Homeschooling organization misquotes history

"In connection with the Family in Crisis symposium in Denver, an article was posted claiming historical precedence for rejecting Sunday school. The article, "R.L. Dabney on Sunday Schools Superseding God’s Means of Grace," was posted from a Colorado based homeschooling organization, Generations with Vision. The purpose of the article is to demonstrate that at least one significant leader in early American Protestantism stood soundly against the newly formed Sunday schools of the early 1800s." Continued here.)

A sketch of the history of Christian age-segregation

The following is a sketch of the facts I have uncovered in my research over the last few years in response to claims from many homeschoolers and/or family-integrated proponents. It is a slightly modified reprint (spelling and format) from the original posting at puritanboard.com:

Hello Boliver,

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 Encyclopedia, 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 & 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 “consistories everywhere shall see to it that there are good school teachers not only to teach the children reading, writing, languages, and the liberal arts, but also to instruct them in godliness and in the Catechism.” (cf. the full Dordt instruction for catechetical teaching here).

"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 day 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. They 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..."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.” (110ff. 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.” The 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- He 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.
If interested in more of how Christians educated over the centuries, please see my blog, ChristianNurture.blogspot.com

Additional (2.7.12): I have combed some of the sessional minutes of Scottish churches in the 1600s: they had age-segregated Sunday school between services. I'll gather that info soon Lord willing.

Ode to the Welfare State, 1949

Christianity and the Centennial State

The Fourth is a celebration of our national birth. It reminds us of 1776 and the great events that transpired. It should also remind Coloradans of...

Keep reading>>>

New Thoughts on an old Washington Debate

Professor Lillback has brought the old assumptions of George Washington's religiosity into new light.  His research of over a decade culminates in his book, George Washington's Sacred Fire.

Here is a short article (at the History News Network) to whet your appetite.

Hitler's "Christianity"

Much confusion arises from Christian detractors who insists on linking religious beliefs and mass murders of historic proportions. One in particular, suggested by some websites and even argued by a few authors is that Hitler was a Christian (having never renounced his Roman Catholic baptism), maybe even doing "God's work".

Such minority views tend to read into public and some (disputed) private remarks of this butcher without considering the larger context. That larger context was power. Hitler was a determined man with a dream of Aryan dominance over the world and his dominance over the Aryan's themselves.

First of all, the man and his movement were consummate liars. No historian worth his or her salt denies this. Nazis lied publicly in speeches, writing, radio and television, manipulating their leader-starved audiences with what they wanted to hear. They lied privately, manipulating those not within their closest circle of confidants. Political propaganda was brought to an art form in Nazi Germany. Not unlike today, politicians speak the language of the people even while not believing in it.

Secondly, many historians (European and American) acknowledge that Hitler used Christianity to his advantage. He promoted a "Positive Christianity" before the war that cherry-picked various beliefs that would emphasize aggression, activism and strength. The Jewishness of Christ was denied, the sacrificial dimension belittled and the requirement of love redirected toward jingoistic nationalism. He failed to unify the churches with a single lowest-common denominator, nationalistic church.

Thirdly, even if Hitler considered himself a "Christian" at all, it was certainly an unorthodox amalgamation of his own imagination peppered with neo-pagan and higher critical liberal "Christianity" influences (here). It even spawned a German Faith Movement. For Christians serious about their own practice and doctrines, to attack two-thirds of the Bible (the Jewish Old Testament) is to attack Christianity. And to attack the infallibility of the Bible (via higher criticism of the liberals) is to attack Christianity. In Mein Kampf, he wrote,

"with the appearance of Christianity the first spiritual terror entered into the far freer ancient world." (Britannica online)

One may wish to assign Hitler to some form of religion, such as neo-paganism, but orthodox Protestantism is not one of them.

Fourthly, the creation of the Confessing Church which resisted this "positive Christianity" and the politicization of the churches for Nazi ends reinforces the radical differences between Nazi-inspired "Christianity" and the conservative Lutheranism. The Nazi regime itself bullied these churches and the Roman Catholic church with trumped up charges and subtle anti-church propaganda. During the war ministers and priests were cast into concentration camps.

Fifthly, the private inner-circle musing of Hitler, published as "table talk", bespeaks of a man easily throwing around some Christian language while attacking the Christian beliefs and clergy, desiring to suppress organized religion.

Lastly, published de-classified evidence for the Nuremberg trials paints a calculating plan to finish of Christianity after the war (here).

If the ideological and philosophical underpinning of Hitler are taken into consideration, then the opportunistic relationship of Nazism to the churches of Germany makes sense. Dictators cannot change a given society whole-sale in one fell-swoop. Hitler was no exception. His philosophy was influenced by the "God is dead" thinker, Nietzsche (here). In sum, his was a pragmatic will to power philosophy bent on world dominion.

As Hitler's powerful private secretary wrote to the Nazi leaders in 1941:

"All influences that could impair, or even damage, the Fuhrer's and the Party's rule must be eliminated. More and more the Volk [people] must be wrested away from the Churches and their agents, the pastors." (Library of Congress WWII Companion, p.903)

Christian Black History Month: Phillis Wheatley

Phillis Wheatley was the mother of African-American poetry. And she is a politically incorrect black heroine.

The fist to publish a book of poems as an African-slave, she was immediately popular in America. Her talent was recognized by George Washington, John Hancock and the governor of Massachusetts, Hutchinson. She was well-received in England as well.

Her slave-family showed some pity by educating her themselves. She was later set free by her family.
With her husband in debtor's prison and the loss of three children, tragically, she died at the age of 31,

Yet in spite of a sad life that would crush the strongest Christian today, her poetry demonstrates a heart sustained and empowered by the Holy Spirit.

The lost of an infant did not crush her:

The gift of heav'n intrusted to your hand
Cheerful resign at the divine command:
(On the Death of J. C. an Infant)


She rested on the grace and gifts of God:

Who taught us prayer and gave us grace and faith
Who but the great and the Supreme who bless’d
(An Address to the Deists)


Her childhood slavery did not overwhelm her.  In amazing contrast with today's whining Americans, she wrote:

Twas mercy brought me from my Pagan land,
Taught my benighted soul to understand
That there's a God, that there's a Saviour too:
Once I redemption neither sought nor knew.
Some view our sable race with scornful eye,
"Their colour is a diabolic dye."
Remember, Christians, Negroes, black as Cain,
May be refin'd, and join th' angelic train.´
(On being brought from Africa to America.)


Although the research does not specify her theological orientation, she was likely a Calvinist. Her church was the Old South Church in Boston. She wrote a poem lamenting the death of her pastor. She wrote another on the death of Whitefield.  And her poetic language (see above as well) uses well-known Reformed thought:

The Atheist sure no more can boast aloud
Of chance, or nature, and exclude the God;
As if the clay without the potter's aid
Should rise in various forms, and shapes self-made,
Or worlds above with orb o'er orb profound

Self-mov'd could run the everlasting round.
It cannot be -- unerring Wisdom guides
With eye propitious, and o'er all presides.
(To the Rev. DR. THOMAS AMORY…)


Here is a woman for our girls to emulate.  Here the beauty of Christ shined wonderfully through His chosen vessel and her poems.

