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?”

Quotes on Social Engineering Achieved via Television, Government Schools, and Pharmacology

Man’s conquest of [human nature] means simply the rule of the Conditioners over the conditioned human material, the world of post-humanity which, some knowingly and some unknowingly, nearly all men in all nations are at present labouring to produce.

-C.S. Lewis, The Abolition of Man, (London: HarperCollins, 1999) p. 46

…[T]he man-moulders of the new age will be armed with the powers of an omnicompetent state and an irresistible scientific technique: we shall get at last a race of conditioners who really can cut out all posterity in what shape they please.

Ibid, -Lewis, p. 37

If the system succeeds in imposing sufficient control over human behavior to assure its own survival, a new watershed in human history will have been passed. …industrial-technological society will be able to pass those limits [of human nature] by modifying human beings, whether by psychological methods or biological methods or both. In the future, social systems will not be adjusted to suit the needs of human beings. Instead, human beings will be adjusted to suit the needs of the system.

-Theodore Kaczynski, Industrial Society & Its Future, (Filiquarian Publishing) pp. 68-69

…[N]ew technology tends to change society in such a way that it becomes difficult or impossible for an individual to function without using that technology… [S]uppose a… treatment is discovered that, without undesirable side-effects, will greatly reduce the psychological stress from which so many people suffer in our society. If large numbers of people choose to undergo the treatment, then the general level of stress in society will be reduced, so that it will be possible for the system to increase the stress-producing pressures… Something like this seems to have happened already… [M]ass entertainment is a means of escape and stress-reduction on which most of us have become dependent.

-Kaczynski, p. 71

Our society tends to regard as a “sickness” any mode of thought or behavior that is inconvenient for the system, and this is plausible because when an individual doesn’t fit into the system it causes pain to the individual as well as problems for the system. Thus the manipulation of an individual to adjust him to the system is seen as a “cure” for a “sickness” and therefore as good.

-Kaczynski, pp. 70-71

Imagine a society that subjects people to conditions that make them terribly unhappy, then gives them the drugs to take away their unhappiness. Science fiction?… Instead of removing the conditions that make people depressed, modern society gives them antidepressant drugs. In effect, antidepressants are a means of modifying an individual’s internal state in such a way as to enable him to tolerate social conditions that he would otherwise find intolerable.

-Kaczynski, p. 65

Now let us consider another kind of drug — still undiscovered, but probably just around the corner — a drug capable of making people happy in situations where they would normally feel miserable. Such a drug would be a blessing, but a blessing fraught with grave political dangers. By making a harmless chemical euphoric freely available, a dictator could reconcile an entire population to a state of affairs to which self-respecting human beings ought not to be reconciled…

-Aldous Huxley, cited in Jim Keith, Mind Control, World Control, (Kempton: Adventures Unlimited Press, 1997) p. 95

There will be in the next generation or so, a pharmacological method of making people love their servitude, and producing… a kind of painless concentration camp for entire societies.

-Huxley, cited in Keith, p. 95

The twenty-first century… will be the era of the World Controllers… The older dictators fell because they could never supply their subjects with enough bread, enough circuses, enough miracles and mysteries. Under a scientific dictatorship education will really work — with the result that most men and women will grow up to love their servitude and will never dream of revolution. There seems to be no good reason why a thoroughly scientific dictatorship should ever be overthrown.

-Huxley, cited in Keith, pp. 95-96

[Education] is becoming a scientific technique for controlling the child’s development.

-Kaczynski, p. 66

What if there is no “problem” with our schools? What if they are the way they are, so expensively flying in the face of common sense and long experience in how children learn things, not because they are doing something wrong but because they are doing something right?… Could it be that our schools are designed to make sure not one of them ever really grows up?

[In 1934,] Ellwood P. Cubberley detailed and praised the way the strategy of successive school enlargements had extended childhood by two to six years… Cubberley… had written the following in the 1922 edition of his book Public School Administration: “Our schools are … factories in which the raw products (children) are to be shaped and fashioned…. And it is the business of the school to build its pupils according to the specifications laid down.”

[Schools are] laboratories of experimentation on young minds, drill centers for the habits and attitudes that corporate society demands.

