Machen On Education As The Most Important Part Of Human Life

“In the political and social discussions of the day, God’s law has ceased to be regarded as a factor that deserves to be reckoned with at all…[But] of one thing we can be sure—a nation that tramples thus upon the law of God…is headed for destruction” (140,141).

A “very ancient principle in the field of education…has been one of the chief enemies of human liberty for several thousand years—the principle, namely, that education is an affair essentially of the State, that education must be standardized for the welfare of the whole people and put under the control of government, that personal idiosyncrasies should be avoided…It is a very ancient thing—this notion that the children belong to the State, that their education must be provided for by the State in a way that makes for the State’s welfare. But that principle, I think you will find if you examine human history, is inimical at every step to liberty” (87,88).

“I hope therefore…that we may return to the principle of freedom for individual parents in the education of their children in accordance with their conscience…But let us be perfectly clear about one thing—if liberty is not maintained with regard to education, there is no use trying to maintain it in any other sphere. If you give the bureaucrats the children, you might just as well give them everything else…No, we do not want a Federal Department of Education and we do not want, in any form whatever, the slavery that a Federal Department of Education would bring” (98).

“Uniformity in education under central control it seems to me is the worst fate into which any country can fall…parents have a right to educate children as they please…education is essentially not a matter of the State at all” (100-102).

We “are dealing with the most important part of human life when we are dealing with education” (114).

J. Gresham Machen (1881-1937)
Education, Christianity, and the State
Edited by John Robbins, The Trinity Foundation, Jefferson, Maryland, 1987.

Note, with the very last quote in this batch that Machen has said the Education is the most important part of human life. This is not a statement that is inconsistent with Christianity as the R2K boys might say. The R2K boys, given their beliefs about the dichotomous nature of reality, should be appalled that any Christian Theologian would say that, we “are dealing with the most important part of human life when we are dealing with education,” since for the R2K boys education belongs not to the grace realm (which would be their “most important”) but to the common realm.

This reveals, again, that Machen was R2K the way that Jeffery Dahmer was a chef.

Machen could say what he said because he realized, unlike the R2K boys, that education is primarily a religious enterprise. Machen understood that Education was definitely not a so called “common realm” concern. The education of children is driven by religious considerations and presuppositions and any Christian who says otherwise, may well be saved, but nevertheless remains a damn fool who shouldn’t be listened to on much of anything no matter how many degrees he has behind his names.

Also, we should zoom in on Machen’s statement here about the dangers of Christians giving over their children to the State for schooling. Machen realized that should we give up our children to the State then it will do little good to hold on to our guns, income, or anything else vis-a-vis the State. If the pagan State is the tutor and the “en locus parentis” of our children for upwards to 8 hours a day then Christians will not normatively keep our children for our undoubted catholic Christian faith. If you give your children to the State to be saturated, soaked, and marinated in a pagan worldview, via the government schools you can not expect the children to become anything but reflections of the religious pagan education in which they were saturated, soaked, and marinated. This is especially so when one adds to the the prison time government school influence upon God’s covenant seed the impact of a pagan culture.

When we baptize our children part of what parents hear in the Baptismal charge is that Baptism is not to be used as a superstition. Yet, when we baptize our children and then send them to Government schools what else can the practice of Baptism have been by the parents, but a superstition that was supposed to be a talisman to ward off the evil that comes from government school education?

Dr. J. Gresham Machen was a prophet who being now dead, still speaks.

Machen … The Non R2K Theologian Offering On Christian Education

(As) “a matter of fact the religion of the Christian man embraces the whole of his life…everything that he does he should now do as a child of God…[The] bearing 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…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” (81,82).

“Another line of attack upon liberty has appeared in the advocacy of a Federal department of education. Repeatedly this vicious proposal has been introduced in Congress.”

“Uniformity in education, it seems to me, is one of the worst calamities into which any people can fall…Uniformity of education under one central governmental department would be a very great calamity indeed.”

J. Gresham Machen (1881-1937)
Education, Christianity, and the State — 81, 82, 71, 73,74
Edited by John Robbins, The Trinity Foundation, Jefferson, Maryland, 1987.