(Her poems are here)


Black History Month Series:
1. Lemuel Haynes
2. Jupiter Hammon 
3. Phillis Wheately

What Bunyan Confessed

In a day and age in which Christians too readily associate with anyone who names himself Christian, it is easy to blithely quote heroes of the faith.

Although some theological differences may not and should not move Christians to disassociate themselves from their spiritual forefathers, others may. And yet to examine what they believed may challenge us today to reexamine our own beliefs.

For the sake of historical truth, I present to you, dear reader, the theological beliefs of John Bunyan, author of Pilgrim's Progress.

A Confession of my Faith...

1. Naturally, he was Trinitarian (point 4)
2. He believed in Hell: "I believe, that those that die impenitent, shall be tormented with the devil and his angels, and shall be cast with them into ' the lake that burneth with fire and brimstone.'" (point 9).
3. He asserted that Christ obeyed the Law for us: "I believe, therefore, that the righteousness, and redemption, by which we that believe, stand just before God, as saved from the curse of the law, is the righteousness, and redemption, that consists in the personal acts and performances of this child Jesus; this God-man the Lord's Christ: it consisteth, I say, in his personal fulfilling the law for us, to the utmost requirement of the justice of God." (point 15)

4. Justification: "I believe, we being sinful creatures in ourselves, that no good thing done by us, can procure of God the imputation of the righteousness of Jesus Christ. But that the imputation thereof is an act of grace, a free gift without our deserving." (point 1).
5. Source of justification: "I believe, that the faith that so doth, is not to be found with any hut those, in whom the Spirit of God by mighty power doth work it: all others being fearful and incredulous, dare not venture their souls and eternity upon it. And hence it is called the faith that is wrought by the exceeding great and mighty power of God; the faith of the operation of God." (point 5)
6. "I believe, that this faith is effectually wrought in none, but those which before the world were appointed unto glory." (point 6)

7. Election by God: "I believe, that this decree, choice or election, was before the foundation of the world; and so before the elect themselves, had being in themselves" (point 2).
8. Election forever: " I believe, that there is not any impediment attending the election of God, that can hinder their conversion, and eternal salvation. ' Moreover whom he did predestinate, them he also called: and whom he called, them he also justified: and whom he justified, them he also glorified. What shall we then say to these things ? If God be for us, who can be against us ? - Who shall lay any thing to the charge of God's elect ? It is God that justifieth. Who is he that condemneth?' &c. Rom. viii. 3o—35" (point 5).

9. Calling & Spirit: "I believe, that to effectual calling, the Holy Ghost must accompany the word of the gospel, and that with mighty power: I mean that calling, which of God is made to be the fruit of electing love. 'Knowing,' saith Paul to the Thessalonians, 'brethren beloved, your election of God. For our gospel came not unto you in word only, but also in power, and in the Holy Ghost, and in much assurance,' &c. lTh.i.4,5. Otherwise men will not, cannot, hear and turn."

10. Faith: "I believe, that effectual calling doth therefore produce, 1. Faith; and therefore it is said, that ' faith cometh by hearing;' Ro.x.17. by hearing the word...2. It produceth hope...3. It produceth repentance; for when a man hath heaven and hell before his eyes (as he will have if he be under the power of effectual calling) or when a man hath a revelation of the mercy and justice of God, with an heart-drawing invitation to lay hold on the tender forgiveness of sins...

11. Repentance: "Repentance is a turning the heart to God in Christ: a turning of it from sin, and the devil, and darkness; to the goodness, and grace, and holiness that is in him. Wherefore, they that of old are said to repent, are said to loath and abhor themselves, for all their abominations. ' I abhor myself,' [said Job,] 'and repent in dust and ashes.'...Godly repentance doth not only affect the soul with the loathsome nature of sin that is past; but filleth the heart with godly hatred of sins that yet may come."

12. Love: "It [effectual calling] produceth also love...[toward God and the brethren].

13. Bible: "I believe that the holy scriptures, of themselves, without the addition of human inventions, are able to make the man of God perfect in all things; and 'thoroughly to furnish him unto all good works.'...and to instruct thee in all other things, that either respect the worship of God, or thy walking before all men."

14. Creation & Providence: "Also, that after the time of the making thereof, he disposed of it to the children of men, with a reserve thereof for the children of God, that should in all ages be born thereunto.' When the Most High divided to the nations their inheritance, when he separated the sons of Adam, he set the bounds of the people according to the number of the children of Israel, De.xxxii. 8. for as he 'made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on all the face of the earth, [so he] hath determined the times before appointed, and the bounds of their habitation.' Acts 17:26" (p.601)

Puritan Classical Education Besmirched

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.

Early American Christianity: Fasting Days

"The committee appointed to prepare a recommendation to these states, to set apart a day of thanksgiving, brought in a report; which was agreed to as follows:

Forasmuch as it is the indispensable duty of all men to adore the superintending providence of Almighty God; to acknowledge with gratitude their obligation to him for benefits received, and to implore such farther blessings as they stand in need of; and it having pleased him in his abundant mercy not only to continue to us the innumerable bounties of his common providence, but also to smile upon us in the prosecution of a just and necessary war...It is therefore recommended to the legislative or executive powers of these United States, to set apart Thursday, the eighteenth day of December next, for solemn thanksgiving and praise; that with one heart1 and one voice the good people may express the grateful feelings of their hearts, and consecrate themselves to the service of their divine benefactor; and that together with their sincere acknowledgments and offerings, they may join the penitent confession of their manifold sins, whereby they had forfeited every favour, and their humble and earnest supplication that it may please God, through the merits of Jesus Christ, mercifully to forgive and blot them out of remembrance; that it may please him graciously to afford his blessing on the governments of these states respectively, and prosper the public council of the whole; to inspire our commanders both by land and sea, and all under them, with that wisdom and fortitude which may render them fit instruments, under the providence of Almighty God, to secure for these United States the greatest of all human blessings, independence and peace; that it may please him to prosper the trade and manufactures of the people and the labour of the husbandman, that our land may yet yield its increase; to take schools and seminaries of education, so necessary for cultivating the principles of true liberty, virtue and piety, under his nurturing band, and to prosper the means of religion for the promotion and enlargement of that kingdom which consisteth "in righteousness, peace and joy in the Holy Ghost."

Nov. 1, 1777 (Journals of the Continental Congress, p.854)

This is but one of several examples of public declarations of fasting or thanksgiving given in the explicit language of Christianity.

Prayer of our First Chief Justice

Most merciful Father! who desirest not the death of a sinner, but will have all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth, give me grace so to draw nigh unto thee as that thou wilt condescend to draw nigh unto me ; and enable me to offer unto thee, through thy beloved Son, supplications and thanksgivings acceptably.

