Bret, at the risk of unleashing another torrent of words, I don’t see any in-between in your thinking (except when it comes to your remaining in a denomination — the CRC — where less in-between thinking would be useful). Everything (minus the CRC) is either-or.

You mean kind of like the idea of he who does not gather with me scatters? You mean kind of like he who is not with me is against me?

You surely are right Darryl. I do not believe that there is such a thing as neutrality.

Don’t worry about the torrent of words. On this subject I have a vast reservoir.

And bless your Ph.D. theological heart, you keep right on with your homey jabs implying I am a hypocrite by being in the CRC. How many different times at different forums have you done that now?

You seem to be saying that the United States is as hostile to true religion as Saddam Hussein’s Iraq. How can you expect any Christian who would rather live in the United States than Iraq to take yourself seriously?

Oh fiddlesticks Darryl! While there is no doubt no such thing as neutrality, hostility certainly can come in varying degrees. Now, I surely agree that no one should take me seriously if I really were saying, the words you are trying to put in my mouth, that these United States are as bad as Iraq, but as I never said that, people are free to take me seriously.

Now, how people can take you seriously after advocating a neutral realm where theology does not reign leaves me quite flummoxed.

Also, you keep insisting that you separate church and state, but since the state administers justice and grace, and does so on the basis of administering God’s word, there does seem to be at least a measure of redundancy between church and state.

I don’t know where you get some things you keep repeating. I keep correcting and you keep repeating what I’ve corrected you on.

Ah well, that’s part of the fun of it all isn’t it?

I tell you what. You quit with your downpour of misrepresentations and I’ll quit with my torrent of words.

Zrim,

One of the interesting aspects to the prevailing notions of parochial education, as seen in this discussion, is the idea that children and adults are somehow in different categories with regard to their respective spiritual states. Grounded in the understanding that they are in impressionable developmental stages it is not further more carefully considered that a distinction must be made between creational and spiritual development. Rather, the differences are collapsed and it is assumed that there is a direct correspondence between creational and spiritual status. The upshot is that children must be hedged in while adults are free to roam in and out of sacred and secular venues with nary a worry.

First, there is no such thing by secular, if by secular you mean something that isn’t dependent upon and reflective of some faith system or religion. Adults are free to roam in and out of venues that are informed and controlled by various faiths.

Second, I would suggest that the way you make the distinction between creational and spiritual development is gnostic. You are suggesting that children can be put in a climate where they are taught to think in an adversarial way to Biblical Christianity and yet they will not be affected in their spiritual development. This makes me think that the only way I will understand your backward perspective is if I spend some time standing on my head.

The idea that what you are calling creational development is isolated and separated from spiritual development is just one more example of the constant dualism’s that we find in the R2kt virus system. Because there is a dualism between creational and spiritual development it is possible to saturate your children in a creational pagan school setting without there be any effect on your children’s spiritual developoment. Dualism. Gnosticism.

But according to this logic, the older convert, say in high school, college or beyond, should drop out of his/her secular educational environs until he/she is declared “satisfactorily grounded in the faith” (whatever that might entail).

Actually, if they are not grounded in the faith that might not be a bad idea unless they have the capacity to learn what is not true and what is true at the same time. I have personally known some people who became converted in post-graduate studies and were able to do that.

But nobody ever actually seems to demand this of older converts; they only demand it of physically younger believers. Not only that, but this seems to suggest that by virtue of an older age alone sinners are somehow less vulnerable to the effects and influences of sin.

You cite that nobody demands this of older converts and yet you frequently observe what a mess the current Church is. Could there be a correspondence between those two statements?

So, I think this observation of yours, bounces off of somebody who thinks it would be a good idea for older converts to somehow get grounded in their faith as quickly as possible. Another thing that needs to be said here is that given the way that God designs life, our foundation of truth is to be laid when we are young. If we don’t get it when we are young, the nature of life makes it difficult to get it later.

Evidently, the ages of 18 and/or 21 must be the point at which this vulnerability is significantly lessened. Does that really make sense, especially when plenty of fully grown and schooled-up believers clearly can get so much wrong while younger ones can be observed quietly remaining faithful? But I just can’t bring myself to admit that my physical age hedges me in…isn’t that Jesus’ job? I know it drawls howls around here to suggest that catechesis with dad every night buries the influences of either sacred or secular educators every day, but something tells me that at root in much of this child/adult divide is more a modern idea that youth are to be handled with kid gloves because they are so very different. This over against a Christian notion that sin is an equal opportunity affliction and cares very little for creational walls built to keep it out and righteousness in.

Your quip about Jesus’ job indicates that you seem to think that Jesus works apart from means. Sure it is Jesus’ job and the way he often does his job his by parents being faithful to the vows they made when they brought their children to Baptism.