Of course when a “Christianity” is embraced that insists that Christians should not take every thought captive to make them obedient to Christ, because many thoughts exist in a common square where it is not possible to take those thoughts as captive to Christ since they are “common thoughts,” then the consequence every time is, what Machen calls, a “neglecting of the children of the covenant by abandoning them to a cold and unbelieving secularism.” R2K, by its very definition, is a neglecting of all God’s people of the covenant by abandoning them to a cold and unbelieving secularism. In point of fact, R2K finds a cold and unbelieving secularism to be what is optimal for the common realm because all that is possible for the common realm is secularism.

Listen to Machen and abandon R2K.

Machen Thumps For Christian Schools — Contra R2K

“A monopolistic system of education controlled by the State is far more efficient in crushing our liberty than the cruder weapons of fire and sword. Against this monopoly of education by the State the Christian school brings a salutary protest; it contends for the right of parents to bring up their children in accordance with the dictates of their consciences and not in the manner prescribed by the State.”

J. Gresham Machen (1881-1937)
Education, Christianity, and the State — pg. 68
Edited by John Robbins, The Trinity Foundation, Jefferson, Maryland, 1987.

What Can Educators do to End White Supremacy in the Classroom?

Interesting article Titled,

What Can Educators do to End White Supremacy in the Classroom?

You can find it here,

Here are some choice quotes from one Kim Radersma who has written one article on a different subject for at least one denominational magazine. Radersma was quoted as saying,

“Teaching is a political act, and you can’t choose to be neutral. You are either a pawn used to perpetuate a system of oppression or you are fighting against it,” Radersma said during the session. “And if you think you are neutral, you are a pawn.”

She said educators need to challenge the system, otherwise they are giving in to white supremacy. Radersma also argued the first step is realizing that all white people are carrying the signs of oppression.

“Being a white person who does anti-racist work is like being an alcoholic. I will never be recovered by my alcoholism, to use the metaphor,” Radersma said. “I have to everyday wake up and acknowledge that I am so deeply imbedded with racist thoughts and notions and actions in my body that I have to choose everyday to do anti-racist work and think in an anti-racist way.”

She argued that until white people admit they have a problem, they will not be able to fight against white privilege.

“We’ve been raised to be good. ‘I’m a good white person,’ and yet to realize I carry within me these dark, horrible thoughts and perceptions is hard to admit. And yet like the alcoholic, what’s the first step? Admitting you have a problem,” she told the session attendees.

Multiple educators attended the breakout session of about 50 people and seemed very interested in how to bring the ideals of social justice and white privilege into the classroom. One attendee, a teacher and the diversity director at his school, spoke about the activities he is implementing and said it is important for teachers and administrators to discuss social justice with their students. Radersma echoed his sentiment.

“If you don’t want to work for equity, get the fuck out of education,” Radersma said. “If you are not serious about being an agent of change that helps stifle the oppressive systems, go find another job. Because you are a political figure.”

Elsewhere the always demur Ms. Radersma offered,

“Who’s at fault? My white body is at fault. My racial identity, as a white person who believes that I am somehow better or more deserving, is the problem. The white supremacy, the structure is the problem.”

Another topic of discussion was how white people’s actions, like donating to charity or helping a family in need, are inherently racist. Here the gentle and soft-spoken Radersma offered,

“It’s that savior mentality, like ‘save them, because they are not like us,’ and that normalization of whiteness. Whiteness is best and those poor others aren’t as good as us,” she said. “So, we need to think of them and give them our sympathy and our charity and our generosity, which is so demeaning to the people on the receiving end. It’s so demoralizing and disempowering to be receiving it.”

1.) On the first quote I would prefer to say that Teaching is a Theological act though certainly all teaching has political implications. She really is on the right track here. There is no neutrality in teaching.

2.) On Radersma comment that “all White people are carrying the signs of oppression,” as combined with how being White is like being alcoholic is perfect. If white people don’t admit they have a problem as oppressor then it proves they have a problem. Meanwhile, if white people do admit they have a problem as oppressor it proves they have a problem. How convenient.

3.) I love it when a lady teacher swears. It is so feminine.

