Why Default to Christian Education?

Why Default to Christian Education?
in Uncategorized 2,302 Words

In this post, I want to defend the conscience of believers who choose different approaches to educating their children while also arguing for defaulting to explicitly Christian education and, if possible, removing children from the public school system.

Common Ground

First, here are some principles that I think are shared broadly by theologically conservative evangelicals:

  • Education is chiefly the responsibility of parents. The Bible requires that parents directly instruct their children in the regular rhythms of daily life (Deuteronomy 6:6–7). This includes love for God, knowledge of Scripture, worldview, and discipleship (Ephesians 6:4).
  • There is no ultimate spiritual neutrality. All truth is God’s truth. Even math, when not explicitly subordinated under God, is still God’s math. But there is no neutral ground in education.
  • The state does not own our children. The government has no natural right to ban homeschooling or to claim final authority over our children’s formation.
  • Parents should be eager, not reluctant, to nurture their children. Children are not a nuisance. Parents should have primary influence and develop a Christian philosophy of education.
  • Marketable skills matter, but not most. Children should be taught workforce competency. But the discipline and instruction of the Lord is more important than being highly marketable (Proverbs 3:13–14).
  • Bad reasons to choose public school include: sports, evangelism through unsaved children, lack of curriculum at home, mom wanting time alone, or perceived inability to teach young children.
  • Bad reasons to choose homeschooling include: fear, ease, or anti-authoritarianism. A charismatic “God told us to” is also a questionable basis for schooling decisions.
  • Homeschooling families must stay connected to the local church. Those who homeschool or have kids heavily involved in activities should not withdraw from the community of the local church (Hebrews 10:24–25).
  • Peer influence is a real danger. “Bad company corrupts good morals” (1 Corinthians 15:33). “The companion of fools will suffer harm” (Proverbs 13:20). Our children are vulnerable to disastrous influence from their peers.

Here are some other principles that, though disputed by some, I think are still commonly shared:

  • At least some faithful Christians can rightly send their kids to public school. There are circumstances in which imitable, godly parents do so. Christians ought not judge each other by idealism. Even when not ideal, public school can be a valid option for at least some.
  • External schooling does not automatically mean abdication. Having a child educated outside the home for 7 hours a day does not alone entail parental neglect.
  • Vigilance is required. Parents who externally school their children should stay active in discipleship and maintain a willingness to pull their kids out (Proverbs 27:23). Home discipleship must continue regardless.
  • Know your options. Parents should be aware of alternatives like homeschooling, dual-enrollment, charter schools, private schools, and hybrid models.
  • Geography matters. There are at least some areas of the country where needlessly sending children to public school is unwise.
  • Lean on the church. Christian families should look to their local church for wisdom in the education of their children.
  • Good non-Christian influences can be a blessing. It’s not inherently unethical to have a secular teacher, tutor, coach, or mentor. Christians can be deeply thankful for such influences!
  • Parents retain final authority. Those who use external schools should understand they are partially submitting to another institution’s authority. But parents must maintain perspective: final authority over their children remains with them.

Mitigating Factors

I acknowledge the following arguments made by brothers who choose public schooling:

  • Mitigated risk. Valid concerns over public schooling can be mitigated by predictable curriculum, structured environment, respect for authority, classical education, expectation of parental involvement, respect for religious values, a subculture friendly to traditional values, and the ability to be monitored. Limited-scope, narrow-focus programs pose less risk.
  • Extant Christian influence. America still benefits from Christian influence and heritage Civil law has an instructional role in teaching good citizenship, and public schools still teach generally good behavior through shared values.
  • Special needs. It wise for parents to seek extraordinary help when their children (and parents themselves) have extraordinary special needs.
  • Common grace. Secular teachers should not be demonized. They are blessed by common grace, generally care about children, and often want to teach them well.
  • Subject matter. It may be wise to have a secular teacher instruct in Latin or Computer Science. It is not wise to have a modern secular teacher instruct on family and sexual norms. The closer the subject is to worldview formation, the more caution is warranted.
  • Complementing home discipleship. Using a public or charter school for subjects like calculus, where a parent lacks competency or time, may free up energy for more focused spiritual formation at home.