I thank thee for my creation, and for causing me to be born in a time and land blessed with the light of thy holy gospel. I thank thee for the excellent parents thou didst give me...I thank thee for my children—for thy kind providence over them—for their doing and promising to do well—and for the comforts which through them I receive from thy goodness.

Above all, I thank thee for thy mercy to our fallen race, as declared in thy holy gospel by thy beloved Son, "who gave himself a ransom for all." I thank thee for the gift of thy Holy Spirit, and for thy goodness in encouraging us all to ask it. I thank thee for the hope of remission of sins, of regeneration, and of life and happiness everlasting, through the merits and intercession of our Saviour. I thank thee for having admitted me into the covenant of this grace and mercy by baptism; for reminding me of its duties and privileges, and for the influences of thy Holy Spirit with which thou hast favoured me.

Enable me, merciful Father, to understand thy holy gospel aright, and to distinguish the doctrines thereof from erroneous expositions of them ; and bless me with that fear of offending thee, which is the beginning of wisdom...Wean me from undue and unseasonable attachments and attentions to the things of this transitory world, and raise my thoughts, desires, and affections continually unto thee, and to the blessings of the better and eternal world which is to succeed this.

Protect me from becoming a prey to temptations to evil, cause the new and spiritual life which of thy goodness thou hast begun in me, to increase daily in growth and strength...Establish my faith in that great atonement, and my gratitude for it...

Be pleased to impress my heart and mind with a deep and permanent sense and recollection of the manifold and unmerited blessings and mercies, spiritual and temporal, which throughout my life thou hast conferred upon me. Give me grace to love and obey and be thankful unto thee, with all my heart, with all my soul, with all my mind, and with all my strength; and to worship and to serve thee in humility, in spirit, and in truth. Give me grace also to love my neighbour as myself, and wisely and diligently to do the duties incumbent upon me according to thy holy will, and because it is thy holy will, and not from worldly considerations.

Be pleased also to impress my heart and mind with a deep and unceasing sense and recollection of the evil of sin, and of my disobedience and ingratitude to thee...Give me grace, I humbly and earnestly beseech thee, to repent of my sins with such repentance as thy gospel requires ; and to loathe, and forsake, and detest all sin for ever...Let thy Holy Spirit lead and keep me in the way in which I should walk, and enable me to commit myself entirely to thy kind and gracious providence and protection as to all my spiritual and temporal concerns...

Be pleased to bless me and my family, my friends and enemies, and all for whom I ought to pray, in the manner and measure which thou, and thou only, knowest to be best for us. Create in us all clean, and contrite, and thankful hearts, and renew within us a right spirit.

I thank thee, the great Sovereign of the universe, for thy long-continued goodness to these countries, notwithstanding our ingratitude and disobedience to thee, our merciful deliverer and benefactor. Give us grace to turn unto thee with true repentance, and implore thy forgiveness...Be pleased to bless all nations with the knowledge of thy gospel,—and may thy holy will be done on earth as it is done in heaven.

Condescend, merciful Father! to grant as far as proper these imperfect petitions, to accept these inadequate thanksgivings, and to pardon whatever of sin hath mingled in them, for the sake of Jesus Christ, our blessed Lord and Saviour..My gracious Saviour ! continue, I beseech thee, to look down with compassion and mercy upon me, and to intercede for me...

Without thee we can do nothing; condescend to abide in me, and enable me to abide in thee, as the branch in the vine. Let thy Holy Spirit purify, and cause it to produce fruit meet for repentance and amendment of life...

Give me grace to meditate with faith and gratitude on thy kind redeeming love all the days of my life. When thou shall call me hence, be with me in the hour of death, and bless me with a full assurance of faith and hope, that I may " fear no evil."

John Jay

Revival of Rousseau

"But when mothers deign to nurse their own children, then morals will reform themselves, natural feeling will revive in every heart, the state will be repopulated"

"It is only in our father's home that we learn to love our own, and a woman whose mother did not educate her herself will not be willing to educate her own children."

"There is no more charming picture than that of family life..."

What do homeschooling and Rousseau have in common?
Much in may ways.

Rousseau endorsed homeschooling as the ideal system of education.

Read that line again.

The quotes above are from Rousseau himself--the infamous whipping boy of the Religious Right. Yet how could such statements flow from the pen of Rousseau? While we have been rightfully castigating him as the grandfather of socialism and like ills, we never slowed down to actually examine his entire system of thought--a system that has been revived again.

His worldview is based on the inborn (natural) innocence and free-will of man. It is nurture not nature that enslaves man's will and corrupts his innocence. And it is the institutions of man (especially the rich) that hold natural man back. He said as much in his little-known book on education, Emile.

In this idealistic work, the fictitious young boy, Emile, is trained at home in the countryside, far away from the evil influences of the mass of men. The mother is to nurse the child and the father is supposed to teach the son. But Rousseau allows, in this instance, for a tutor-father to replace the stereotypical father who laments his lack of ability and time.

Now, it is certain that many scholars connect Rousseau with Statism, but Rousseau was not always considered consistent with his own thought. If society is the problem and all men are born in society, then what? Either embrace (control) all of society or flee (escape) society. In fact, in a letter to a friend, he admits that Emile is "a philosophical work on this principle advanced by the author in other writings that man is naturally good." (M.h.siddiqui, 83). Emile is an ideal.

The contrast of nature and nurture arises yet again--of good nature and bad nurture. And therein lies the contemporary revival of Rousseau. Both the Left and the Right embrace elements of Rousseau. The left either through monopolistic public education or idealistic anarchy and unschooling and the Right...What of the Right? Although it is certainly the case that many Christian homeschoolers do not buy whole-hog the thinking of Rousseau, it may well be they embrace more of him than they realize.

Consider parents who fearfully isolate their children from society (and publicly state as much). Many are but echoing Rousseau:

"Watch over him from the moment he comes into the world. As soon as he is born take possession of him and do not leave him till he is a man; you will never succeed otherwise. Just as the real nurse is the mother, the real teacher is the father...He will be better educated by a sensible though limited father than by the cleverest teacher in the world" [book 1, paragraph 71].

Or consider Rousseau again:

"A young man is led astray in the first place neither by temperament nor by the senses, but by popular opinion..it is not nature that corrupts them but example...[so] I am dealing only with home training. Take a young man carefully educated in his father's country house, and examine him when he reaches Paris and makes his entrance into society; you will find him thinking clearly about honest matters, and you will find his will as wholesome as his reason. You will find scorn of vice and disgust for debauchery" (Emile, 242, emphasis added).

The educational claims trumpeted in some circles sound eerily Rousseauian. However, the most disturbing is the religious overlap of Rousseau and some Christians: both believe in original innocence and free will. That is, in Rousseau's language, "man is naturally good."

Here is the real culprit. It is not the similarity of methods as such but the fundamental beliefs that support the methods. As much as the public schools are scorned by many conservative Christians, such a system was once inundated with God-talk, prayer and Bible. Once those were taken out, many Christians fled. It was not schooling as such that was the culprit but that the method was shifted into a context of unbelief.

