Reflecting on the French Revolution, Karl Marx wrote, “The tradition of all dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brains of the living.”
Today, we seem to be living in this sick fantasy of Karl Marx, as communists, utopians, and progressives fight for mankind to be woken up from the “nightmare of tradition.”
In France, the Olympics displayed a ghastly mockery of our Lord’s Last Supper; in America, our schools are omitting history and replacing it with progressive theory; and Vice President Kamala Harris proudly imagines, “What can be, unburdened by what has been.”
What do all of these disturbing occurrences have in common? What is the “end goal” of those who promote them? How can we, as classists and Christians, defend truth, beauty, and goodness in the face of such blatant paganism?
Listen as Robert Bortins and Christ Blackburn discuss all this and more in episode 109 of Refining Rhetoric.
Classical Conversations CEO Robert Bortins and Chris Blackburn discuss current events on this episode of the Refining Rhetoric podcast.
Also, learn more about the dangerous implications of our Vice President’s words in Robert Bortins’ latest op-ed in The Carolina Journal, “What can be, unburdened by what has been.”
Join Robert Bortins, CEO of Classical Conversations® as he interviews thought leaders about critical topics related to faith, education, business, and culture. Using the fifteen classical tools of learning to guide his conversations, Robert encourages listeners to seek truth in every arena of life.
“… bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.” Eph. 6:4 (ESV)
That’s it! Questions?
It seems so clear and simple, yet as a father of two teen boys, I can confidently say—it’s not. Parenting is often emotionally exhausting and constant. It exposes our sin and frequently humbles us to the point of despair. But praise God; His Word is sufficient to equip us for every good work. When we look at the training and admonition of the Lord, the way He raises up men in Scripture and in our lives, we see that His approach is a perfect balance of grace and discipline. When we remain in that balance as parents, God blesses those efforts, and there is fruit.
However, when grace turns into overindulging or discipline leads to exasperation, we’re out of balance, and our parenting efforts fall short. I will detail both to help us better recognize when we inevitably slip into these extremes. The quicker we recognize it, the quicker we can return to that balanced approach.
Are You a Giving Tree?
In the children’s book The Giving Tree by Shel Silverstein, we read about an apple tree that gives everything it can to support and love a boy from childhood through old age. The tree allows the boy to climb and swing on its branches, then gives its apples to sell, its branches to build a house, and its trunk to build a boat. The tree gives and gives to the point of having only a stump for the boy to sit on when he is old. Throughout his life, the boy takes and takes with the same emotionless disposition.
Some would say it’s a beautiful and loving story. Perhaps. I’d argue that it’s a sad picture of how 20-plus-year-old boys end up living in their parents’ basements, playing video games, and eating Cheetos. If parents give and give without training the mind, boys tend to keep coming back for more handouts, shirking their responsibilities, and living slothful and passive lives.
We see the same when Old Testament fathers like Eli, Samuel, David, and Solomon overindulge their sons. It is good to give gifts to our boys, but when those gifts become expected (often accompanied by a lack of gratitude), that is a sign that our parenting is out of balance. In these moments, I (the more natural ‘training tree’) tend to be the one that raises the point to my wife (the more natural ‘giving tree’) that we need to move back towards a focus on discipline.
How did we get to this extreme in the first place? We just wanted to make that hormonal teen happy and content! What we’ve found, however, is that no matter how much we give him, it never seems to be enough.
I’m reminded that our own lack of joy and contentment is never fulfilled by material things. Our real need is Jesus; the same is true for our boys. They need to be lovingly and patiently pointed back to the Gospel over and over.
Are You Exasperating Your Sons?
The other extreme that indicates an unbalanced parenting approach is when our children become overwhelmed by our training.
“Fathers, do not provoke your children to anger, but bring them up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord.” Ephesians 6:4 (ESV)
The Greek word for anger here is parorgizete, which implies exasperation or frustration. It is when a child feels the training is too much to carry or there isn’t a feasible way to move forward. Moreover, it is also interesting that Paul directs this point to fathers, both here and in Colossians 3:21. Why is that?
I believe that we, as fathers, often forget we’re bringing our children up in the Lord’s training, not our own. Too often, I allow ‘my kingdom’ to be front and center, which leads to a myriad of problems that result in parorgizete. Here are a few:
Over-Sensitivity
Often, my son’s sin can feel like a personal attack. This can drive me to an emotional response, which then triggers the hormonal teen to anger and deflects attention from the original sin. Thus, the training opportunity gets missed.
However, if dads keep God’s kingdom in mind, we will instead see their sin as an affront to Him, which will yield our approach to be calmer and more patient. We will see their sin as an opportunity to help them rather than fight them because we’re in the same battle.
Keep in mind that growing boys will want to have the alpha male, toe-to-toe spar with dad because they see our weakness. It is important to redirect their sin to the true King, who brings the proudest of men to their knees.
Overprotectiveness
Of course, let’s start with this fact: Dads should be protectors.
However, when this denies our sons opportunities to earn trust, training will be stifled. With just our ‘kingdom’ in mind, it’s easy to remain rigid and unchanging because it’s easier to protect what we feel we can control. With God’s kingdom in mind, we remember His protection is all-powerful and infinite. This can enable fathers to take some wise risks that allow their sons to gain more trust and learn from failures.
Overtraining
When we think our son’s future sanctification hinges solely on our training, it’s easy to become overbearing. If we carry such a heavy burden, we will become slaves to teach and train.
Sons will feel overwhelmed.
Their ears will close.
Their desire to learn will diminish.
If boys don’t hear and heed the instructions of their fathers, they may struggle to become Godly men.
Grace Puts Our Parenting Back in Balance
At the end of the day, shifting our efforts towards grace puts our parenting back in balance. For example, I have found that inviting my son out to dinner to meet one-on-one is most effective. Listening, empathizing, clarifying his perspective, and even repenting where personally needed builds trust and open communication more than provoking ever would.
Ultimately, our calling is to model our parenting after our Heavenly Father’s parenting. God’s loving grace and His timely discipline provide the model of balance we need in raising our boys to be Godly men.
Lastly, the reality is that we can’t do this alone. Prayerlessness is a dependency on oneself. After all, if we can tackle this on our own, then there’s no need to ask for help and intervention.
But let’s get real. We know we’re helpless in our flesh. Prayer, at its essence, is admitting this, looking to the Father, and asking Him to do the work for us and through us. Bringing our children up in the discipline and instruction of the Lord requires our energy to be spent there.
When all is said and done, may the sum of our life be one spent and bathed in prayer.
Read the first installment of the Raising Boys to Become Men series here.
Michael Kuehni currently serves as an elder at Peninsula Community Chapel, Yorktown, Virginia, and as a Colonel in the USAF. He is a Virginia native, a UVA grad, and has an M.A. in Theological Studies from Liberty University. He has been married to his bride, Jamie, for 20 years, and they have three children, 17, 15, and 7. In his spare time he loves meeting with and discipling young men.
“For I know the plans I have for you,” declares the Lord…” Jeremiah 29:11(ESV)
Where were you on September 11, 2001?
We all remember where we were when we first heard the news of the planes crashing into the Twin Towers on September 11, 2001; the first pictures we saw that day of the destruction and devastation as nearly three thousand lives were lost.
These types of events (terrorist attacks, pandemics, recessions, assassination attempts on a president, etc.) change us. The world around us changes.
We see the wickedness of sin; the heinous acts against others bring sorrow to our souls. Where was I that fateful morning? What lasting impacts did that day have on my family?
Packing for a New Home
We were boxing up all our earthly belongings and moving halfway around the world to serve the Lord in Samara, Russia. The movers were at our house packing and loading the truck with our many boxes to be shipped to our new home. We were waiting for a friend to pick up our daughter that morning to watch her for the day. She called us to let us know she was running late because of the breaking news events of that day. What news? What events of the day? We rushed to unpack a small radio to listen to what had happened that morning.
The Heinous Act of Terror
Seeing pictures on the news that night of the destruction in New York City, Washington DC, and Pennsylvania was overwhelming! How could such a heinous act happen? Why?
“‘Islamists’ see Islam as a guiding ideology for politics and the organization of society. That is, they believe that strict adherence to religious law should be the sole basis for a country’s law, as well as its cultural and social life…Islamist extremists believe violence is acceptable to achieve these ends.”1
These Islamist terrorists planned this attack for some time. Using violence to fulfill their mission, to cripple the US.