We have become a nation of children, happy to surrender our judgments and our wills to political exhortations and commercial blandishments that would insult actual adults.

-John Taylor Gatto, “Against School”

If we understand the mechanism and motives of the group mind, is it not possible to control and regiment the masses according to our will without their knowing about it?

-Edward Bernays, Sigmund Freud’s nephew and the godfather of consumerism

Two institutions at present control our children’s lives – television and schooling, in that order. Both of these reduce the real world of wisdom, fortitude, temperance, and justice to a never-ending, non-stopping abstraction. In centuries past the time of a child and adolescent would be occupied in real work, real charity, real adventures, and the realistic search for mentors who might teach what you really wanted to learn. A great deal of time was spent in community pursuits, practicing affection, meeting and studying every level of the community, learning how to make a home, and dozens of other tasks necessary to become a whole man or woman.

-John Taylor Gatto, “Why Schools Don’t Educate”

Bertrand Russell on Modern Education

“Education should aim at destroying free will so that after pupils are thus schooled they will be incapable throughout the rest of their lives of thinking or acting otherwise than as their school masters would have wished…. Influences of the home are obstructive; and in order to condition students, verses set to music and repeatedly intoned are very effective…. It is for a future scientist to make these maxims precise and discover exactly how much it cost per head to make children believe that snow is black. When the technique is perfected, every government that has been in charge will be able to control its subject securely without the need of armies or policemen.”

Bertrand Russell

The Advantages Of Public Schooling

http://christwire.org/2011/08/is-homeschool-best-for-your-christian-child/

Any experienced non Christian parent is worried about what the children of Christians may be exposed to while attending home school. They often ask themselves, “Isn’t it time that we forced those children into the enlightened classrooms of our public schools.” Don’t those people know how they are ruining their children and that their children are better raised by strangers then by fundamentalist parents? Recently someone asked me to list the advantages my children have over a child educated by homeschooling Christian Nazis.

Here is my list,

1.) My child learns how to work in groups and how to get along with others. The public schools have taught them to rely on the group and to find their identity in the group. Why, just last week, little Lou-Ann came home and said that her peers at the school had decided to do something different as a group and together had decided to have a “Dress as a chaste and modest lady” day. I thought that was so cute and indicative of how Lou-Ann and her peers have learned how to work in groups. No more of the independent thinking that gets in the way of group progress.

2.) My girls learn how to put prophylactics on cucumbers and bananas. I find safety and cleanliness in food preparation to be important to me and so I think it is wonderful how the public school takes up home economics in the Kitchen and is proactive in protecting vegetables and fruit from Sudden Tainting Disease (STD’s).

3.) I love the creative new vocabulary my children learn in school. My boys now affectionately refer to me as (sniff sniff) Dad’s “Ho,” (doubtless short for my given name “Hortensia”) and the girls have taken to affectionately calling their Father, “pimp” (I think it is short for “paterfamilias”). Even I have picked up some of the kids language as when I am in a hurry filling out forms I simply put in “Ho,” when asked my name.

4.) I have come to appreciate the body art that my children learn at school. I’ve learned from my children the improvement upon the body beautiful that a hole in the ear can be or Chinese lettering across the chest. And my darling girl put the cutest little serpent on her right calf.

5.) The teachers have become special to me and my children, and boy do they love the kids. Why just last week I saw the History teacher giving my 13 year old Lisa an affectionate hug goodbye. He even kissed her but as he is from France, I know that was just a cultural demonstration. Also the 22 year old new lady English teacher has a very close relation to my 18 year old son. Just last week my husband and I came home from a business trip and she was at the house conjugating verbs with my son. Such dedication. Before that they were studying his reading assignment in D. H. Lawerence’s “Lady Chatterly’s Lover.”

6.) My children have learned that other cultures are just as valuable as their great great grandparents culture. They have learned the beauty of gangsta rap is just as full of rapture as the beauty of Bach or Mozart. They have learned that pants worn around the knees, thus revealing colorful boxer shorts, is just as stylish as a Tuxedo. They have learned that burning widows with their dead husbands is just as acceptable as letting widows stay alive after their husband’s death. They have learned that the definition of “theft,” or “loose” is culturally variant. They have learned that since one can find sodomy in animal cultures therefore we know that sodomy among humans is a beautiful thing. Funny thing is that they’ve especially come to see the beauty in Jewish culture. Viva la culture.