Many Christians--even Christian homeschoolers--in my experience endorse the innocence of babies and the free-will of man. Ask yourself: when a child dies in infancy why should he or she enter heaven? Many answer, "because they are innocent" but they answer wrongly. By birth--by nature--man is a sinner (Ps. 51:5; Eph. 2:2). Ask yourself: can man exercise his free-will and seek after God? Many answer, "yes!" but they answer wrongly. Man's will is bound in sin and iniquity and none seek after God (Rom. 3:11, 12).

Original sin is thrown out while free-will is retained.

In such a world, the Holy Spirit is not needed to regenerate man's mind and free his will. What is needed is a new environment, either of the home or of society. What is needed is a new method, for the churches or for the families.

That is the American religion. That is the revival of Rousseau.

Calvinism, History & Homeschooling

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 1787, 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 America 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 found in every homeschooling house 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]

Doctrine of Election

Who hath saved us, and called us with an holy calling, not according to our works, but according to his own purpose and grace, which was given us in Christ Jesus before the world began. But is now made manifest by the appearing of our Saviour Jesus Christ, who hath abolished death, and hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel.
2 Timothy 1:9, 10

A Sermon by John Calvin

We have shown this morning, according to the text of St. Paul, that if we will know the free mercy of our God in saving us, we must come to His everlasting counsel: whereby He chose us before the world began. For there we see, He had no regard to our persons, neither to our worthiness, nor to any deserts that we could possibly bring. Before we were born, we were enrolled in His register; He had already adopted us for His children. Therefore let us yield the whole to His mercy, knowing that we cannot boast of ourselves, unless we rob Him of the honor which belongs to Him.

Men have endeavored to invent cavils, to darken the grace of God. For they have said, although God chose men before the world began, yet it was according as He foresaw that one would be diverse from another. The Scripture showeth plainly that God did not wait to see whether men were worthy or not when He chose them: but the sophisters thought they might darken the grace of God by saying, though He regarded not the deserts that were passed, He had an eye to those that were to come. For, say they, though Jacob and his brother Esau had done neither good nor evil, and God chose one and refused the other, yet notwithstanding He foresaw, (as all things are present with Him) that Esau would be a vicious man, and that Jacob would be as he afterwards showed himself.

But these are foolish speculations: for they plainly make St. Paul a liar who saith, God rendered no reward to our works when He chose us, because He did it before the world began. But though the authority of St. Paul were abolished, yet the matter is very plain and open, not only in the Holy Scripture, but in reason; insomuch that those who would make an escape after this sort, show themselves to be men void of all skill. For if we search ourselves to the bottom, what good can we find? Are not all mankind cursed? What do we bring from our mother’s womb, except sin?

Therefore we differ not one whit, one from another; but it pleaseth God to take those to Himself whom He would. And for this cause, St. Paul useth these words in another place, when he saith, men have not whereof to rejoice, for no man finds himself better than his fellows, unless it be because God discerneth him. So then, if we confess that God chose us before the world began, it necessarily follows, that God prepared us to receive His grace; that He bestowed upon us that goodness, which was not in us before; that He not only chose us to be heirs of the kingdom of heaven, but He likewise justifies us, and governs us by His Holy Spirit. The Christian ought to be so well resolved in this doctrine, that he is beyond doubt.

There are some men at this day, that would be glad if the truth of God were destroyed. Such men fight against the Holy Ghost, like mad beasts, and endeavor to abolish the Holy Scripture. There is more honesty in the papists, than in these men: for the doctrine of the papists is a great deal better, more holy, and more agreeable to the sacred Scripture, than the doctrine of those vile and wicked men, who cast down God’s holy election; these dogs that bark at it, and swine that root it up.

However, let us hold fast that which is here taught us: God having chosen us before the world had its course, we must attribute the cause of our salvation to His free goodness; we must confess that He did not take us to be His children, for any deserts of our own; for we had nothing to recommend ourselves into His favor. Therefore, we must put the cause and fountain of our salvation in Him only. and ground ourselves upon it: otherwise, whatsoever and howsoever we build, it will come to nought.

We must here notice what St. Paul joineth together; to wit, the grace of Jesus Christ, with the everlasting counsel of God the Father: and then he bringeth us to our calling, that we may be assured of God’s goodness. and of His will, that would have remained hid from us, unless we had a witness of it. St. Paul saith in the first place, that the grace which hangeth upon the purpose of God, and is comprehended in it, is given in our Lord Jesus Christ. As if he said, seeing we deserve to be cast away, and hated as God’s mortal enemies, it was needful for us to be grafted, as it were, into Jesus Christ; that God might acknowledge, and allow us for His children. Otherwise, God could not look upon us, only to hate us; because there is nothing but wretchedness in us; we are full of sin, and stuffed up as it were with all kinds of iniquity.

God, who is justice itself, can have no agreement with us, while He considereth our sinful nature. Therefore, when He would adopt us before the world began, it was requisite that Jesus Christ should stand between us and Him; that we should be chosen in His person, for He is the well beloved Son: when God joineth us to Him, He maketh us such as pleaseth Him. Let us learn to come directly to Jesus Christ. if we will not doubt God’s election: for He is the true looking glass, wherein we must behold our adoption.

If Jesus Christ be taken from us, then is God a judge of sinners; so that we cannot hope for any goodness or favor at His hands, but look rather for vengeance: for without Testis Christ. His majesty will always be terrible and fearful to us. If we hear mention made of His ever-lasting purpose, we cannot but be afraid, as though He were already armed to plunge us into misery. But when we know that all grace resteth in Jesus Christ, then we may be assured that God loved us, although we were unworthy.

In the second place, we must notice that St. Paul speaketh not simply of God’s election, for that would not put us beyond doubt; but we should rather remain in perplexity and anguish: but he adds, the calling; whereby God hath opened His counsel, which before was unknown to us, and which we could not reach. How shall we know then that God hath chosen us, that we may rejoice in Him, and boast of the goodness that He hath bestowed upon us? They that speak against God’s election, leave the gospel alone; they leave all that God layeth before us, to bring us to Him; all the means that He hath appointed for us, and knoweth to be fit and proper for our use. We must not go on so; but according to St. Paul’s rule, we must join the calling with God’s everlasting election.

It is said, we are called; and thus we have this second word, calling. Therefore God calleth us: and how? Surely, when it pleaseth Him to certify us of our election; which we could by no other means attain unto. For who can enter into God’s counsel? as saith the prophet Isaiah; and also the apostle Paul. But when it pleaseth God to communicate Himself to us familiarly, then we receive that which surmounteth the knowledge of all men: for we have a good and faithful witness, which is the Holy Ghost; that raiseth us above the world, and bringeth us even into the wonderful secrets of God.

We must not speak rashly of God’s election, and say, we are predestinate; but if we will be thoroughly assured of our salvation, we must not speak lightly of it; whether God hath taken us to be His children or not. What then? Let us look at what is set forth in the gospel. There God showeth us that He is our Father; and that He will bring us to the inheritance of life, having marked us with the seal of the Holy Ghost in our hearts, which is an undoubted witness of our salvation, if we receive it by faith.