Trusting God with Our Future
What would we do now? Would we still be moving to Russia? Would we be able to leave the US? Our flight was scheduled for September 17. All the airports were shut down, and no planes were allowed to fly over US airspace. Our friends were set to see us off at the airport, but was that still an option?
As we continued to prepare to fly out the following Monday morning, we prayed and trusted God for our future. We were in a waiting pattern. We finally heard on Saturday that the airports would open on Monday, and our flight was one of the first to depart from Los Angeles. We said our goodbyes in the church parking lot and headed to the airport twelve hours before our flight was set to leave. Only ticketed passengers were allowed at the airport with all the extra security measures. So, the farewell we had hoped for at the airport did not happen. Since 9/11, only ticketed passengers can go to the gate; there are many new security measures at the airports for “our protection” due to 9/11.
God’s Plan is Best
Before we left for Russia, there were many questions and uncertainties about the future. But God knew and still knows what is best for us today; He is conforming us into the image of His Son, Jesus, and sanctifying us each day through His word, other people, and circumstances in our lives (Romans 8:28). We are reminded in James 1:2 that we will have trials; it is not ‘if’ we will have trials, but ‘when.’
God opened the door for many years of ministry in Russia, allowing us to link arms with the Russian believers to share the gospel, train pastors, and support the churches. What Satan may have tried to thwart through sinful men, God’s plan is never thwarted! He is always victorious!
Continue reading an uplifting spiritual blog. This one was written by Jennifer’s husband, Paul.
Jennifer Bright is theCommunication Manager for Research and Quality Assurance for Classical Conversations®. Jennifer’s passions are classical Christian education and discipling the next generation to live for Christ. She supports homeschool families by tutoring their students with the classical tools of learning. Jennifer and her husband began their homeschool journey almost 20 years ago in Russia while serving as missionaries, and currently, they reside in Covington, Louisiana.
“Society may be formed so as to exist without crime, without poverty, with health greatly improved, with little, if any misery, and with intelligence and happiness increased a hundredfold, and no obstacle whatsoever intervenes at this moment except ignorance to prevent such a state of society from becoming universal.”
This utopian prediction was made by the world’s first true socialist—Robert Owen.
Born in Wales on May 14, 1771, Robert Owen’s childhood was rather uneventful according to the standard upbringing of children in the 18th century. His hard-working father worked multiple jobs to support his wife and seven children, and like his peers, Owen was sent to a school that emphasized moral instruction above the teaching of reading, writing, and arithmetic.
Owning largely to his knack for entrepreneurship, Owen became the manager of New Lanark, his father-in-law’s factory, at age 28. During his time in management, he became widely known for improving work conditions, providing opportunities for his employees, and increasing the productivity of his factory. His official slogan became “8 hours labor, 8 hours recreation, 8 hours rest.” This was a stark comparison to the 10–16 hours of work that children and adults alike were accustomed to.
With this reputation and list of accomplishments, Robert Owen’s future looked bright and promising. Such a background does not commonly lead a person to become a utopian, spiritualist, communist—but as the Scriptures say, “Do not be misled: “Bad company corrupts good character.” 1 Corinthians 15:33
The Idea
In 1793, a bright-eyed and progressive Robert Owen joined the Manchester Literary and Philosophical Society. Known today as Manchester Lit & Phil, this group of thinkers and theorists gathered together with the goal of attaining the end of progressivism, which is a globalized utopia. Far from being a casual attendee of these meetings, Robert was one of its leaders. Today, he is still recognized on the Manchester Lit & Phil website as “The father of the co-operative movement.”[1]
Briefly put, the Co-operative Movement was birthed out of the progressive movement and was the first infant school that emphasized character over moral instruction. This is the complete inverse of the schooling Owen had experienced as a child. His school even went as far as dismissing all moral teaching in favor of the instruction of dance and music. It was during this time that Owen adopted the views that he would hold for the majority of his life.
Robert Owen believed that all religion, specifically Christianity, was the stumbling block of social utopia and therefore, must be destroyed. He rejected individualism and worked to uphold social collectivism. He renounced the right to private property and was the first to call for free, public education as a means to establish a global utopia. Simply put, Owen was a good communist and a loyal atheist.
Interestingly, he would not have called himself a “communist” simply because the renowned Communist Manifesto had not yet been published. But regardless of the title, Owen had adopted the very ideas that would kill almost 100 million people in the 20th century alone.
He had one other idea that must be understood in order to grasp the “why” and “how” of his later actions.
Even more importantly than understanding his communist views or anti-religious beliefs, we must recognize that Robert Owen was a utopian. Utopians have one simple premise that undergirds all of their reasoning: human beings are shaped purely by their environments, not by nature. Or, as Owen put it, “Man is a creature of circumstances.”
This premise leads to the following argument:
All humans are products of their environment.
Utopias are concerned with perfecting humanity.
Therefore, Utopians are responsible for perfecting the environment of humans.
To Christians who acknowledge the reality of sin nature, there is a clear problem with this thinking. The utopian argument puts the responsibility of perfecting humanity into the hands of imperfect men. Regardless, Owen, who rejected the Christian worldview, applied himself to perfecting the human race by attempting to perfect their environment.
New Harmony
By 1825, Robert Owen had left Europe and arrived in the United States of America with the aim of creating the perfect communist society. He purchased a piece of land in Indiana and named it New Harmony.
Though this image of New Harmony looks beautiful, I cannot help drawing a comparison between its great red walls and the cold, deadly red walls of the Kremlin in Communist Russia.
It was here that Robert applied his theories to the lives of other people. Consequently, the socialist motto “You will own nothing and be happy” was universally applied at New Harmony. There was no organized religion (though the citizens were able to personally practice whatever religion they chose), and there was no centralized authority in the government; rather, decisions were made in committee. Throughout its brief existence, 500–1,200 people lived in this radically progressive society.
Owen also established many social “firsts” in his communist commune, including the first public library, the first public civil drama club, and the first public school system.
In this supposed utopia, children were kept with their families until age three, when they would be handed over to the populous to be raised, educated, cared for, and trained to be productive members of society.
Tasks and jobs were divided up by age, not skill set or ambition. Children, along with adults, worked the whole day long and only saw their families at mealtimes.
Is this a Utopia?
Owen had successfully disjointed the traditional structure of civilization. No family, no private education, no private property, no organized religion, no accountable government structure—in other words, utopia, right?
Wrong—very wrong. The problem with Owen’s theory is that it can only work in the mind of a madman.
Within two years, New Harmony collapsed. The capitalists say it was because people are not happy when they own nothing; the liberals say it was because New Harmony just needed more money so the committee could care for the populace; the conservatives say it was because the family unit was dissolved; the Christians say it was because of a lack of religious fervor.
Each of these factors may have played a part in the downfall of utopia, but Robert Owen rationalized his failures in a different way.
Because he was a loyal communist, New Harmony did not cause his convictions to sway. Rather than admitting that New Harmony was a destructive idea from the start, he reasoned that it must have failed because the members of his communist society had not been properly conditioned and educated to live in a utopia. He truly took his own advice when he said, “Never argue. Repeat your assertion.” That is exactly what he did.
“The thinking was that the commune failed not because of anything wrong with communism or collectivism, but because the people living there had not been properly socialized and ‘educated’ to be collectivists from childhood.”
From then on, Robert Owen applied himself to convincing his fellow theorists that if utopia is to be established, the population must be educated to accept communism. Therefore, all efforts should be made to design, establish, and control a public school system.
“To train and educate the rising generation will at all times be the first object of society, to which every other will be subordinate.”—Robert Owen.
Suddenly, the public schools were born.
The Prussian Public Schools
“According to Owen’s account, the Prussian ruler had “so much approved” of these ideas that he ordered his own government to create a national education system based upon them. And thus, the Prussian system of education—schooling of the state, by the state, and for the state—was officially born.”
In 1843, a man named Horace Mann traveled to Prussia and observed the public school system—which had been directly inspired by Owen. He instantly recognized the potential of the government overseeing the instruction of all future generations, so he instantly began working in the United States to see this very system implemented in the West.
Ultimately, thanks to the work of men like Horace Mann, John Dewey, and Herbert Marcuse, the schemes of Robert Owen were quickly and eagerly implemented in the freest country on earth.
The Legacies
After his failed American experiment, Robert Owen returned to England as a disgraced and broke man. Having sunk 80% of his wealth in New Harmony, he relied on his children for support until he died in 1858.