Second, I would say that most home schoolers don’t suddenly set their children free at 18 or 21 the way you are suggesting. Home school parents practice what might be called incremental exposure. Home school parents put their children in situations that are appropriate to their age all along the way. They then debrief and train. In such a way when the children get to 18 or 21 the children have been trained. Even then though, when they attend the pagan universities there will be phone calls home asking parents about what they learned in this or that class. Indeed, with my oldest daughter I had to attend a class to politely inform the professor he was getting the puritans wrong in some pretty significant ways. He received my correction. Said he would look into my points and later came back to my daughter and told her, “your father was right.” So, Zrim, the training doesn’t stop at 18 or 21 and it doesn’t even stop while they are in school.

You really are constructing straw men.

Darryl writes,

Bret,

Believe it or not, I understand that Geneva was different from Philadelphia. Calvin ministered in the shadow of Constantine. All of the creeds from Reformed churches in the 16th century advocate a state church. I think they were mistaken, and I can find teachings in Calvin about the spiritual nature of Christ’s kingdom (not to mention Ursinus) which imply that the church should minister the keys of the kingdom (not the state), and that this ministry is spiritual and moral, not physical or political. But I do honestly get that Geneva had a state church. (I wish the critics of state schools would also see that Geneva had a state school.)

Darry,

There is no shadow of Constantine, if by that you mean, that Constantine can be avoided. All governmental arrangements are Theocracies — whether in a defacto or dejure sense. You seem to keep running right by that.

Second, no theonomist advocates that ministers run the civil realm. You seem to keep implying this and it really is horse hockey. Also, no theonomist denies the spiritual nature of Christ’s Kingdom, if by that you mean that Kingdom is ruled by Word and Sacrament. Still, all because the Kingdom is ruled by Word and Sacrament that doesn’t mean that that spiritual and moral authority doesn’t incarnate itself in a physical and political fashion.

I agree that Geneva had a State School. I don’t think that was, or is, the optimum arrangement since I believe education should belong to the family sphere.

Darryl,

So if you want to stand full-stop behind the 16th c. political/ecclesiastical arrangements, and don’t want to disavow the idea of killing professing believers in Christ’s name, how can you conceivably live with the current political arrangements and subscribe to those creeds?

By professing that the current governmental arrangement, due to its various wicked policies (Roe vs. Wade, Lawrence vs. Texas, Theft on an obscene scale, etc.) no longer has legitimacy. We live under an illegal regimen. We obey because we know that the State can beat us up. We wait for God’s good pleasure to raise up lesser magistrates to petition on our behalf, and failing that, to lead us against wickedness. Until that happens we bear God’s just judgments against us.

Darryl,

Don’t you have to cross your fingers on the civil magistrate? Even the Covenanters in the U.S. had to learn how to participate in the political process without an affirmation of Christ as Lord in the constitution.

In dealing with the current civil magistrate we must be wise as serpents but harmless as doves.

Darry,

So isn’t there something binding on you to take up arms and overthow the current government?

Yes, what is binding on me is that we are currently living under God’s just judgment against us, as exhibited in His punishing us with wicked magistrates. What releases me from that binding is God raising up lesser magistrates to oppose the wicked magistrates. Much like Americans had their magistrates lead them in the American war for Independence and much like Southerners had their magistrates lead them against the wicked Federal magistrates.

Darryl,

I guess I’ll have to deal with what may come if you succeed in grabbing power. But for now it does seem a lot easier to beat up on me when you’re real problem is with a state that has established a church that is anti-God. HOW CAN YOU LIVE WITH YOURSELF!!???!!!

By reminding myself of God’s severe mercy, great providence, that His judgments are altogether just, and that He will turn to my good whatever adversity he sends me in this sad world.

Oh, and by keeping my powder dry for the time that God raises up a righteous magistrate.

Darryl,

I also understand that the government is not fair and balanced, and that neutrality with respect to the God of the universe is impossible for every person. I also understand the problems of public schools and am quite comfortable with parents deciding to home school or send to private schools. What I am troubled by is a good point being used to make up reality. We do not have an established “church” as in something where our citizenship is bound up with worshiping a false god.

That is only because you’re looking in the wrong places. You expect the false God to come up and greet you by saying, “Hi, I am the false God and this is how my worshipers here are worshiping me.” People with eyes wide open clearly see that the God here is Demos (autonomy — The people have become as god) and the established Church is the government schools and while a few citizens fall through the cracks, Demos realizes that if he gets the majority the rest will be insignificant as it comes to control.

Darryl,

Thankfully, we are still able to practice our religion freely in this country. And thankfully, the government does not tell my communion how to conduct its worship. So again its fine if you want to analyze philosophical the problems that attend liberal democracy in the United States. Take a number because the line is getting longer. But that analysis does not give a right to make irresponsible statements either about churches that are really schools, worship that is simply a property tax bill, or government bias that actually protects the way most of us worship both publicly and privately.