The gospel is preached to a great number, which notwithstanding, are reprobate; yea, and God discovereth and showeth that He hath cursed them: that they have no part nor portion in His kingdom, because they resist the gospel, and cast away the grace that is offered them. But when we receive the doctrine of God with obedience and faith, and rest ourselves upon His promises, and accept this offer that He maketh us, to take us for His children, this, I say, is a certainty of our election. But we must here remark, that when we have knowledge of our salvation, when God hath called us and enlightened us in the faith of His gospel, it is not to bring to nought the everlasting predestination that went before.

There are a great many in these days that will say, who are they whom God hath chosen, but only the faithful? I grant it; but they make an evil consequence of it; and say faith is the cause, yea, and the first cause of our salvation. If they called it a middle cause, it would indeed be true; for the Scripture saith, “By grace are ye saved through faith” (Eph. 2:8). But we must go up higher; for if they attribute faith to men’s free will, they blaspheme wickedly against God, and commit sacrilege. We must come to that which the Scripture showeth; to wit, when God giveth us faith, we must know that we are not capable of receiving the gospel, only as He hath framed us by the Holy Ghost.

It is not enough for us to hear the voice of man, unless God work within, and speak to us in a secret manner by the Holy Ghost; and from hence cometh faith. But what is the cause of it? Why is faith given to one and not to another? St. Luke showeth us: saying, “As many as were ordained to eternal life believed” (Acts 13 :48). There were a great number of hearers, and yet but few of them received the promise of salvation. And what few were they? Those that were appointed to salvation. Again, St. Paul speaketh so largely upon this subject, in his epistle to the Ephesians, that it cannot be but the enemies of God’s predestination are stupid and ignorant, and that the devil hath plucked out their eyes; and that they have become void of all reason, if they cannot see a thing so plain and evident.

St. Paul saith, God hath called us, and made us partakers of His treasures and infinite riches, which were given us through our Lord Jesus Christ: according as He had chosen us before the world began. When we say that we are called to salvation because God hath given us faith, it is not because there is no higher cause; and whosoever cannot come to the everlasting election of God, taketh somewhat from Him, and lesseneth His honor. This is found in almost every part of the Holy Scripture.

That we may make a short conclusion of this matter, let us see in what manner we ought to keep ourselves. When we inquire about our salvation, we must not begin to say, Are we chosen? No, we can never climb so high; we shall be confounded a thousand times, and have our eyes dazzled, before we can come to God’s counsel. What then shall we do? Let us hear what is said in the gospel: when God hath been so gracious, as to make us receive the promise offered, know we not that it is as much as if He had opened His whole heart to us, and had registered our election in our consciences!

We must be certified that God hath taken us for His children, and that the kingdom of heaven is ours; because we are called in Jesus Christ. How may we know this? How shall we stay ourselves upon the doctrine that God hath set before us? We must magnify the grace of God, and know that we can bring nothing to recommend ourselves to His favor; we must become nothing in our own eyes, that we may not claim any praise; but know that God hath called us to the gospel, having chosen us before the world began. This election of God is, as it were, a sealed letter; because it consisteth in itself, and in its own nature: but we may read it, for God giveth a witness of it, when He called us to Himself by the gospel and by faith.

For even as the original or first copy taketh nothing from the letter or writing that is read, even so must we be out of doubt of our salvation. When God certifieth us by the gospel that He taketh us for His children, this testimony carries peace with it; being signed by the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ, and sealed by the Holy Ghost. When we have this witness, have we not enough to content our minds? Therefore, God’s election is so far from being against this, that it confirmeth the witness which we have in the gospel. We must not doubt but what God hath registered our names before the world was made, among His chosen children: but the knowledge thereof He reserved to Himself.

We must always come to our Lord Jesus Christ, when we talk of our election; for without Him (as we have already shown), we cannot come nigh to God. When we talk of His decree, well may we be astonished, as men worthy of death. But if Jesus Christ be our guide, we may with cheerfulness depend upon Him; knowing that He hath worthiness enough in Him to make all His members beloved of God the Father; it being sufficient for us that we are grafted into His body, and made one with Him. Thus we must muse upon this doctrine, if we will profit by it aright: as it is set forth by St. Paul; when he saith, this grace of salvation was given us before the world began. We must go beyond the order of nature, if we will know how we are saved, and by what cause, and from whence our salvation cometh.

God would not leave us in doubt, neither would He hide His counsel, that we might not know how our salvation was secured; but hath called us to Him by His gospel, and hath sealed the witness of His goodness and fatherly love in our hearts. So then, having such a certainty, let us glorify God, that He hath called us of His free mercy. Let us rest ourselves upon our Lord Jesus Christ, knowing that He hath not deceived us, when He caused it to be preached that He gave Himself for us, and witnessed it by the Holy Ghost. For faith is an undoubted token that God taketh us for His children; and thereby we are led to the everlasting election, according as He had chosen us before.

He saith not that God hath chosen us because we have heard the gospel, but on the other hand, he attributes the faith that is given us to the highest cause; to wit, because God hath fore-ordained that He would save us; seeing we were lost and cast away in Adam. There are certain dolts, who, to blind the eyes of the simple and such as are like themselves, say, the grace of salvation was given us because God ordained that His Son should redeem mankind, and therefore this is common to all.

But St. Paul spake after another sort; and men cannot by such childish arguments mar the doctrine of the gospel: for it is said plainly, that God hath saved us. Does this refer to all without exception? No; he speaketh only of the faithful. Again, does St. Paul include all the world? Some were called by preaching, and yet they made themselves unworthy of the salvation which was offered them: therefore they were reprobate. God left others in their unbelief, who never heard the gospel preached.

Therefore St. Paul directed himself plainly and precisely to those whom God had chosen and reserved to Himself. God’s goodness will never be viewed in its true light, nor honored as it deserveth, unless we know that He would not have us remain in the general destruction of mankind; wherein He hath left those that were like unto us: from whom we do not differ; for we are no better than they: but so it pleased God. Therefore all mouths must be stopped; men must presume to take nothing upon themselves, except to praise God, confessing themselves debtors to Him for all their salvation.

We shall now make some remarks upon the other words used by St. Paul in this place. It is true that God’s election could never be profitable to us, neither could it come to us, unless we knew it by means of the gospel; for this cause it pleased God to reveal that which He had kept secret before all ages. But to declare His meaning more plainly, he adds, that this grace is revealed to us now. And how? “By the appearing of our Savior Jesus Christ.” When he saith that this grace is revealed to us by the appearing of Jesus Christ, he showeth that we should be too unthankful, if we could not content and rest ourselves upon the grace of the Son of God. What can we look for more? If we could climb up beyond the clouds, and search out the secrets of God, what would be the result of it? Would it not be to ascertain that we are His children and heirs?