Before then, however, Owen also founded the National Equitable Labor Exchange in 1832. This was a union that sought not only to reform the working system but to upend and remake it all together through social transition. Does this sound at all familiar?
Also, before his death, Owen, who had been a staunch atheist all his life, converted to spiritualism in 1854 after meeting with Maria B. Hayden, the first witch to visit England after the awakening of spiritualism in the United States. Later on, he claimed to have communicated with Thomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin via spiritual mediums. He believed they urged him “to prepare the world for universal peace and to infuse into all the spirit of charity, forbearance, and love.”
Interestingly, 13 years after his death in 1871, Robert’s son, Robert Dale Owen, claimed to have been visited by his father, who said he would share a set of “spiritual commandments” through a woman named Emma Hardings Britten, who was a supposed “spiritual medium.” These “spiritual commandments” were written down and are to this day are taught as the Seven Principles of Spiritualism.
His legacy also continued in the life of his son, Robert Dale Owen, who stayed in New Harmony after his father left. He later became a US Representative and helped found the Smithsonian Institute.
When reflecting on his life, Robert Owen said this: “My life was not useless; I gave important truths to the world, and it was only for want of understanding that they were disregarded. I have been ahead of my time.”
Happily for Owen and regretfully for mankind, time would catch up rapidly. Today, Americans are blissfully ignorant of the deceptive and unsuccessful roots of the public school system and send children off to the yellow school bus, completely unaware that the bus is there to advance the ends of a loyal communist and committed spiritualist.
As Alex Newman said, “History would gradually be forgotten as the rotten fruit of this system began to undermine traditional American values and ideas.”
The question that demands to be asked is, have we seen the utopian world promised to us by Robert Owen? The honest answer is absolutely not. So, rather than trying to revive New Harmony, I suggest that we check our premises before our society too collapses.
Elise DeYoung is a Public Relations and Communications Associate and a Classical Conversations® graduate. With CC, she strives to know God and make Him known in all aspects of her life. She is a servant of Christ, an avid reader, and a professional nap-taker. As she continues her journey towards the Celestial City, she is determined to gain wisdom and understanding wherever it can be found. Soli Deo gloria!
[1] Manchester Lit and Phil (n.d.). Our History. Manchester Lit & Phil. Retrieved August 2, 2024, from https://www.manlitphil.ac.uk/about-us/our-history/
How did we arrive at the place where freedom of speech is cherished in American culture until someone says something the other doesn’t agree with? How is it that for over 200 years, patriots have fought and died for the right for us to continue to exercise our 1st Amendment right—even if we reveal our ignorance on an issue, say something unpopular, embarrassingly ridiculous, or counter-cultural?
Just as important…can this road be traversed in reverse?
Walk with me, and let’s ponder—Freedom of speech: A unifying right until our perspectives clash.
How Indeed?
How indeed, has the “You’re entitled to your opinion” slogan superseded the right for someone to voice one—are we even entitled to our opinion anymore? Can we turn back the crashing societal waves of mind control and behavioral modification? Can we control our minds and modify our own behavior? So many questions!
Let’s start with…
Evidence of Societal Mind Control and Behavioral Modification
We’ve all been there. It’s on the tip of your tongue, but you don’t dare say it. Perhaps you’ve felt ashamed for even thinking about it! Why? Was it sinful? No. Was it unkind? Not really. Was it true? Yes. Then why wasn’t it said?
Could it be that we didn’t want to encounter the discomfort of being scoffed at, shunned, or silenced?
Exhibit A – Conditioning of the populace through political correctness.
How did we get to the place where we must all be in lockstep when it comes to our opinions, ideas, values, and morals or face the retribution of those around us? Why is tolerance spouted from every organization and every talking head on television, but tolerance isn’t really valued, only strict adherence to the prevailing dogma?
Exhibit B – Conditioning of the population through the philosophy of intersectionality, where one’s opinions are weighted and valued based not on how they stack up against objective truth but on where their labels fall within certain categories.
How, in a free society, can the leader of the free world paint a segment of people with a broad brush, clumping their ideologies together based on their skin color, and call them the “most dangerous terrorist threat”[1] to the nation—and not be reprimanded for it?
Exhibit C – Conditioning of the populace through propaganda of fear and hate.
The phenomenon of “Cancel Culture” cannot escape anybody’s attention. Since when do we allow abuse of power to “shut the people up?” The number of individuals who have been deplatformed and debanked is astounding!
When it first started, I think we were all stunned and paralyzed, wrestling with our cognitive dissonance, much like an onlooker who sees an impending disaster but can’t force themselves to act.
These people’s freedom of speech has been revoked. Whether we like what they say or how they say it doesn’t matter. They have a right to say it, and we have the right to hear it, support it, or denounce it.
Here is a recent list.
Alex Jones
Milo Yiannopoulos
President Donald Trump
Andrew Tate
Laura Loomer
Gavin McInnes
Gab and Parler
Enrique Tarrio
J.K. Rowling
Shane Dawson
Kevin Hart
Gina Carano
Chris Pratt
…many others
Exhibit D – Cancel Culture, “de-banking” and “de-platforming.”
These individuals have faced various forms of de-platforming, de-banking, or cancellation due to their actions or statements that sparked public outrage and led to significant consequences in their professional lives.
They played the long game over many decades, and not enough people realized they had an opponent slipping their freedom away as they slumbered—not unlike a cautious parent weaseling an object from the grip of a sleeping child. Those who did awaken and speak up to warn of the siren’s call were gagged, silenced, and choked with the pill of “political correctness.” Others were simply pacified.
Now that decades have gone by and many have awakened, their ideas and vocalization of them are met with eye rolls and perhaps condescending utterances of “Boomers.” Their warnings are not heeded because they are viewed as generational gaps in knowledge and societal evolution.
Pastors didn’t want to make unnecessary waves for the sake of politeness and unity, so the pulpits remained silent. They rationalized and perpetrated a false sense of “love and tolerance,” a love that doesn’t disagree, point out pitfalls, warn, or correct—a love that places acceptance above all else on the altar.
What was sacrificed in its place?
Truth and the ability to say and hear it without being hurt or triggered. Worse yet, some pastors seized this opportunity to overthrow goodness and righteousness to embrace evil. This is how absolute truth was assassinated.
All of this happened for a few reasons.
The weakest, most susceptible, and malleable among us were captured first in the indoctrination camps (i.e., government schools) for more than 100 years. These eroded the Christian worldview and pumped out little ideologues for decades (the long game…remember?).
Seminaries were infiltrated… for this is where the largest opposition should have been based with fortifications of a strong Christian worldview.
Legacy Media was appropriated, for every good war commander knows you must disrupt their supply chain and communications to take over an opponent completely.
The nuclear family has eroded to the extent that most adults of child-bearing age are forgoing marriage and having children.
Hollywood aided the narrative by pumping out propaganda in story form.
National identity has been eroded and supplanted by the desire for globalization.
We didn’t get to where we are overnight, and we won’t get out overnight.
Martin Niemöller was a prominent Lutheran pastor in Germany in the 1920s and 1930s. At first, he sympathized with Nazi ideas, but after Hitler came to power in 1933, Niemöller became an outspoken critic of Hitler’s interference in the Protestant Church. He spent the last eight years of Nazi rule (1937 to 1945) in prisons and concentration camps.
He is famously quoted for the following:
“First they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out—because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out—because I was not a Jew. Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me.”[2]
Here expressed is Niemöller’s belief that Germans had been complicit through silence amidst Nazi evils (imprisonment, persecution, and murder of millions of people). He felt this was especially true of the leaders of the Protestant churches, which were made up of Lutheran, Reformed, and United traditions.[2]
Note that he stood against what he initially supported when it conflicted with his Christian worldview. Note also his sincere ownership and regret for failing to speak sooner.
How do We Reverse the Traverse?
In sum, we ask: ‘How do we reverse the traverse?”
1. Stand for truth.
Speak the truth. Don’t tolerate lies and falsehoods. Instead, immunize yourself and your loved ones against the contagion of the culture, recognizing that our
“…weapons of our warfare are not carnal but mighty in God for pulling down arguments and every high thing that exalts itself against the knowledge of God, bringing every thought captive to the obedience of Christ, and being ready to punish all disobedience when your obedience is fulfilled.” 2 Corinthians 10:4-6
At the same time, we should work within our homes, churches, and communities to rebuild the walls of a Christ-centered worldview that has protected and blessed us for so long.