You can practice your religion freely? Well, I suppose you can, if your religion is one where it is wrong to condemn wickedness in the high places of the civil realm. Those of us who believe that freedom of religion means that should be allowed to speak prophetically against wickedness have been threatened by the State with various laws prohibiting such religion. It is completely reasonable to note that Schools are Churches. Public teachers are catechizers. Curriculum is catechism. Political correctness taught is the new prayer book. The long day in school is equivalent to the ancient Churches matins, vespers, and lauds. The School has its high holy Days (Martin Luther King B. Day, winter break, spring break, etc.) which is equated with the feast days of old. It’s all there Darryl, you just have to know where to look.

Darryl,

I am an anti-federalist and I think the U.S. went off the rails in 1789. So I have my alarms. But can’t we get a grip on the differences between Geneva in 1560 and Philadelphia in 2008, and can’t we see that somethings are better and some are worse. If we can’t, then how can we tell the difference between real persecution and not having a seat at the table? Maybe I’m a coward (there’s an opening for you, Bret), but I like life.

I like life also Darryl. And obviously you’re very brave in defense of cowardice. I commend you for that. I guess I more inclined to agree with Knox’s estimation of Geneva that, it was “the most perfect school of Christ that ever was in the earth since the days of the Apostles,” then I agree with your apparently high estimation of Philadelphia 2008.

I don’t want a seat at the table Darryl. Since Christ is Lord of the table, I want the table. I agree that we are not suffering real persecution now. But real persecution doesn’t come apart from a process building to that end. I’d like to strangle the baby of persecution in the cradle.

I wish you could get a grip on the whole idea of inevitable categories.

Dr. Darryl Hart opines,

So the state, as you have it, ministers justice and grace and does so only on the basis of God’s word. That sounds like a lot of ministry of the word going on. Maybe you mistyped. Been known to happen.

Obviously, as you no doubt already know, it was indeed a typo. My you are full of sarcasm aren’t you?

This is really simple Darryl. Follow closely.

The ministry of justice according to God’s word is common grace to those to whom it is ministered. The ministry of word and sacrament is special grace to God’s people. See, that was easy. We managed to keep a distinction while at the same time seeing that God is directly sovereign over both.

Please don’t try this at home. This is only safe with the experts.

Dr. Darryl Hart,

Also, if I understand you correctly, there is a defacto state church now, and defacto state administering justice according to God’s word. Or is it the case that something really is different between Geneva in 1560 and Lansing, Mich. in 2008. I know I am dangerously stupid, but your lessons sure are hard to follow. Maybe that’s because neither the state nor the church administer logic.

Yes there is a defacto state Church now. It is the State Church of humanism as promulgated in the State Schools. The defacto justice that the state is administering is the justice of the God Demos according to Demos’ positivist law.

See, not hard to follow Darryl. Why, it’s so simple that even you can play along.

I’ll pass on teaching logic to you. Some things are to difficult … even for the mighty.

Zrim,

So let me get this straight: The brand of compulsory education has a direct effect on the spiritual condition of people.

So, let me get this straight. Sending your children to schools that teach from a Humanist, or Muslim, or Satanist belief system doesn’t have a direct effect on the spiritual condition of people?

Zrim,

So what accounts for all the conflicts in Presbyterian and Reformed circles these days? CVT was a staunch proponent of parochial education and his broader Dutch Reformed tradition agreed with him. Whither his CRC? CSI trucks on with vigor as the CRC devolves with equal steam. Something tells me there is one mammoth disconnect here.

A large accounting of the conflicts in P & R circles is the fact that people like you are pushing a “Christian” agenda that owes more to Aristotelian humanist categories then it does the Bible.

Whither the CRC can be answered by pointing to how the CRC bought into humanist assumptions.

No, mammoth disconnections at all. It all makes quite a bit of sense.

Zrim,

I realize it will be guffawed, but it seems clear to me that what those who lend such a high ordination to the institution of education actually do is betray a low view of the family instead of a high one.

I am to busy guffawing to even begin to answer this.

The family (insofar as it is tucked nicely into the institution of church, of course) is what has the ordained power to nurture or destroy true faith, in mutual conjunction with the church. 8 hours in any sort of school pales in comparison to 1 with mom and dad, especially when that hour is in the pew. Education has its place, importance and dignity. But it isn’t the family. Something tells me that those who over-realize education might be the same ones who over-realize the function of statecraft to do more than it was ordained for as well.

When families turn their covenant seed over to the State schools, they have in essence, substituted the child’s family for the new family found in the State schools. The state schools, through peer pressure, shape the child’s passion. The state schools, through the brainwashing regimen, shape the child’s thought. The child grows up wanting to be like his family, the school, as opposed to the family God intended him to have.