7.) The schools have made my children very smart. They have learned to read road signs if I slow down enough and they have learned how give change back for a quarter. They have learned that the world is melting. They have learned that Abraham Lincoln, Woodrow Wilson, and Franklin Roosevelt were our greatest Presidents. They have learned how the white man has oppressed the world. They have learned about six million Jews being oven baked (Why, they even watched Schindler’s List in class), and they learned about how gays and lesbians, like the Jews, have been oppressed. They have learned how Christians have often been behind world wide oppression.

8.) The schools have excelled at teaching the children civics. They have learned that the Constitution is a document of negative powers, and being taught to be positive people they have learned that being negative is a bad thing and so the Constitution needs to be changed. They have learned that the State always has the people’s best interest at heart and they have learned that people have rights (health care, homes, food, peace, safety from guns, etc.) for which a good government must provide.

9.) They have learned how to support one another in grief. The school has taught them well to be sympathetic in the midst of the multiple suicides of their peers. Down this line, the school has taught them not to be judgmental and that they should support their peers who are sexually active with dead people, with farm animals and with dead farm animals. My children are the most non judgmental people I know. They will support anything.

10.) The school doesn’t get into all that “god stuff.” We pray at every meal (God is great, God is good, thank you God for this meal) and we don’t need the schools worrying about God. Even our preacher agrees with us on this score.

We are very thankful for our children attending public schools and we earnestly desire that home schooled children could experience all of this.

Dewey, Hegel, and Modern Education

“The school is primarily a social institution. Education being a social process, the school is simply that form of community life in which all those agencies are concentrated that will be most effective in bringing the child to share in the inherited resources of the race, and to use his own powers for social ends. Education, therefore, is a process of living and not a preparation for future living.”

John Dewey
My Pedagogic Creed

1.) In order to interpret this correctly the reader must understand that Dewey was a Hegelian in his philosophy. Hegelians believed that the State is the idea of universal Spirit in the external manifestation of human Will and that the universal Spirit was God becoming. Hegel said,

“The State is the absolute reality and the individual himself has objective existence, truth and morality only in his capacity as a member of the State.”

Simply put, for Hegel and later his disciple Dewey, the State was God. This is important to understand for Dewey’s education is not child centered but state centered. We see this in the quote above with the repeated references to the word “social” serving as the adjective for the subsequent noun. For Dewey, the Hegelian, “social institution”, “social processes” and “social ends” means “state institution,” “state processes,” and “state ends.”

This is where the gulf of misunderstanding between modern parents and the educational system begins. Parents believe a child goes to school to learn skills to use in the adult world, but Dewey states specifically that education is “not a preparation for future living.” The Dewey educational system does not accept the role of developing a child’s talents but, contrarily, only to prepare the child to function as a unit in an organic whole — in blunt terms a cog in a wheel of an organic society. Whereas many Americans have moral values rooted in the individual, the value of the school system are rooted in the Hegelian concept of the State as the absolute.

That Dewey is channeling Hegel can be seen by yet another quote from Dewey,

“Education consists either in the ability to use one’s powers in a social direction or else in ability to share in the experience of others and thus widen the individual conscienceness to that of the race”

In each case the individual is lost in either the left wing Hegelian collective of the State (i.e. — social direction) or the right wing Hegelian collective of the race.

The point to be taken in all this is that modern education is geared towards training the child to be a cog in the machinery of a State that has become so overarching that the society, and every individual in it, is identified with the State. When children go to school they are being trained against Christianity which opposes the State as God.

2.) When Dewey says that “education is a process of living” he means to communicate that education is to the end of molding little people into the stream of societal consciousness. Students, in modern education, are not trained to think critically, or prepare for future living, they are trained in how to be good citizens. In contemporary education public schooling has the teleology of creating Borg. It does not have the teleology of training independent thinkers.