2. Recognize that we don’t…
“Wrestle against flesh and blood, but against principalities, against powers, against rulers of the darkness of this age, against spiritual hosts of wickedness in the heavenly places.” Ephesians 6:12
Therefore, submerse yourself in prayer and meditation.
3. Be sober about what you spend time viewing, doing, and talking about.
What do you or I spend our time viewing, doing, and talking about? Do we seek truth, beauty, goodness, wisdom, and virtue?
“…Whatever things are true, whatever things are noble, whatever things are just, whatever things are pure, whatever things are lovely, whatever things are of good report, if there is any virtue and if there is anything praiseworthy—meditate on these things.” Philippians 4:8
All of this takes time and commitment, but it is the only way out. In and of ourselves, we cannot moderate our minds and behavior, nor should we legislate to do so, for it is the place of the Holy Spirit to bring about the manifestations of the fruit of the Spirit. However, it is in our purview to honor the liturgy of the ordinary in our lives, provide time and silence to be “…rooted and built up in Him, and established in the faith…” so that we can…
“Beware lest anyone cheat you through philosophy and empty deceit, according to the tradition of men, according to the basic principles of the world, and not according to Christ. For in Him dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily; and you are complete in Hm, who is the head of all principality and power.” Colossians 2:7-9
Conclusion
How did we get here?
We arrived through the consumption of a steady diet consisting of complacency, self-elevation, pride, and vigilance. This was combined with the cowardice to accept the threats of isolation and cancelation.
Can we reverse it?
Yes. this can be accomplished by identifying issues, opposing worldviews, and speaking against what is wrong and what is right.
In his poem “The Second Coming” (written shortly after WWI), William Yeats states,
“Turning and turning in the widening gyre The falcon cannot hear the falconer; Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold; Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world, The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere The ceremony of innocence is drowned; The best lack all conviction, while the worst Are full of passionate intensity….”[3]
Yeat’s heart was breaking for what humanity was enduring. He knew that the new worldview would eventually fall apart. Anarchy and bloodshed ensued. The best citizens lacked conviction, and the worst people possessed an intense passion for their ideas and beliefs.
In essence, the falcon could not hear the falconer.
Sound familiar?
It’s clear that Christians need to live a life of repentance, forgiveness, and prayer. Not only should we have a steady diet of the Word, but this must be coupled with discernment and alertness for what passes for culture.
We must recognize that all ideas and philosophies necessitate being captive by Christ.
Without Christ, man’s ideas have consequences. Moreover, these are often severe consequences.
If so, then we should take action.
Sadie Aldaya is the Research & Quality Assurance Specialist for Classical Conversations® Special Projects & Policy Research Department. Sadie and her husband homeschooled for over 20 years. She served as a Classical Conversations field representative for 15 years, providing community and support for other homeschooling families. Sadie’s passions are to stop government encroachment in areas where they have no authority or jurisdiction and to see Christians return to a biblical Christ-centered worldview.
[1] Giselle Ruhiyyih Ewing, “Biden Calls White Supremacy ‘Most Dangerous Terrorist Threat’ in Speech at Howard,” Politico, May 13, 2023. Accessed 6/24/2024. https://www.politico.com/news/2023/05/13/biden-howard-university-white-supremacy-terrorism-00096811.
[2]United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, “Martin Niemoeller First They Came for Socialists,” Holocaust Encyclopedia, Accessed 6/24/2024. https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/martin-niemoeller-first-they-came-for-the-socialists
[3] William Butler Yeats, “The Second Coming,” Poetry Foundation. Accessed 6/24/2024. https://www.poetryfoundation.org/poems/43290/the-second-coming
Think about this: you are an Idaho homeschooler who is offered “free” money to use in your homeschool for tutoring sessions, curriculum, extracurricular sports, lessons, and more. Where do I sign up, right??
“… you will know the truth and the truth will set you free.” John 8:32
Where have we been?
Currently, Idaho is the most free state to homeschool, but it hasn’t always been that way.
Let’s go back to 1984, at which time the Idaho Code stated, “…Unless the child is otherwise comparably instructed, as may be determined by the trustees of the schooldistrict in which the child resides, the parent or guardian shall cause the child to attend a public, private or parochial school…” (emphasis added)
This meant that the law wasn’t uniform across the state and that the code allowed every school district in Idaho to set its own rules and standards for homeschooling.
One school district, in particular, chose to set a hard line, declaring that the children of several homeschool families were, in fact, truant, and the parents were charged with habitual truancy. The county sheriff and several armed deputies showed up at their homes and physically removed all children, from nursing infants through high schoolers, from the homes. The parents were arrested and sentenced to jail time, and their sentences were longer than another inmate convicted of child molestation!
The state media outlets accused the families of denying their children an education and that it was the government’s and community’s responsibility to ensure this didn’t happen, even if that meant stashing such parents in jail. (Paraphrased from Lewiston Morning Tribune, 12/3/84.) Another article stated that the families were challenging a “basic tenet of our society” and that they had “brought it on themselves.” (Idaho Statesman, 12/4/84)
However, as hard as they tried, the media was unable to discourage homeschooling among Idaho families, and it continued to grow, albeit with difficulties due to the existing code.
Where are we now?
Brave, pioneering homeschool families worked to ensure they could legally and freely educate their children at home. This came about by establishing a state coalition that was very active in local and federal policy to achieve the freedoms we have now and a support group that served parents through conventions, a quarterly magazine, and a wealth of information on myriad topics. These two groups have since combined to create Homeschool Idaho.
Homeschool Idaho (HSI) has worked tirelessly for 30+ years lobbying for home education in our state legislature. During this time, they have worked to promote, protect, and preserve home education in Idaho, including being instrumental in securing changes in the Idaho Code. In 2009, our current code was written into law, which states that Idaho home educators have the right to educate their children, aged 7-16, as they deem appropriate, without governmental regulation or requirements. More information about Idaho Law can be found at HSI Idaho Homeschool Law.
Our current homeschool freedom in Idaho was hard-won by these pioneering families, volunteers, and those passionate about ensuring we could walk out the calling and freedoms God has given us. But that can easily go away.
Where are we headed?
In 2019, approximately 2.5 million people in the US homeschooled. By 2022, that number had more than doubled! (And that only counts those homeschoolers who have to register with their state, of which Idaho homeschoolers do not.) Public schools realize they are losing money due to students leaving and understand they are not going to get homeschoolers back unless they make some token concessions. One of the ways they’re doing this is by partnering with for-profit companies to offer families “free” money to homeschool.
While Idaho has not passed an ESA (Education Savings/Scholarship Accounts) bill successfully through its legislative process, there are other for-profit companies within the state that offer “free” money to homeschoolers.
Sounds great, right?
Actually, no. When a family chooses to join one of these programs, they are NO LONGER a homeschool but a public school at home. The family chooses their own curriculum (with restrictions), sets their schedule and pace, and teaches their children at home, but when they choose to partner with these companies, they give up their homeschool status to become a public school at home.
How does that happen?
In order to access the funds, once the family signs on with the company, the company, in partnership with a local school district, will enroll the student in the public school system. The company will then have access to the state and federal educational dollars, keeping some for themselves, giving some to the public school district, and finally allocating a small portion of the funds to the family.
Why does that matter?
This matters because families have now chosen to give up the freedoms fought for and enjoyed by privately-funded Idaho homeschoolers. The family’s public school at home will now come under company and governmental regulations. These families will need to submit their students’ work bi-weekly, have their students meet with a “mentor” regularly, be told what they can and cannot purchase with the money, and submit to yearly standardized testing.
Additionally, it matters because the school district with which the company partners will be given money for services they are not rendering, for students they are not serving, and will also get “credit” for the test scores for the public school at-home students who are required to test. A family will be educating their children at home, and yet the school district will benefit from standardized test scores from children they didn’t serve, possibly bringing up their overall scores and being allocated more money in the process. Statistically, in Idaho, homeschooled students test 30 percentage points higher on the IOWA Test of Basic Skills than public schooled students.
These may seem like minor concessions, given the amount of money to which the family will be given access. But do you remember the frog in the pot of water where the water is gradually heated up? At first, it’s tolerable, maybe even enjoyable. The temperature is turned up slowly, so change is less noticeable, eventually leading to death. This is what we are already seeing happen within these programs. Regulation of home-educating families who choose to partner with these companies and accept the funds continues to increase yearly.
