This sermon is from the Rev. Charles G. Dennison sermon archive, part of the “Misc. NT sermons” series, and was preached at Grace Orthodox Presbyterian Church in Sewickley, PA, during a worship service on Sunday, April 13, 1975.
About this sermon
The First and Tenth Amendments bear on Christian education, and they weigh against any claimed inherent right of the state to educate children. State education is anti-Christian in its basic assumptions, and the problem runs deeper than poor execution. Responsibility for a child’s education belongs to the family.
Sermon transcript
The reading this morning is taken from 2 Corinthians chapter 10, 2 Corinthians chapter 10, the first five verses. But now I, Paul, myself, urge you by the meekness and gentleness of Christ, I will meet when face to face with you, but bold toward you when absent. I ask that when I am present, I may not be bold with the confidence with which I propose to be courageous against some who regard us as if we walked according to the flesh.
For though we walk in the flesh, we do not war according to the flesh. For the weapons of our warfare are not of the flesh, but divinely powerful for the destruction of fortresses. For we are destroying speculations and every lofty thing raised up against the knowledge of God. And we are taking every thought captive to the obedience of Christ. Lord, it is only in your word that we see the light that you have for us. For coming in that Word is the powerful effect of your Spirit, for your Spirit and Word always work together, bearing witness to Christ the Savior and exalting Him our Father. We are asking this morning that your Word may be preached and that we may hear and that the faith of our souls may be the faith of men.
The firm is on Christian education this morning, so this last week I went out and bought a new pair of glasses so I looked the part. A couple of weeks ago I received a phone call. The person on the other end of the line was issuing to me an invitation to participate in the dedication of the new wing of the Farrakhan Elementary School, Heidi Klein. And I’d like to explain the reason for that this morning to you. And in doing so I hope to make clear my own position with regard to education, and particularly Christian education.
I also want to say at the beginning of this that I’m not on a personal crusade of any kind. And I know that there are here this morning many who have given their lives to public education. And I know that in your hearts you have never once compromised your faith and allegiance to Jesus Christ. And you would never do so, even if it meant your job.
And so I hope that no one will interpret my remarks this morning as an indictment against anyone. but merely an explanation of my own position in hopes that you may understand my position and why I say some of the things that I do at particular times. All right.
The reasons for turning down the invitation to participate in the dedication service this afternoon to Ferriton Elementary School. I was told that it would be on a Sunday, and I had just turned down an invitation from the Cub Scouts, the very pack which this church sponsors, to participate and attend their Pinewood Derby, which was also going to be held on a Sunday afternoon. Now, I do have some definite opinions about Sunday and the use of the Lord’s Day. And it’s not my purpose to get into a discussion about that this morning. I’m hoping, the Lord willing, to reserve those comments for April 27th.
So we’ll leave that item where it lies. The other matter was the fact that I was invited to pray. And knowing that there would be many there that had no relationship to Jesus Christ whatsoever, being aware that there were administrators, members of the board, teachers, and others connected with the school who had no love for the Savior, I felt that I would be tempted to turn my prayer into a sermon. And I didn’t think that that was proper.
Also, I feel finally, and I believe this to be the most basic point, that there is an inherent inconsistency at work in a school that is run by the laws of the state, which forbids any specific and definite mention of God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ, in inviting a minister of the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ to pronounce a blessing in Christ’s name over a building that does not recognize his Lordship, and has no desire to do so. That leads us to consider what is state education. Basically, state education is a publicly funded, compulsory system of education which is bound by the law of the state and by the Constitution of the United States of America.
In the Constitution of the United States of America, there are two amendments that are important for the public school system. The first one is the Tenth Amendment, and that Tenth Amendment provides the basis for the legitimacy of the state being involved in education at all. What does that amendment say? It says that powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states, respectively, or to the people. On the basis of the Tenth Amendment, I almost said the Tenth Commandment, on the basis of the Tenth Amendment, the state has declared that it has a legitimate right and even obligation to educate all the children within its boundaries. It has declared that it has an inherent right by law to educate our children. The second amendment that is of importance to us in this regard is the First Amendment, and we all know what that amendment is.
This is the amendment which prohibits the Congress from making any law respecting the establishment of religion. And according to recent interpretations of the First Amendment, any facility which is operated by the state is prohibited from supporting either directly or indirectly any particular religious doctrine or cause. When I start praying to the Father in the name of the Son, that’s pretty particular. That’s definite religious doctrine, and I am involved in a religious cause, that of spreading the gospel and honoring the Lord Jesus Christ.
Now, up to this point, you may say, I don’t see the problem, because you, like myself, believe basically in the separation of powers, and that’s what is at the heart of the First Amendment. The Church is not to rule the State, and the State is not to rule the Church. But you see, it isn’t the matter of the First Amendment and the separation of powers that is the problem. It is really the implementation of the Tenth Amendment that is the problem.
Really the question that we are asking ourselves is, does the state have an inherent right to assume the responsibility of educating our children? Or have they usurped that right, a right that is not theirs? Have they gone beyond a true legal boundary, a legal boundary which would be inscriptious? That’s the question. For you see, the conclusion of the matter is simply this.