4.) Not only is being white itself racist but being white and helping people is even more racist. So, if you don’t help people, I’m pretty sure that is racist. However, if you do help people, that proves you’re racist also.

5.) Obviously Ms. Radersma has fallen prey to the self hatred and false guilt mongering that is so typical among whites who have fallen victim to Cultural Marxism.

6.) Keep in mind that 50 teachers attended Ms. Radersma session. How many of them will drink the kool-aid and take this poison back to their classrooms?

Why We Have The Ministers We Have

“If you tell young men that entry into the ministry is based on passing written exams in institutions of higher education, they will spend most of their time and effort mastering the techniques necessary for passing the exams. The churches must select candidates from a limited supply of survivors. Problem: there is no evidence showing that passing written exams prepares men to pastor churches. There is considerable evidence based on actual Church growth rates that these skills are inversely related: the greater the skill in passing formal exams, the less the skill in pastoring. Additionally, there is a positive correlation between the ability to pass written exams and political liberalism. As Ladd and Ferree concluded in 1982, based on a detailed survey of the opinions of 1,112 members of American seminary faculties, “Those who teach in schools of religion and theology resemble fairly closely a larger community of academic humanists of which they are a part.” Of those responding, 50 percent or more described themselves as politically liberal. The Episcopalians were the highest: 78 percent. Then came Methodists (69 percent) and Presbyterians (63 percent). The only faculties below 50 percent were Southern Baptists (32 percent), other Baptists (17 percent), and Pentecostals (7 percent). Those students who seek access to a seminary education must first prove themselves skilled at passing collegiate exams designed and imposed by politically correct liberals, atheists, feminists, and New Age mystics on the college campus…. The Church’s preliminary screening process is placed in the hands of the Church’s mortal enemies. This has been going on for eight centuries. You get what you pay for, and hierarchical churches pay ministerial candidates for passing academic exams. The operational rule is: “Those who baptize infants have been academically certified by liberals.” … The weak point in churches that baptize infants is their intellectual pride.”

Gary North
Crossed Fingers — pp. 766-767

A few more observations,

1.) Besides the observations offered by Dr. North above we have to contend that Educational programming is liberal by its very dynamic. What higher education is really a model of is bureaucracy and bureaucracy is inherently liberal since it is committed to top town authority and working within the system. When that system is functioning as Humanist then the bureaucracy’s job is in support of the beast. In bureaucratic systems students learn never to challenge the system, never to question authority, and never to work outside the bureaucratically assigned boundaries. That which educational bureaucracies overwhelmingly produce is men and women who look like the liberal bureaucracy where they attended. Bureaucracy always reproduces itself.

2.) Even thinking about the whole “college experience” we conclude that it is Liberal. We take children out of the context of that which is familiar (Family life) and place them in the context of that which is strange and unnatural away from family. Why do we do that? Is it because we want to get the children away from non liberal influences so that they can be properly propagandized with the Liberal Humanist agenda? Further, in the big University settings we pack and stack them in co-ed Bacchanalian centers called dormitories so that those young adults who are coming from more conservative homes can be compromised with is licentiate humanist ethic and morality.

3.) Of course the implication of all this is that at a very fundamental level the guy you’re listening to on Sunday Morning is likely Liberal. Oh, naturally, most ministers are not going to lead with their chin on the matter, and it may only come up in putatively conservative churches in very subtle ways. But if Dr. North is correct in the above quote then your minister is likely Humanist and the reason you don’t see that is because you are also.

This also applies to the Seminary teacher as well. The reason our ministers are humanist / liberal, whether of the R2K type, the FV type or the Cultural Marxist, or the Statist type is because they learned it from their Seminary professors.

Naturally, like all things, exceptions exist. But they are far more rare then most people believe. A few students happen upon a College or Master’s program where some key Professor managed to slip through the Humanist net himself and so is able to mentor and teach a young student in a Biblical direction. Alternately, God still awakens men and women to see through the parlor game that Humanist Higher Education is.

The Christian Church member needs to realize that higher education is not their friend and that because ministers are produced by the humanist educational system that most Churches are not their friends either.

Could this be one reason why we were told to “not conform to this world but be transformed by the renewing of your mind?”