Because the families who choose these programs are public schools at home, the regulations will look similar to what a student in an in-person public school faces. The programs are accountable for ensuring that the students they are funding meet the public school regulations. Some of these regulations are frequently presented as equity, stopping discrimination, ensuring a rounded education, and more. As publicly funded institutions, both the brick-and-mortar public schools and the public schools at home will be regulated and, to an extent, will be mandated to teach the public school’s agenda.
The truth is that what the government funds, the government regulates. It has to, and we want it to! We want to know how our government is spending the money it collects from its citizens, and we want them to be accountable for their expenditures.
Yes, but…
We hear repeated, defensive arguments from those families who choose to partner with these programs and accept government funding. Most of these arguments stem from a lack of understanding of how these programs truly work. Parents should gather all the information so that they may be equipped to make a fully informed decision that benefits their family and its legacy.
Argument 1: Offering “free” money promotes school choice.
We homeschool parents have a reputation for being skeptical of almost everything, including mainstream narratives about public education. This skepticism is rooted in an abiding desire to protect our children’s minds and hearts. But there has been a shift in the narrative, and typically cautious homeschoolers have found themselves caught up in a movement that has been gaining steam across the nation and right here in Idaho: School Choice.
“School Choice” has been touted as the miracle that will save the American education system. Proponents hawk sales-pitch slogans like “Fund Students, Not Systems” as if they were vendors at a carnival. State legislatures are frequently facing bills that spend more and more money on school choice programs, often pressured and funded by lobbying groups outside of the state.
The truth is that, in Idaho, we ALREADY have school choice. We can choose to educate our children at home or send them to public, private, parochial, or charter schools. This argument sounds good as it is presented. However, the argument is actually not about school choice but about WHO will fund the family’s choice of education for their child(ren). Families are, essentially, asking their neighbors and other taxpayers to pay for their choice.
Argument 2: They’re MY tax dollars, and I should get some back.
Actually, they’re not. The money we pay in taxes has never been designated for our personal use. Once it leaves our paychecks, it stops being our money. Many who make this argument are referring to property taxes, part of which is allocated to our local school districts. Very few Idahoans pay the $8,500 in property taxes that are earmarked per student for public schools. The amount of money from a family’s property taxes allotted to the public school is a mere fraction of what one student might receive when the family partners with the government to receive money for home education. The amount paid in our property taxes does not cover even one student’s allocation when using these “free” money programs. So, where does the rest of the money come from? Our neighbors: the other taxpayers. It is taking from our neighbors to fund our choice. And if there isn’t enough budget to fund these programs? Yup, you guessed it: raise taxes for all!
Argument 3: We are still homeschoolers. We choose our curriculum and teach our kids athome.
This argument is only partially true. As previously stated, a family who joins the program will become a public school at home. When a family partners with the government to accept funds for homeschooling, this results in the loss of parental control through regulations. The government must control everything that it funds, without exception. The for-profit companies will continue to control the funds through the funding mechanisms they have set up to administer them. It will pay only for things that it approves, and those things will have inflated price tags because the business providing the good or service has a captive client who can only purchase the item from the single source that is approved. Families do not have the autonomy to use the dollars however they see fit. For instance, a religious curriculum is not an approved purchase.
Additionally, by needing to check in regularly with a tutor or mentor and having a student’s work reviewed, the parent’s authority as teacher is questioned and minimized.
Argument 4:If the regulations become too much or are invasive, it’s okay… we’re members of HSLDA, and they’ll defend us or help us out of the situation.
HSLDA (Home School Legal Defense Association) exists to serve home-educating families. When a family partners with a company offering “free” money programs, they willingly give up their homeschool status to become public school at home. Therefore, HSLDA’s membership legal services will not cover families in public schools at home, charter schools, or families homeschooling using public funds.
Argument 5: Our family taking the money doesn’t affect anyone else.
As this “free” money comes from taxpayer dollars, what happens when the amount of money collected from taxpayers no longer covers the demand for it? Citizens are taxed more, even those who do not have school-aged children. This means that a family’s choice to participate will affect the amount of taxes paid by their friends and neighbors.
Additionally, legislators currently lump homeschoolers in Idaho into one large group without differentiating between privately funded homeschoolers and those who choose to partner with government-funded programs. By partnering with programs that allow for governmental regulation to enter their homes, those who choose these “free” money programs are telling the government that all homeschoolers don’t mind the regulations. As such, when legislation has come up regarding education in the state, homeschoolers have been grouped in with other educational options because the message has been sent that we all want and/or need the government to tell us how to educate our children. In actuality, Idaho homeschoolers have shown year after year that privately funded homeschoolers are excelling, thriving, and becoming well-spoken, intelligent, logical-thinking young adults.
Why do we homeschool?
Take a moment to ponder why your family has chosen to homeschool. Many of us decided to homeschool because we felt God was calling us to diligently teach our children about Him. Some of us feel the public school agenda is objectionable and directly contradicts the Biblical foundation we seek to impart to our children.
Then ask yourself, “Does partnering with these for-profit companies that will instill government regulations into our home support our vision for our children and our homeschool?”
“Children are a blessing and a gift from the Lord.” Psalm 127:3 (CSV)
“You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your might. And these words that I command you today shall be on your heart. You shall teach them diligently to your children, and shall talk of them when you sit in your house, and when you walk by the way, and when you lie down, and when you rise.” Deuteronomy 6:5-7 (ESV)
So, if our children are a gift from God and He has commanded us to teach them about Him, isn’t it possible that He would also have us teach them academics? To rely solely on Him for equipping, encouraging, refining, and providing for our needs?
We must choose. We cannot serve two masters.
“No one can serve two masters, for either he will hate the one and love the other, or he will be devoted to the one and despise the other. You cannot serve God and money.”Matthew 6:24 (ESV)
TINSTAAFL
The truth is, There Is No Such Thing As A Free Lunch (TINSTAAFL)!
The money these for-profit companies promote as “free” is anything but. The money comes with regulations and impositions on other taxpayers. It requires families to surrender their homeschool freedom, which is given to us by God and was hard won by Idaho families.
So, what can I do?
TRUST God to supply all your needs. (Philippians 4:19)
CHOOSE carefully how to steward the money God provides your family through employment; telling our children’ no’ when we cannot afford all the lessons, all the newest technology, etc., will build their character and their faith.
LEARN more… ask questions! Do your research. If it sounds too good to be true, it usually is. Share what you are learning with your homeschool friends!
NEW to Idaho? Welcome! We do things a little differently here: You do not have to fall under a charter school’s authority or any other governmental regulations to educate your children at home in Idaho.
GET INVOLVED: Join Homeschool Idahoand participate in “Pie Day,” our day at the state capitol to strut our stuff to state legislators.
PRAY for home educators in Idaho to stand strong against governmental regulation, to be secure in the knowledge that God will equip the called, and to be convinced that God is able to do far more abundantly than we ask or think. (Ephesians 3:20)
Annie Grey is a Christ follower, wife, and Momma to two CC graduates. When she isn’t serving families in Montana, Idaho, and Wyoming as an Area Representative, she is enjoying the outdoors in many ways, working on the family homestead, teaching group fitness classes, engaging with her young adults in thought-provoking and interesting conversation, or curled up reading a good book. After launching her arrows, she is grateful in this season that God is still using her to encourage and support families who wish to homeschool.
Adapted from Key’s correspondence, the story behind the Star-Spangled Banner
The collapse of Baltimore’s Francis Scott Key bridge has opened discussions about its namesake. Adapting original sources and letters, I wrote about Francis Scott Key and how he came to write “The Star-Spangled Banner” in my book, The Burning of the White House: James and Dolley Madison and the War of 1812.At the end of this article, I’ve included a notation to give you the historical context surrounding the controversy over two lines in the third verse.
Editor’s note: This blog is published in short. Read the full blog here.
Francis Scott Key, a lawyer who seemed to ponder his place in this world and author of The Star-Spangled Banner, was not pro-war. He was pro-emancipation. Key is credited with writing the Star-Spangled Banner after the 25-hour bombardment of Fort McHenry, which he watched from a British ship with a spyglass.