If the state is to become involved in education, By the very nature of the case, by law, according to the Constitution of the United States, that education must be, it has to be, it can’t be anything else but an education without God. At least for God it matters. a definite God, the God of the Scriptures, the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ. Because then, you see, you would be involved, the state would be involved in establishing a religion, and it cannot do that. As I say, we are not arguing about the separation of powers, We are arguing about the legitimacy of the right of the state to assume the responsibility to educate our children.
You may not be unduly concerned yet, but let’s consider the consequences of this approach to education for a minute. The consequences are simply this. First of all, and probably most importantly, we cannot kid ourselves. An education without God eventually must become a godless education. A godless education in the sense that it must eventually become morally perverse and corrupt. How can I say something like this?
I say on the authority of Jesus Christ himself, who said that there is no neutral ground with regard to himself. You cannot stand on the fence and say that you’re going to have a neutral middle ground from which God is not going to be included, into which God is not going to be included, or from which he is not going to be excluded. To merely claim neutrality, a middle ground, Jesus Christ says, he who is not for me is against me. If you claim neutrality with regard to God, to the Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, as far as God is concerned, you are against Him.
Not for Him, but against Him. The ultimate result of this is that education without God is against God, And in the end it must become godless. To say it even more pointedly, it must become anti-godless by its very nature. And in the end, you see, also it imbibes of that spirit of the Antichrist. For he was not with Christ as against him. There is no neutral ground. There is no middle position. That’s the first consequence.
Now, to greater or lesser degree, this can be seen in the public education system today. There are some tremendous pockets of resistance, and they deserve our praise and our commendation. and we should offer them any help and assistance in our prayers that we can. There are pockets where people are standing up for the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ and telling the state that they have no right to undermine the authority of their homes by teaching their children something entirely different than is taught to them at home by their own parents. What is the second consequence of this approach to education by the state? This assumption that the state has the inherent right to educate our children. Second consequence is this. This education must end playing a charade. It must end in a hopeless hypocrisy.
For not only has it declared neutrality with regard to the matter of God, we’re going to stand on the fence, and we’re not going to try to influence anyone one way or the other. But it must now claim neutrality in the classroom with regard to every subject that is taught.
God has nothing to do with arithmetic. And if he does, I can’t tell you, because that is forbidden by the state. God has nothing to do with language, arts, with sociology. He has nothing to do with biology so that we can have sex education courses that teach you the mechanics. The charade and the hopeless hypocrisy is simply this.
We are being told by the state educators that in the classroom we are not to have teachers who impart value and make moral judgments or interpretations upon the facts that they are presenting. The teachers are to be neutral, the materials to be neutral. You’re just to tell the facts. You’re not to interpret them, you’re not to evaluate them, you’re not to make any moral judgments about them at all. Now, such a view of education is completely impossible. And I know the teachers here this morning didn’t tell you that. I knew exactly where my 6th grade teachers stood on the Civil War. I knew exactly where my senior high civics teacher stood on the election of 1960. I knew who he was going to vote for.
It was impossible for him to hide that from us, from the remarks that he made in class. I know that my 10th grade biology teacher believed in evolution. And even though it was a theory, he presented it as a fact. as a fact of science. I knew that my 10th grade history teacher hated Jonathan Edwards. And everything that snowed was a pureness. And we had a raging battle going between us throughout that whole 10th grade experience of life. It is impossible to teach without making value judgments. It’s impossible to teach without interpretation. It’s impossible to teach without making moral judgments.
The sexual attitudes of the health teachers in our public schools will become evident to our children as they are subjected to these teachers in the classroom. If the teacher is promiscuous, it will come out, and the student will know it. The most important thing is to keep yourself from some communicable social disease. But if you love one another, what harm is it? That’s what I heard.
The interpretation The evaluation of the facts are a part of education, and there is no education without them. As a matter of fact, this is what the charade is, because you see, the teacher cannot help but impart his own values, his moral judgments, and his own interpretations to the child.
It’s an impossibility. It cannot be done. And to claim that it can, is a lot. Alright, we have the first two consequences and the final one is the clincher. Such an approach to education cannot educate. It’s very basic. And it’s something that is becoming increasingly evident in the educational systems of our nation. We are graduating illiterates. We are graduating people who cannot cope, who cannot deal with reality. Something is wrong.
It is a self-defeating system because It is a system that is directed not for God, not even in neutrality towards God, but against God. It is a system that is dedicated to interpretations that are not consistent with the Word, nor neutral to it, but against the Word of God. And finally, as we even called ourselves to worship this morning by quoting from those passages in the Old Testament that said, the fear of God is the beginning of wisdom, and to depart from evil is understanding. Here is the true perspective to education. It has to be moral. There have to be judgments made. You have to evaluate. You have to interpret. What is necessary is that we have the interpretation that God gives. Basically, in his word. You have his values. You have his moral judgments.