Now we know these things, for they are clearly set forth in Jesus Christ. For it is said, that all who believe in Him shall enjoy the privilege of being God’s children. Therefore we must not swerve from these things one jot, if we will be certified of our election. St. Paul hath already shown us, that God never loved us, nor chose us, only in the person of His beloved Son. When Jesus Christ appeared He revealed life to us, otherwise we should never have been the partakers of it. He hath made us acquainted with the everlasting counsel of God. But it is presumption for men to attempt to know more than God would have them know.

If we walk soberly and reverently in obedience to God, hearing and receiving what He saith in the Holy Scripture, the way will be made plain before us. St. Paul saith, when the Son of God appeared in the world, He opened our eyes, that we might know that He was gracious to us before the world was made. We were received as His children, and accounted just; so that we need not doubt but that the kingdom of heaven is prepared for us. Not that we have it by our deserts, but because it belongs to Jesus Christ, who makes us partakers with Himself.

When St. Paul speaketh of the appearing of Jesus Christ, he saith, “He hath brought life and immortality to light through the gospel.” It is not only said that Jesus Christ is our Savior, but that He is sent to be a mediator, to reconcile us by the sacrifice of His death; He is sent to us as a lamb without blemish; to purge us and make satisfaction for all our trespasses; He is our pledge, to deliver us from the condemnation of death; He is our righteousness; He is our advocate, who maketh intercession with God that He would hear our prayers.

We must allow, all these qualities to belong to Jesus Christ, if we will know aright how He appeared. We must look at the substance contained in the gospel. We must know that Jesus Christ appeared as our Savior, and that He suffered for our salvation; and that we were reconciled to God the Father through His means; that we have been cleansed from all our blemishes, and freed from everlasting death. If we know not that He is our advocate, that He heareth us when we pray to God, to the end that our prayers may be answered, what will become of us; what confidence can we have to call upon God’s name, who is the fountain of our salvation? But St. Paul saith, Jesus Christ hath fulfilled all things that were requisite for the redemption of mankind.

If the gospel were taken away, of what advantage would it be to us that the Son of God had suffered death, and risen again the third day for our justification? All this would be unprofitable to us. So then, the gospel putteth us in possession of the benefits that Jesus Christ hath purchased for us. And therefore, though He be absent from us in body, and is not conversant with us here on earth, it is not that He hath withdrawn Himself, as though we could not find Him; for the sun that shineth doth no more enlighten the world, than Jesus Christ showeth Himself openly to those that have the eyes of faith to look upon Him, when the gospel is preached. Therefore St. Paul saith, Jesus Christ hath brought life to light, yea, everlasting life.

He saith, the Son of God hath abolished death. And how did He abolish it? If He had not offered an everlasting sacrifice to appease the wrath of God, if He had not entered even to the bottomless pit to draw us from thence; if He had not taken our curse upon Himself, if He had not taken away the burden wherewith we were crushed down, where should we have been? Would death have been destroyed? Nay, sin would reign in us, and death likewise. And indeed, let every one examine himself, and we shall find that we are slaves to Satan, who is the prince of death. So that we are shut no in this miserable slavery, unless God destroy the devil, sin, and death. And this is done: but how? He hath taken away our sins by the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ.

Therefore, though we be poor sinners, and in danger of God’s judgment, yet sin cannot hurt us; the sting, which is venomous, is so blunted that it cannot wound us, because Jesus Christ has gained the victory over it. He suffered not the shedding of His blood in vain; but it was a washing wherewith we were washed through the Holy Ghost, as is shown by St. Peter. And thus we see plainly that when St. Paul speaketh of the gospel, wherein Jesus Christ appeared, and appeareth daily to us, he forgetteth not His death and passion, nor the things that pertain to the salvation of mankind.

We may be certified that in the person of our Lord Jesus Christ we have all that we can desire; we have full and perfect trust in the goodness of God, and the love He beareth us. But we see that our sins separate us from God, and cause a warfare in our members; yet we have an atonement through our Lord Jesus Christ. And why so? Because He hath shed His blood to wash away our sins; He hath offered a sacrifice whereby God hath become reconciled to us; to be short, He hath taken away the curse, that we may be blessed of God. Moreover, He hath conquered death, and triumphed over it; that He might deliver us from the tyranny thereof; which otherwise would entirely overwhelm us.

Thus we see that all things that belong to our salvation are accomplished in our Lord Jesus Christ. And that we may enter into full possession of all these benefits we most know that He appeareth to us daily by His gospel. Although He dwelleth in His heavenly glory, if we open the eyes of our faith we shall behold Him. We must learn not to separate that which the Holy Ghost hath joined together. Let us observe what St. Paul meant by a comparison to amplify the grace that God showed to the world after the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ; as if He said, the old fathers had not this advantage, to have Jesus Christ appear to them, as He appeared to us.

It is true, they had the self-same faith; and the inheritance of heaven is theirs, as well as ours; God having revealed His grace to them as well as us, but not in like measure, for they saw Jesus Christ afar off, under the figures of the law, as St. Paul saith to the Corinthians. The veil of the temple was as yet stretched out, that the Jews could not come near the sanctuary, that is, the material sanctuary. But now, the veil of the temple being removed, we draw nigh to the majesty of our God: we come most familiarly to Him, in whom dwelleth all perfection and glory. In short, we have the body, whereas they had but the shadow (Col. 2:17).

The ancient fathers submitted themselves wholly to bear the affliction of Jesus Christ; as it is said in the 11th chapter of the Hebrews; for it is not said, Moses bore the shame of Abraham, but of Jesus Christ. Thus the ancient fathers, though they lived under the law, offered themselves to God in sacrifices, to bear most patiently the afflictions of Christ. And now, Jesus Christ having risen from the dead, hath brought life to light. If we are so delicate that we cannot bear the afflictions of the gospel, are we not worthy to be blotted from the book of God, and cast off? Therefore, we must be constant in the faith, and ready to suffer for the name of Jesus Christ, whatsoever God will; because life is set before us, and we have a more familiar knowledge of it than the ancient fathers had.

We know how the ancient fathers were tormented by tyrants, and enemies of the truth, and how they suffered constantly. The condition of the church is not more grievous in these days, than it was then. For now hath Jesus Christ brought life and immortality to light through the gospel. As often as the grace of God is preached to us, it is as much as if the kingdom of heaven were opened to us; as if God reached out His hand, and certified us that life was nigh; and that He will make us partakers of His heavenly inheritance. But when we look to this life, which was purchased for us by our Lord Jesus Christ, we should not hesitate to forsake all that we have in this world, to come to the treasure above, which is in heaven.

Therefore, let us not be willingly blind; seeing Jesus Christ layeth daily before us the life and immortality here spoken of. When St. Paul speaketh of life, and addeth immortality, it is as much as if he said, we already enter into the kingdom of heaven by faith. Though we be as strangers here below, the life and grace of which we are made partakers through our Lord Jesus Christ shall bring its fruit in convenient time; to wit, when He shall be sent of God the Father to show us the effect of things that are daily preached, which were fulfilled in His person when He was clad in humanity.