A series of events led Key and Mr. Skinner to board the British admiral’s ship to secure Dr. Beanes’ release. As it turns out, Key was left out of the discussion that would result in Dr. Beanes’ release. History notes how well the American Army treated the British prisoners of war, and this was a key bargaining chip for Dr. Beanes’ freedom. Interestingly, Key was unimpressed with the British officers.
Key was unimpressed, as he later wrote: “Never was a man more disappointed in his expectations than I have been as to the character of British officers. With some exceptions they appeared to be illiberal, ignorant, and vulgar, and seem filled with a spirit of malignity against everything American. Perhaps, however, I saw them in unfavorable circumstances.” Indeed, he did.
During the attack on Fort McHenry, Key anxiously waited.
“What colors would he see as he placed his eye behind the spyglass and pointed it toward the fort? He didn’t know which was worse, beholding the British Union Jack flag above Fort McHenry or the white flag of surrender. Both would mean victory for the British and capitulation once again from his countrymen.
Suddenly he noticed it. Gone was the American battle flag measuring 17 by 24 feet that had flown over the fort. Instead, he saw the most beautiful colors cast against a canvas of a multi-hue sunrise. The stars and stripes, fifteen of them to represent that nation’s fifteen states that had grown to eighteen by this time, flapped briskly from the fort that morning. The sight could only mean one thing. The Americans still held Fort McHenry.
The flag that Key saw that morning measured 42 feet by 30 feet. It was the largest flag ever flown at a U.S. fort. On that morning Key saw the larger flag, whose bright stars measured 24 inches from point to point. What he couldn’t have heard that morning was the music at the fort. Because America lacked an official national anthem, the band played the popular Yankee Doodle.”
Francis Scott Key, Library of Congress
As he was set from the British ship and sailed back to land, “…his emotion gave way to words, poetic words …”
“O say, can you see, by the dawn’s early light, what so proudly we hailed at the twilight’s last gleaming?” “Whose broad stripes and bright stars, through the perilous fight” as did the sight of the bombs and rockets. “O’er the ramparts we watched, were so gallantly streaming! And the rockets’ red glare, the bombs bursting in air.”
“Suddenly Fort McHenry didn’t just represent Baltimore. It symbolized America, as did the 1,000 men who defended it. Suddenly the flag didn’t just soar over Baltimore, it unfurled over the entire United States.”
“O say, does that star-spangled banner yet wave, O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave?”
The verses poured from Key’s pen, including lesser-known flourishes that reflected faith:
“O thus be it ever, when freemen shall stand, between their loved homes and the war’s desolation! Blest with victory and peace, may the heaven-rescued land. Praise the Power that hath made and preserved us a nation.” Some were surprising for a man who seemed to oppose the war: “Then conquer we must when our cause it is just, and this be our motto: ‘In God is our trust.’” Each verse ended with the refrain “and the star-spangled banner in triumph shall wave o’er the land of the free and the home of the brave!”
“Whether the words flowed easily for Key that day or came to him in bits and pieces to organize into a poetic pattern, one thing is for sure. The result spoke of the emotion that he and so many other Americans felt to learn that they had indeed once again defeated the British.
After the darkness of the burning of the U.S. Capitol and the White House came the dawn brought by the soaring multitude of phoenixes that awakened and defended Baltimore. Hope was brighter than ever. Maybe, just maybe, the Royal Navy would soon abandon America’s shores.”
“Historical context behind the third verse: In recent years, Americans have questioned the meaning of Key’s reference to slavery in the third verse: “No refuge could save the hireling and slave, From the terror of flight, or the gloom of the grave.”
Most of Key’s lyrics are universal, especially in the first verse. The relief of an American victory can apply to Fort McHenry in 1814 and many subsequent victories in American history. The third verse, however, requires historical context to understand what Key meant.
Just a few months before Key wrote these lyrics, the British military had issued a proclamation promising freedom to slaves who would run away. There was a catch, however. The male slaves had to first fight as soldiers in the British army before they could receive their freedom in Canada or the Caribbean.
Key did not think the British army was a suitable place of refuge for slaves or hired mercenaries. By fighting in the British army, they risked both the “terror of flight” and the “gloom of the grave.” Hence, these lyrics are not Key’s opinion justifying slavery but a reflection of the stakes of being forced to fight in the British army.
It also helps, too, to understand why America and Britain were at war in the first place. The primary moral issue behind the War of 1812 was impressment. British sea captains were kidnapping American sailors and “impressing” or forcing them to serve in the British Navy against their will.”
Jane Hampton Cook is the author of 10 books, a frequent guest in the national news media, a screenwriter, a former White House staffer, and a former Women’s Suffrage Centennial Commission Consultant.
“The reward for humility and fear of the LORD is riches and honor and life. Thorns and snares are in the way of the crooked; whoever guards his soul will keep far from them. Train up a child in the way he should go; even when he is old, he will not depart from it. The rich rules over the poor, and the borrower is the slave of the lender. Whoever sows injustice will reap calamity, and the rod of his fury will fail.” — Proverbs 22:4-8(ESV)
The threat of globalism and neo-Marxism has become increasingly apparent over the last decade. What began as a group of theorists and power-hungry bureaucrats meeting once a year has turned into a demonic assault on the family, Christianity, and education. Families in many countries, even in the United States, have experienced repression on homeschooling as their governments work tirelessly to funnel them into the government mind-grinder—the public school system.
Just in the past few years, the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) released its 17 global goals by the year 2030—the fourth of which is “quality education.” Their vision is simple:
“In addition to free primary and secondary schooling for all boys and girls by 2030, the aim is to provide equal access to affordable vocational training, eliminate gender and wealth disparities, and achieve universal access to quality higher education.”[1]
Marxism Version 9.0?
Those familiar with the work of Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels will recognize this agenda from The Communist Manifesto. In his renowned political pamphlet, Marx outlined ten steps or “planks” necessary to implement in order for communism to be established in a society. The tenth plank is “Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children’s factory labour in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, &c, &c.”
Both UNESCO and Marx agree that the implementation of free universal government-run education with the aim of industrial production is absolutely necessary to achieve their utopian ends. The fact that UNESCO aligns its vision with the deadliest idea known to history is telling.
When internationally powerful people insist on controlling the upbringing of your children, what ought you to do? Are they too powerful to resist? Should we hand them our children in exchange for their “free money”?
Of course not! In the face of the globalist threat, the best tactic to overthrow their tyranny is to raise and educate your own children in the way they should go independently from the state. Praise God, millions of parents are doing just that.
Raise your Children
Millions of parents around the United States have been convinced that it is their job to drop their precious babies off at daycare to be nurtured, ship them off to “free” government schools to be trained in humanist religion and Critical Theory, only to be reunited as stakeholder (pesky conservatives might even deign to call them “mom” or “dad”) and product on the day of graduation when the tassel goes from Right to Left. The effects of this have been undeniably disastrous, whether you examine the breakdown of the family, the dumbing down of the American mind, or the rise of humanist globalism in the West.
Let me be clear: we should not slander the parents who have fallen for this lie because the Left has always been good at marketing. A big sign that says, “Free stuff here!” always looks enticing. So, it should not be surprising when millions of otherwise reasonable people join the fray, calling for “free public education.” They do not know that their children’s very minds, bodies, and souls are at stake.
Thankfully, millions more parents have not been persuaded by the Left to divorce themselves from their children. Rather than offering up the bodies, souls, and minds of their children to Father Government, these mothers and fathers have taken upon themselves the God-given duty to have, nurture, raise, and educate their beloved children independently from the state. Hallelujah!
The truth is that our Creator, sustainer, and Savior God has given parents, and parents alone, the jurisdiction to raise their children in the way they should go. If you are skeptical of this point, I would encourage you to search the scriptures for a verse that suggests that the state has a role to play in the upbringing and education of children.
Furthermore, a brief overview of history will expose government schools as a radical and novel idea foisted upon society by Christian-hating humanists with the aim of uprooting Christianity and implementing Marxism. Alex Newman makes this case undeniably clear in his groundbreaking book Indoctrinating Our Children To Death.
By raising your own children independently of the government, you are depriving the Marxist, humanist, globalist elites of the thing they need most—the next generation.
Educate your Children
Keeping your children out of the government’s reach is not the final step that parents must take. We also must educate our children.