What alternatives are there then to the state-run educational system? There have been a couple that have been developed, and we’ll just run through them, trying to end on an upbeat, I hope. The first approach was the approach of the church, seeing that it was losing its children to the school, and they devised a program called Release Time, where students would be released to go and receive religious instruction during school time. What was the result of this? The result of this was that Johnny became a schizophrenic. He became a split personality.
Because, you see, what he was being told, in effect, is that God has everything to do with the Church. He has everything to do with this education here, which I am experiencing during this release time. But he doesn’t have anything to do with this education that I’m experiencing here for the most part of my day. He has everything to do with the Church, but he has nothing to do with the subjects that I am learning in the public school.
Johnny ends up a very confused boy. He doesn’t understand, and his religious life becomes quite compartmentalized. Certain aspects of his life belong to God, But there are certain aspects that don’t belong to God or that are in a gray area. And I have no responsibility to God there. Sundays belong to God. Monday through Saturday belongs to me or to the state. All right, that’s one alternative. What’s another alternative? Another alternative is the parochial school. What’s the position of the parochial school?
Parochial school is merely doing the same thing that the state is doing. The state has said that it has an inherent right to educate your children, and it has usurped that right. Here comes the parochial school. It says, the church has the right, the inherent right, to educate your children. You can’t find that nowhere in the Bible. The church’s job is to preach the gospel. The parochial school is not the answer. And I say this against both Catholic and Protestant parochial schools. What is another alternative? I believe that the other alternative is the one that is sanctioned by the Word of God.
And that is that the inherent right to educate resides in the parent. as he is part of a community. The community that the Christian belongs to is the covenant community that has claimed God’s promises, not only for himself, but for his children. And when I take a vow in baptism to raise my child in the nurture and the admonition I am recognizing some responsibilities that have to do with the whole covenant community of God’s people. It’s bigger than just a little church on a corner in one little town. It involves a whole area of people with a common concern to see their children raised in a way that is consistent with the scripture, and it is honoring to God the Father and to our Lord Jesus Christ. Parents binding themselves together in covenant to see that their children are educated in a way that does not undermine their authority.
In a way that ensures that if I am teaching my child at home that man is a creature of God, he is not going to go to a school where every textbook in science tells him differently. Every textbook. There is no exception. Well, I am assured that the name of Jesus Christ will not be a swear word, nor an oath, especially on the mouths and lips of teachers and administrators. For I can be assured that those who have been given the responsibility to run the school, to lead God and claim his promises, and who are not declarably atheistic or agnostic.
This is the structure that demonstrates itself from beginning to end in the scriptures. Covenant people are given the responsibility by Moses to bring up their children to know the law, to teach their children well. The Book of Proverbs is the education of a father to his son, where he is passing on the wisdom that he has gained to his child. That is the structure.
The structure is the education of God the Father of God the Son. It even has divine sanctity and a divine replica. parental responsibility in educating the child. The state does not have the inherent right to educate my child and he does not have the inherent right to educate your child. The church does not have an inherent right to educate your child. That is not the purpose of the church. It is your job to educate your children. In the context of a community where you can be assured that the things that you believe in your home will be honored in the school that you send your child to.
Here we have a completely unique view of what education is, because the community that we are dealing with is the regenerated community of God’s people. The people who have received the Spirit of God and by grace they have been transformed so that they are separate from the natural man, For they have divine understanding of the things that pertain to life. That means now that everything is different. The Christian sees the world differently than the non-Christian. The Christian school must see the world differently than the public school. It has a different view of reality, of the world and man.
It has a view of the world that begins with Psalm 24, verse 1. tells you that the earth is the Lord’s and the fullness thereof, the world and day that dwell therein. The world is God’s creation. And Johnny must know and learn that the tree that he sees outside the window is a God-created tree, and when he studies those When he studies those slides in biology class, he must be impressed with the fact that what he is looking at is something that is there because God made it so. Because of creation. And only if he understands the tree, as a God-created tree, does he really understand the tree. He doesn’t know what a tree is unless he sees it as a God-created tree. Man is a creature of God, made in his image.
We are told that in Genesis 1.27. He is crowned with honor and glory. He is made a little lower than the angels. There is a unique view of man, you see, that is inherent to Christian education that cannot be a part of the public educational system. Man is a sinner. All have sinned and come short of the glory of God. That cannot be preached or taught in the public school. We can teach that man has faults, he has errors, but that he is a sinner answerable to God, that cannot be taught.
And we also teach that the creation is experiencing a new day in Jesus Christ through him, in which all things are being made new. and that we are like a new and mighty army. As Paul himself has said in this passage that we read this morning, we are engaged in a new Christian endeavor in which we are claiming the Lordship of Jesus Christ throughout all of the world and all of life. For Paul says, we are destroying speculations on every lofty thing that is raised up against the knowledge of God. And we are taking every thought captive to the obedience of Christ. The Christian approaches mathematics differently than the non-Christian.
The sermon text provided above is derived from the sermon audio recording making use of generative tools. It has not been manually edited. While transcription tools have a high degree of accuracy, the output may include generative textual, punctuation, and/or formatting errors.