(Sermons of Calvin, 1829 reprint)

A Very Short History of Christian Education, 4/5

Reformation & Post-Reformation:

The major Reformation churches and leaders vigorously promoted informal and formal schooling, preaching both parental and communal responsibility. Luther preached on the duty of sending children to school; Calvin erected the famous Geneva Academy; the Scot, Swiss, Dutch, French, Polish and Hungarian churches ordered, created and some even operated schools for children. Catechizing, both by the parents, teachers and ministers, was encouraged, practiced and enforced.

The Dutch synod of 1618 endorsed a three-fold approach to theological instruction: parents, schools and churches. Each was to instruct the children in the catechism; each was to reinforce the Doctrines of Grace. Such integration between the family, church and school was already in practice in other Reformed communities, but this Synod laid it out in a most explicit manner.

The rise of English Puritan influence has been labeled an "educational revolution." "The diversity of forms of elementary training—and its chronic lack of endowment—led Puritans as well as their contemporaries to rely heavily on the household for instruction in literacy at the same time as they encouraged the finding of schools..." (Morgan, 175). The existing records demonstrate that about 800 new schools were added within less than two-hundred years in England alone (1480-1660). The availability of schools in England during the 1600s was such that a primary school was available for all children and "every boy, even in the remotest part of the country, could find a place of education in his own neighborhood competent at any rate to fit him to enter college" (Morison, qtd. 60).

A typical English school included a master and and assistant (usher), each teaching a class of students in the same room. The larger Academies, such as at Geneva and Strasbourg, included seven to eight classes, each lasting a year, with students being tested for advancement between the lower and upper classes.

Charity schools in England--especially for the poor--mushroomed in the 1600s. In the 1670s there were around 350 charity schools and 51 grammar schools in the small country of Wales. In 1724 over 1,000 charity schools existed in England (this number does not include the normal schools). Eighteenth-century Devon county, England, contained 180 schools compared to modern Devon's greater population and 365 schools. Similar schools multiplied in the German states. The Scottish General Assembly asked the presbyteries to collect monies for charity schools in 1709.

The father of modern education was the Reformed leader and Moravian bishop, Johann Comenius. England invited him for educational advise; Sweden commissioned him for an educational book; Transylvania petitioned him to reform their schools; and Harvard asked him to be their president. He wrote the first picture book for children and worked tirelessly teaching, creating schools and school programs (graded-level schools, curriculum, etc.).

Again, literacy rates are hard to come by because of the scarcity of records (the same is true with the number of schools). However, it appears that literacy was accomplished in about two to three years, between the ages nine and twelve (Morgan, 175). Literacy was around 50% in London and lower in the surrounding countryside. But then, the main point of creating schools was to combat such illiteracy--not for humanistic reasons, but for godly reasons: reading the Bible. Schooling, at home and abroad, co-existed peacefully during this time.


Summary of References and Suggested Readings:
History of Education, Cubberley
Godly Learning: Puritan Attitudes Toward Reason, Learning, and Education, Morgan
The Intellectual Life of Colonial New England, Morison
The Great Didactic, Comenius

A Very Short History of Christian Education, 3/5

Medieval Period:

With the rise of cathedrals came cathedral schools (early 500s), not only for the instruction of an up and coming priesthood but even for the local village boys. Bishops continued to tutor local boys in their homes. Tutoring came from a more educated relative, local priest, scriveners, curators, rectors, etc. Boarding schools became more common in the latter period. Guilds created schools for their specialties and schools for the children of their members. Apprenticing was common as well. Endowed schools for primary education--supported by the wealthy or the town--were on the rise as well as the famous Latin grammar schools, which could be stand alone institutions or attached to a college.

Homeschooling was probably continued in many homes. Education under these more simplistic conditions probably included basic speaking ability and training in household chores and farming. As a rule, "poorer children, even if they or their parents were favorable to reading, might have to postpone the undertaking until adolescence or adulthood, and might not begin at all" (Orme, 246).

Charlemagne, concerned with the degraded learning among the monks, decreed in 789 AD that "schools be established in which boys may learn." A century later, King Alfred, taught by a tutor, decreed a similar proclamation in 901 AD. The Sixth General Council of Constantinople (680 AD) required the presbyters in the country towns and villages to teach gratis any child brought to him. Echoing similar provisions in the Council of Chalons (813 AD), the Council of Langres, and Council of Savonnieres (859 AD), the Third Lateran Council in 1179 encouraged the cathedrals to create schools, especially for the poor.

European literacy rates are notoriously hard to discover. But the evidence grows after the 1100s. Literacy was facilitated through a communal approach (family, community and church) instead of an individual approach. Group readings were a mainstay for literacy. By the 1250s it appears that many who may not have been literate at least knew someone who was literate. Near the end of this period, households of royalty, nobility and even clergy "often included one or more schoolmasters to teach the lord’s children, wards, and the boys who sang in the chapel." Common-sense may suggest that the gentlemen, clergy, merchants and those with more leisure time and education gave some basic instruction to their children at home, but such evidence is scarce (Orme,167, 22)

By the late Medieval period useful numbers begin to appear. The Black Plague devastated England, lowering her population to around 2.5 million between 1348-1448 AD. Yet thirty-five grammar schools are known to have existed in three British shires during this time. The latest research is confident that in England alone during the late Medieval period a typical small town had at least one schoolmaster and possibly an assistant. London herself retained at least two dozen full or part-time teachers. Florance (1336-38) is known to have over 50% of the children in city schools. The Lowlands (Holland/Belgium) increased the number of primary schools from the twelfth century onward (as did England). Local schooling typically included children eight to sixteen years-old.

Many methods of instruction were practiced during the Medieval times. Such an eclectic approach continued into the Reformation.

Summary of References & Suggested Readings:
Medieval Children and Medieval Schools, Orme
History of Education, Cubberley

A Very Short History of Christian Education, 2/5

New Testament Times:

About one-hundred years before Christ, the Jewish leadership began promoting schools as a counterweight to Grecian influence. The schools were for boys age five to thirteen, teaching rudimentary skills.

"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." (Schaff, 2262)

Early Church:

The evidence of this time period is scarce. Some of the church fathers were schooled at home (Gregory of Nyssa), others locally (Basil) and others some combination thereof (Chrysostom). A few of the councils (Constantinople, Toledo and Vaison) ordered the erection of schools or commanded the priests to teach the local children. Some leaders, such as Polycarp, apprenticed local boys at their home. Even though the church fathers cautioned against pagan influence, men such as Chrystostom and Tertullian, allowed and at times encouraged local schooling or tutoring. There were even bible schools for children.

Religious instruction being an important Christian goal, catechetical schools were created.

“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)

Formal schooling existed along side domestic education, even as it was expanding into new venues such as the monastery, cathedral and parish schools.

Summary References & Suggested Reading:
Compendia Rerum Iudaicarum ad Novum Testamentum, Section One. “The Jewish People in the First Century.” Vol. 2.
Catholic Encyclopedia Online
History of Education, Cubberley
A Religious Encyclopedia, Schaff, online.