What is the purpose of education? In modernity, the perceived purpose of education is perfectly in line with the Marxist and globalist vision rather than with the classicists. UNESCO said, “The aim is to provide equal access to affordable vocational training, eliminate gender and wealth disparities, and achieve universal access to quality higher education.” Just think—we go to high school to get a diploma so we can go to the university to get a degree for a job so we can be a productive member of society. Today, education is strictly a matter of establishing social roles.
We want more for our children! Education is about the soul, the mind, the heart, and the desires of an individual. It is meant to cultivate virtue and instill wisdom. By removing the soul from education, modern Marxist school tyrants have nulled the desire of individuals to search out and know truth, beauty, and goodness. As the CIRCE Institute says, “The purpose of classical education is to cultivate virtue and wisdom. The classical Christian does not ask, “What can I do with this learning?” but “What will this learning do to me?” Briefly put, education is a matter of the soul as much as it is of the mind.
Thankfully, though men have forgotten the truth about education, Christians can still rejoice in the Proverbs when it says:
“How much better to get wisdom than gold! To get understanding is to be chosen rather than silver.” — Proverbs 16:16 (ESV)
“The one who gets wisdom loves life; the one who cherishes understanding will soon prosper.” — Proverbs 19:8 (ESV)
“The fear of the LORD is the beginning of knowledge, but fools despise wisdom and instruction.” — Proverbs 1:7 (ESV)
Through education, we can prepare our children to be sent out as sheep among wolves, being wise as serpents and innocent as doves (Matthew 10:16). Through education, we can teach our children to be virtuous men and women, full of wisdom and understanding, and equipped with the whole armor of God (Ephesians 6). This is how we will protect children from globalist manipulation and humanist lies.
Overcome Evil with Good
Oftentimes, it can feel like we have already lost the battle. It can seem like the elite class has all the power required to shape the world into their image—but take heart: Christ has overcome the world (John 16:33). As we continue to pierce souls with the sword of the Spirit, let us not be discouraged by the fiery arrows of the devil. By raising and educating your own children, you are depriving the globalists of the one thing they require—the bodies, minds, and souls of your children. Without control of the next generation, they are incapable of implementing their wicked agenda. So, as you continue to walk the straight and narrow, “Do not be anxious about anything” (Philippians 4:6), “Trust in the Lord with all your heart” (Proverbs 3:5-6), and “Do not be overcome by evil, but overcome evil with good” (Romans 12:21).
Elise DeYoung is a Public Relations and Communications Associate and a Classical Conversations® graduate. With CC, she strives to know God and make Him known in all aspects of her life. She is a servant of Christ, an avid reader, and a professional nap-taker. As she continues her journey towards the Celestial City, she is determined to gain wisdom and understanding wherever it can be found. Soli Deo gloria!
[1] United Nations (2016, January 1). “Goal 4: Quality Education.” Sustainable Development Goals. Retrieved July 11, 2024, from https://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/education/
Social engineering is hardly novel. Whether in totalitarian states like North Korea or dystopian novels such as George Orwell’s 1984 and Animal Farm, this method of mass manipulation is widely recognized and feared throughout the free world as the silent killer of civilizations.
In his book, The Abolition of Man, C. S. Lewis articulates the aim of social engineering: “Traditional values are to be debunked,” he wrote, “and mankind cut out into some fresh shape at the will of some few lucky people in one lucky generation which has learned how to do it.”
Borrowing Lewis’s language, we can conclude that the aim of social engineering is to debunk traditional values in order to cut mankind into “some fresh shape” according to the will of the powerful. The frightening fact is that we are one of those “lucky generations” that has learned how to do it.
There are many plausible methods of social engineering that our generation has at its disposal. To name a few: the creation of a mass social contagion through the internet, fostering a forgetfulness of history, and state infiltration into education. An argument could be made that those “lucky people” with the power to engineer society are not allowing any of these methods to go to waste.
However, by examining the purpose of state education and the methods of academic manipulation used on children today, it will become clear which practice is most prominent in our modern age—social engineering through state education.
The Purpose of State Education
There is a looming debate over public education. What is its purpose? Is it to effectively educate America’s youth or to indoctrinate upcoming generations? We do not have to wonder for long because the proponents of public education have told us exactly what their intentions are.
“The purpose of a public education in a public school is not to teach kids only what parents want them to be taught. It is to teach them what society needs them to know. The client of the public school is not the parent, but the entire community, the public.”
The Michigan Democratic Party Facebook page
This quote might as well have been pulled from the dystopian novel The Giver. There can be no doubt—the purpose of state education is, and always has been, to create an institution where “some few lucky people” can cut the minds of the youngest generation “into some fresh shape” on the largest scale mankind has ever known.
The only question that remains is a practical one—how?
The Methods of Academic Manipulation
There are three practical methods of manipulation that are employed in our schools:
Mass indoctrination
Data mining
Installation of Father Government
Mass Indoctrination
Cambridge Dictionary defines indoctrination as “the process of repeating an idea or belief to someone until they accept it without criticism or question.” It also involves banning certain ideas—those that are contradictory to the ideology of the indoctrinator—from the public square.
These two ideas combined—the forceful instillation of ideas and the banning of contrary thought and expression—make up the most essential tool of social engineering. To put it another way: in order to control a population, you must first control their thoughts.
In the 1963 case School District of Abington Township v. Schempp,[1] the Supreme Court ruled that Bible reading and prayer in public schools would be unconstitutional. By banning scripture and the expression of religion from schools (ideas that contradict progressive thought), the Court seemed to say, “Let the indoctrination begin.”
Since then, the religion of the Left has been unleashed and forcefully taught in all public schools around the country. DEI initiatives, books like Gender Queer: A Memoir by Maia Kobabe, and Critical Race Theory have all been introduced to the K-12 curriculum. This is what schools are really teaching our children.
What’s more, Students who reject these ideas are demonized, teachers who refuse to comply are fired, and parents who object are ignored or condemned as “domestic terrorists.”
Society, through state education, insists on indoctrinating children with the idea that boys can be girls and girls can be boys, white people are evil and black people oppressed, the weather is going to end the world, religion is bigoted and intolerant, capitalism is wicked and communism benevolent, America is systemically racist, and anyone who tells you otherwise is a Christian nationalist, MAGA, fascist extremist.
Our state schools are not places of wonder and free thought. Rather, they are prison cells designed to keep both truth and the will of parents locked away so that the minds of children will remain captive and submissive to what “society needs them to know.”
Data Mining
Commonly used to predict investment planning and to track internet analytics, data mining uses technology to sort through large quantities of data on a subject in order to determine patterns and characteristics. Although it seems like basic computer interaction, it is being used for much more than simply organizing numbers and symbols.
This powerful technology has been unleashed on every child in the public school system by the state to collect, organize, analyze, and micromanage their academic performance and personal information.
If your child is in the public schools, their grades, academic history, confidential information, address, family members, personal beliefs, strengths and weaknesses, social tendencies, extracurricular activities, and more are deeply known by the state.
Alex Newman, author of Indoctrinating Our Children to Death and co-author of Crimes of the Educators, details the depth of this dangerous method of child monitoring and explains how other countries, such as China and Sweden, have used this technology to exponentially advance social engineering and further corrupt education.
With this information, the powerful few who are pulling the strings of education will know exactly who your child is and how to shape them into a “creature of the state.”[2]
Father Government
In 1925, the Supreme Court ruled in Pierce vs Society Sisters that it is both the right and the duty of parents to direct the education and “destiny” of their children independent of the state.
“The fundamental theory of liberty upon which all governments in this Union repose excludes any general power of the state to standardize its children by forcing them to accept instruction from public teachers only. The child is not the mere creature of the State; those who nurture him and direct his destiny have the right, coupled with the high duty, to recognize and prepare him for additional obligations.”[3]
This fundamental right of parents should be self-evident. However, in recent decades there has been a drastic shift in western civilization away from parent-controlled education towards state-controlled education.
The Michigan Democratic Party said, “Not sure where this ‘parents-should-control-what-is-taught-in-schools-because-they-are-our-kids’ is originating… The purpose of a public education in a public school is not to teach kids only what parents want them to be taught.”[4]
James Dwyer, a professor at the William & Mary School of Law, stated in an interview, “The state needs to be the ultimate guarantor of a child’s wellbeing.”
Even President Joe Biden said in a speech to public school teachers, “They aren’t someone else’s, they are all our children.”[5]
According to those with the power to engineer society, parents are no longer welcome to participate in their children’s upbringing, well-being, or education—that is the role of Father Government.
