in the public educational system.
The need for quality education in our modern, technological society is paramount for all of our young people. The public schools have failed to truly educate our children in two fundamental areas. First, they have often distorted reality by insisting on a radically secular and Humanistic world view. Second, they have often failed to provide the basic skills needed for a young person to become a productive member of society.
This is nowhere more evident than in our major cities where an enormous drop-out rate of often above one-third demonstrates the ineffectiveness of many school systems. This substandard education points toward the creation of a permanent underclass of functionally illiterate adults who will emerge alienated from a society which has not provided them with equal access to opportunities for the future. Such a felt need provides the PCA with a unique opportunity in its strategic concern to evangelize the great metropolitan centers of North America. We have the opportunity open before us to truly penetrate the urban culture by providing quality Christian education at reasonable cost. Our suburban and exurban churches can establish a true bridge of friendship and understanding by becoming partners to the urban church, providing personal and financial resources for the nurturing of all of our children.
—
The entire position paper is worth reading: https://pcahistory.org/pca/digest/studies/2-128.pdf
It’s unfortunate so much of the PCA has not followed its own position paper on this issue.
TPC Pastor's Page 