Voddie Baucham on Legalism in the Homeschool Movement

“The homeschool movement is rife with legalism to a sickening degree. It’s rife with legalism, because that’s a lot easier. Because here’s what happens: as parents, many of us are recipe parents. And what I mean by that is we had this idea that raising children is like baking a cake, and if you just find the right ingredients and you put them together in the right balance, then you can guarantee the outcome, right? And most of us wouldn’t say this upfront; we wouldn’t admit to being recipe parents. But here’s how you know: something happens, and, you know, you have some children, and several children go off and they do well, and then you have one that derails. And you come and you say, “I just don’t know what happened. We did everything that we knew how to do. I don’t know what we did with this one that would—” Stop. Time out. Because here’s what you just said, homeschool mom, homeschool dad: you just said those children are doing well because of what we did. This child’s not doing well because obviously we missed a step, because we determine the spiritual outcome of our children’s lives. We control that. That’s recipe parenting…

“We don’t want to be recipe parents; we don’t want to be reputation parents. We want to be redemption parents. Amen. Amen. My children are utterly dependent on the cross, and whatever I give to my children, it’s going to be inadequate. And any of my children who end up walking with God, my response will be to fall on my face before a holy God and to thank Him for His mercy and His grace—not to tip my hat because He gave me what He owed me because I got the recipe right.” (Homeschooling How and Why)

Avoiding Legalism

Jeff Wiesner writes,

First, we should be slow to make a 1:1 correspondence between Ephesians 6:4 and “education,” en toto. Fathers are finally responsible, with the help of his faithful wife, to instruct their children in matters of Christian religion around God’s law and gospel. To these ends, Scripture is sufficient, and fathers are accountable.

Second, Scriptural sufficiency does not entail all possible knowledge or skill, only that all true knowledge finds its source in its Creator; all fruitful skill, in his wisdom. On such subjects or skills (e.g. calculus or car repair), the “light of nature” leaves room for secular (i.e. “common”) cooperation.

Third, given these two points, it is possible for Christian parents, in certain contexts and circumstances, to seek education for their children through common education while being vigilant to bring God’s truth to bear on all things in their education, even in possible disagreements.

Fourth, while it is permissible in all kinds of circumstances for Christian parents to seek education on certain subjects from public schools, they are nevertheless responsible for training their children in Christian religion (Eph. 6:4). To abdicate their responsibility would, in fact, be sin. But public schooling does not necessarily entail abdication. Admittedly, parenting in this manner will be in some ways harder, not easier, as their training must now include not only positive instruction on the Christian religion but negative correction of all that opposes it. But it IS possible for certain families in certain contexts and circumstances, with much wisdom and vigilance.

Fifth, and more to the point of the post, one species of legalism voids God’s word by adding to God’s word (cf. Mark 7). We add to God’s word any time we confuse our personal (and, perhaps, wise) application of God’s command with the command itself. This is precisely what the Pharisees did in Mark 7. They maintained that obedience to God necessarily meant observing certain traditions such that observing the latter was required to obey the former. I believe this is exactly what Brian did in his post. I might summarize it this way:

Prescription = God’s way
Prudence = My (our) way to do God’s way
Legalism = Your way must be my (our) way if you’re to do it God’s way. Otherwise, you’re in sin.

Sixth, on the matter of educating our children, I noted, contrary to Brian, that a universal prohibition against public schooling is not necessarily inferred from Ephesians 6:4 because there are all kinds of circumstances and contexts in which the prohibition could be reasonably overturned. And if the principle is not universally applicable to all people in all contexts at all times, but only for certain people in certain contexts at certain times, then the principle cannot be a matter of Scriptural prescription, but personal prudence.