When powerful people tell you they intend to take your parental rights away, it is best to believe them.
This philosophy is the policy of the political Left in America. We see this in the way that homeschooling, which is the enemy of Father Government, has been heavily restricted and aggressively regulated across the states; teachers have begun to take the place of parents as the mentor and confidant of their students; and schools have shamelessly implemented teachings that contradict the beliefs of the majority of American parents.
Gradually, parents have been conditioned to believe that their job is simply to drop their children off at school. By accepting this lie, they invite Father Government to mold their children into “some fresh shape” until they are “a mere creature of the state.”
The Solution
The purpose of state education has always been to divorce parents from the upbringing and education of their children so that the state can “teach [children] what society needs them to know.” As parents or simply lovers of liberty, it is our duty to strongly oppose the dangerous methods of mass manipulations that millions of children in our country are subjected to daily.
Social engineering requires power and influence to manifest in a society. Currently, it has both. In order to evade the effects of engineering, we must recognize its deeply dangerous influence in state schools and, once again, educate ourselves and our children independently of Father Government. By doing this, those powerful few with the aim of controlling society will lose their power, and this lucky generation will remain free.
Elise DeYoung is a Public Relations and Communications Associate and Classical Conversations® graduate. With CC, she strives to know God and make Him known in all aspects of her life. Elise is a servant of Christ, an avid reader, and a professional nap-taker. Elise continues her journey towards the Celestial City with a determined resolve to gain wisdom and understanding. Soli Deo gloria!
[1] US Supreme Court (1963, June 17). Abington School District v. Schempp, 374 U.S. 203 (1963). Justia. Retrieved March 28, 2024, from https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/374/203/
[2] U.S. Supreme Court (1925, June 1). Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510 (1925). Justia. Retrieved March 28, 2024, from https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/268/510/
[3] U.S. Supreme Court (1925, June 1). Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510 (1925). Justia. Retrieved March 28, 2024, from https://supreme.justia.com/cases/federal/us/268/510/
[4] Renk. “Michigan Democratic Party Questions Why Parents Think They Should Have a Say in Their Childs Education.” 95.3 WBCKFM, January 18, 2022. https://wbckfm.com/michigan-democratic-party-questions-why-parents-think-they-should-have-a-say-in-their-childs-education/.
[5] (2023, July 4). Biden. X. Retrieved April 15, 2024, from https://twitter.com/TPostMillennial/status/1676284124527755266
“Christian”—what does it mean? The use of the word “Christian” in modern vernacular is quite perplexing to me. It functions as both an adjective and a noun, but at its inception, it was solely used to describe or rename people. Christianity.com published this piece that speaks to the term’s origin, “Scholars say ‘Christian’ comes from the Greek word christianos, meaning ‘little Christ.'” Stories say the term was used as a jeer, as their enemies would poke fun at them by calling them diminutive versions of their Savior, as in, “Look at those little Christs.”
The adjective is first used in Acts 11:26
“And when he had found him, he brought him to Antioch. For a whole year, they met with the church and taught a great many people. And in Antioch, the disciples were first called Christians.”
The term is used two more times in Scripture:
“And Agrippa said to Paul, ‘You almost persuade me to become a Christian.'” Acts 26:28
“Yet if anyone suffers as a Christian, let him not be ashamed, but let him glorify God in that name.” 1 Peter 4:16
Defining “Christian”
The Oxford English Dictionary defines Christian as:
adjective: Christian
relating to or professing Christianity or its teachings. “the Christian Church”
noun: Christian; plural noun: Christians
a person who has received Christian baptism or is a believer in Christianity. “a born again Christian”
At some point, the term went from describing and renaming just people to other things and ideas.
Why did this happen?
How can inanimate and abstract nouns be “Christian?”
Is this conversation even worth anyone’s time?
How and why we use the word “Christian” matters
How and why we use the word “Christian” matters because our usage has the potential to be ambiguous, misleading, counterproductive, and perhaps tyrannical and abusive. That is assuredly raising eyebrows. If we don’t view everything through the lens of this one adjective, surely I must be a secularist, and my argument will serve to disparage the gospel! Or will it?
I often hear talk about a thing being called “Christian.” You could call anything Christian, whether it pertains to justice, punishment, civil government, individual sovereignty, parental rights, foreign policy, benevolence, responsibility, or even gravity, trigonometry, music, or art. I am not sure what this means when you describe a thing this way. It could mean the idea was communicated by someone who claims to be a Christian. It also could mean that the assigner of this attribute believes the object to be true.
Additionally, “Christian” could mean that the speaker believes the topic should rest within the church’s jurisdiction. This is what I mean when I say the term has the potential to be ambiguous. I am left to wonder, what about this thing is “Christian”; its origin, its jurisdiction, or its nature? If I am unclear about what aspect is being described, there is plenty of room to be misled or to mislead.
If the modifier “Christian” simply means that a thing is true (Jesus said to him, “I am the way, and the truth, and the life. No one comes to the Father except through me.” John 14:6), any true idea would be a Christian idea. Consequently, any time a truth is spoken, it would be “Christian,” whether it is spoken by an atheist or a pastor. Conversely, any untruth would be an anti-Christian idea, whether it is spoken by an atheist or a pastor.
Since this word is ambiguous, and it is unclear if we are modifying content or context, we frequently miss out on truths from unexpected places and accept lies from places in which we have let our guard down—all because of this “Christian” label.
My last point is that using the name of Christ in the word Christian has the potential to be tyrannical or abusive. Why do I say this? Well, for those who recognize Christ as King of Kings and Lord of Lords, this type of adjective is authoritative. It implicates and obligates us if the nature of the idea does flow from Christ and reflects his nature, expectations, and authority. If you choose to label something as “Christian,” you are using the name of Christ to prop up your argument. If you have the grounds to do so, proceed with extreme caution. If you do not have the grounds to do so, could you not be found guilty of using the Lord’s name in vain? Exodus 20:7
Why would anyone take this risk?
We do it all the time!
We are all born into contexts that rub off on us. I think the Holman Christian Standard Bible version says it best when it warns us in Romans 12, “Do not be conformed to this age, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, so that you may discern what is the good, pleasing, and perfect will of God.” For some of us, the “age” we were born into was full of religious-sounding power-grabbing language, and it is incumbent upon us not to be pressed into that mold. Furthermore, we must all confess that our culture has not embraced the beauty of flexing our rational faculties. Many of us are not equipped to defend and argue how we should be, so we subconsciously default to authoritative trump cards.
Last, and most dangerous, are those who would purposely leverage the authority of Christ where they shouldn’t because of the pervasive fallen nature that plagues all of humanity. Abigail Adams, in her typical direct manner, said, “Remember, all men would be tyrants if they could.” While she may have spoken specifically of males, I think we could agree that this proclivity also affects women.
This is what Augustine (The City of God) so aptly named the lust for dominance, and we all have it— all politicians, pastors, podcasters, Sunday school teachers, lawyers, doctors, plumbers and teachers! So when we speak of that which is Christian or hear someone else leverage that term, it is our obligation to say, “But is it? And why is it?”
There is an alternative
Philippians 4:8 gives us some practical objective adjectives to use instead.
“Finally, brothers, whatever is true, whatever is honorable, whatever is just, whatever is pure, whatever is lovely, whatever is commendable, if there is any excellence, if there is anything worthy of praise, think about these things.”
Choose to use objective merit-based adjectives and defend them well. In the classical tradition, we argue for what is true, good, and beautiful, and we can be confident that when we find these things, we will also find Christ! But beware of those who will skip the work of reason to persuade you in other ways.
Let us beg God for discernment in what we hear and what we say.
“Discernment is not the ability to tell the difference between right and wrong; rather, it is telling the difference between right and almost right.” Charles Spurgeon
“Be sober-minded; be watchful. Your adversary the devil prowls around like a roaring lion, seeking someone to devour.”1 Peter 5:8
Lauren Gideon is the Director of Public Relations for Classical Conversations®. She has been a home educator since her first student was born 18 years ago. She came to Classical Conversations for support when the student count in their home grew beyond what she thought she could navigate on her own. In addition to homeschooling her seven children, she co-leads community classes that unpack our nation’s founding documents and civic responsibility. However, she is happiest at home, preferably outside, with her husband of 18 years, tackling their newest adventure of building a modern homestead.
We use cookies to ensure that we give you the best experience on our website. If you continue to use this site we will assume that you are happy with it.