Christian Black History Month: Jupiter Hammon

Jupiter Hammon (1711-1806?) was the first black poet published in America. Considered the father of African-American poetry, on Christmas of 1760 he published, “An Evening Thought. Salvation by Christ with Penitential Cries.” He is politically incorrect today. And he was also a “committed Calvinist versifier,” rejoicing in the redemption found in Christ instead of dwelling on his condition of slavery (The Journey Back, 5).


Although not much is known about him, his story is beautiful nonetheless. Near the end of his life he spoke to a convention of blacks in New York (late 1786). Here are some soul-searching comments from a man who lived his whole life as a slave to man but was never a slave to the world, the flesh or the Devil:

“The apostle Paul says, 'Servants be obedient to them that are your masters according to the flesh, with fear and trembling in singleness in your heart as unto Christ: Not with eye service, as men pleasers, but as the servants of Christ doing the will of God from the heart: With good will doing service to the Lord, and not to men: Knowing that whatever thing a man doeth the same shall he receive of the Lord, whether he be bond or free.' --Here is a plain command of God for us to obey our masters. It may seem hard for us… If you are proud and stubborn and always finding fault, your master will think the fault lies wholly on your side, but if you are humble, and meek, and bear all things patiently, your master may think he is wrong, if he does not, his neighbours will be apt to see it, and will befriend you, and try to alter his conduct. If this does not do, you must cry to Him, who has the hearts of all men in his hands, and turneth them as the rivers of waters are turned.

“Getting our liberty in this world, is nothing to our having the liberty of the children of God. Now the Bible tells us that we are all by nature, sinners, that we are slaves to sin and Satan, and that unless we are converted, or born again, we must be miserable forever. Christ says, except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God, and all that do not see the kingdom of God, must be in the kingdom of darkness… Now you may think you are not enemies to God, and do not hate him: But if your heart has not been changed, and you have not become true Christians, you certainly are enemies to God, and have been opposed to him ever since you were born… The Bible is a revelation of the mind and will of God to men. Therein we may learn, what God is. That he made all things by the power of his word; and that he made all things for his own glory, and not for our glory. That he is over all, and above all his creatures, and more above them that we can think or conceive --that they can do nothing without him -- that he upholds them all, and will over-rule all things for his own glory.

"In the Bible likewise we are told what man is. That he was at first made holy, in the image of God, that he fell from that state of holiness, and became an enemy to God, and that since the fall, all the imaginations of the thoughts of his heart, are evil and only evil, and that continually. That the carnal mind is not subject to the law of God, neither indeed can be. And that all mankind, were under the wrath, and curse of God, and must have been for ever miserable, if they had been left to suffer what their sins deserved. It tells us that God, to save some of mankind, sent his Son into this world to die, in the room and stead of sinners, and that now God can save from eternal misery, all that believe in his Son, and take him for their saviour, and that all are called upon to repent, and believe in Jesus Christ.

“If we should ever get to Heaven, we shall find nobody to reproach us for being black, or for being slaves. Let me beg of you my dear African brethren, to think very little of your bondage in this life, for your thinking of it will do you no good. If God designs to set us free, he will do it, in his own time, and way; but think of your bondage to sin and Satan, and do not rest, until you are delivered from it. We cannot be happy if we are ever so free or ever so rich, while we are servants of sin, and slaves to Satan. We must be miserable here, and to all eternity, I will conclude what I have to say with a few words to those negroes who have their liberty. The most of what I have said to those who are slaves may be of use to you, but you have more advantages, on some accounts, if you will improve your freedom, as you may do, than they. You have more time to read God's holy word, and to take care of the salvation of your souls. Let me beg of you to spend your time in this way, or it will be better for you, if you had always been slaves. If you think seriously of the matter, you must conclude, that if you do not use your freedom, to promote the salvation of your souls, it will not be of any lasting good to you.”



Black History Month Series:
1. Lemuel Haynes
2. Jupiter Hammon 
3. Phillis Wheately

A Very Short History of Christian Education, 1/5

Whoever controls the image and information of the past determines what and how future generations will think; whoever controls the information and images of the present determines how those same people will view the past.
— George Orwell, 1984 (1949)

It was a little over ten years ago that I first heard about a new and strange form of education. At my new church, I rubbed shoulders with homeschooling families. And having experienced firsthand the modern public schools, I easily accepted this “homeschooling.”

In fact, when my first group speech debate was thrust upon me in the dreaded college freshman speech class, I eagerly accepted my assignment to defend homeschooling against all on-comers. Rushing to church, I read what families handed me on the superiority of home education, especially its history. Standing tall and confident in the scholarship of those of like-minded faith and practice (some who were even public school teachers), I seemingly trounced the competing public school and private school proponents—until afterward when my gentle speech teacher, lauding my eloquence, chided me on my weak historical evidence. “Many founding fathers were schooled or tutored as well as taught at home,” he gently informed me.

Naturally, I was crestfallen.

Now, after a few years of research, I have verified my teacher's chiding.

It did not change my mind about the propriety of homeschooling--it is certainly allowable and even desirable in many circumstances. But then, so are other methods of schooling.

This historical question is important. Many conservative Christians take history seriously: if our spiritual forefathers practiced a certain way maybe we should take it seriously. Furthermore, setting up Patrick Henry or John Witherspoon as educational role models adds addition pressure on families--especially if the history if false.

And the history is false.

And the more I have studied the original resources and works by standard historians the more I discover that homeschooling was only one of many options exercised by our spiritual and political fathers and mothers.

But what is education anyway?

Education can be conceived of in a broader and narrower sense. In the former, it may be labeled nurture: the spiritual, physical and intellectual well-being of the child made in Christ's image for the furtherance of the Kingdom. This involves (at least) the teaching of truth (as any endeavor would), discipline and imitation. Narrowly, education can be conceived of as a more structured/systematic teaching of facts, understanding and wisdom concerning the realms of human (and divine) knowledge within the sphere of Christian nurture. I will label this schooling.

Thus, in examining the history of Christian schooling I am referring to the narrow idea. The series and the research would have tripled if the first definition was followed. The idea and practice of nurture is wrapped around Christian schooling, but it is not the focus of this series. Thus homeschooling means schooling at home (not nurture at home per se--that's assumed). This is instruction at home by a tutor, friend, neighbor, parent or some combination thereof.

Definitions are important to avoid equivocations--a common error I have encountered in my study. If the past is misinterpreted and misunderstood, then future expectations will be misdirected. One thing is important: historically Christian education--in fact, most education--was a cooperative laissez-faire effort.

This short, short history of education will include Jewish practices during Christ's time, the early church, Medieval era, and both the Reformation and Colonial America eras.

I hope this very short series is encouraging and helpful as it is informative for those parents carrying on the Christian tradition of training their children in the fear and admonition of the Lord.

(This series is a condensed version of a soon-to-be-published A Short History of Christian Education)