Seventh, and finally, when church leaders fail to make these proper distinctions, and threaten to censure otherwise faithful Christians under a pretense that their prudential application of Ephesians 6:4 is really the biblical prescription itself, then they are committing spiritual abuse by using the authority of their office to bind Christians to human judgments. Such men consequently use God’s law unlawfully, pervert the gospel, trample Christian freedom by demanding implicit obedience, void God’s word, and, if they persist, disqualify themselves from Christian ministry.

My Cumulative Case for Defaulting to Christian Education

Matters of such prudence and wisdom often resist simple recipes or reductive formulas, and are better approached with a cumulative case.

  • Education is discipleship. Schools don’t just transmit data; they shape worldview through values, heroes, and stories. Teachers imprint on students like a seal on wax.
  • Christian ownership. It is better that believers fund, regulate, staff, and govern the institutions educating their children.
  • The American educational system has become hostile. Public schools are increasingly antagonistic to traditional Christian values.
  • You can’t realistically undo daily secular formation. The “debrief at dinner” approach underestimates how much worldview shaping happens in 7 hours versus the limited time parents have afterward (Psalm 1:1-2).
  • Unnatural dating pools. Teens form romantic attachments with whoever they spend time with, and public schools normalize relationships with unbelievers during formative years.
  • Two-income dependency is a trap. Free public schooling enables and encourages a dual-income lifestyle that undermines family structure and creates dependency on the government school system.
  • Public school is not viable for future generations. Even those who think current public schools are acceptable often doubt they’ll be suitable for grandchildren. Better to normalize Christian education now.
  • Holy jealousy. Your kids are your kids. It’s unnatural to needlessly hand them to others for early formation. Parents should enjoy the privilege and responsibility of raising their own children. This point resonates especially with young children.
  • Accountability and oversight. Even if you trust certain teachers, you’re often submitting your children to a public school system where teachers and peers can teach falsehood without your knowledge, Christian objection, or meaningful parental oversight.
  • Daily rhythm of Christian life. A Christian household or school should normalize prayer, worship, and Scripture throughout the day. Government schools structurally exclude these practices, teaching children that the secular/sacred divide is normal.
  • Modern education produces citizens who feel unable to educate their own children. The system perpetuates dependency on itself. Better to choose an approach that empowers future parents to educate their own children rather than feeling incompetent to do so.
  • The thought experiment of cost. If public schooling wasn’t free, would you pay to send your kids to the same school? Many would answer no. We shouldn’t settle for something just because it costs nothing.
  • Peer influence. Placing children in groups of 30 other immature kids for 6-7 hours daily, with minimal adult oversight, is not wise. Children learn better with smaller friend groups and more direct influence from parents and trusted adults.
  • Stability. Mask mandates, shutdowns, and ideological shifts have roiled public schools. Christian education can offer consistency, security, and uninterrupted learning free from secular institutional chaos.
  • Continuity. Modern families are mobile, frequently moving within a region or across state lines. Homeschooling offers more consistent education that travels with the family. Private Christian schools can provide similar continuity for local moves.
  • The sufficiency of Scripture. Scripture speaks to all areas of life, and a child’s education should equip them with knowledge of Scripture and its application to every domain (2 Timothy 3:16–17).

Plea for Unity and Warmth

Brothers, if you and I disagree on our educational choices, may we lean extra hard into the warmth of re-affirming fellowship to avoid letting it become a relational wedge.

We need to give each other space to come to our own conclusions with the application of wisdom, and do so on God’s timetable. Even if we think the other is wrong. Even if we think another’s conscience needs to be better informed. We can be “right” on this issue and be wrong in a dozen others. It’s ripe for self-righteousness.

God has a way of subverting our legalistic recipes and absolutized proscriptions for parenting. Life comes at you fast. Fortunately, sitting under the preaching of the word, belonging to a loving Christian community, being mentored under godly men and women—all these go a long way. We don’t need to divide churches or denominations or friendships over this. But if that’s your conviction, at least find a church with a clear membership covenant and stick to it.

Grace and peace in Christ.

AI use: Claude helped me organize my notes into this post.