Separation of school and state
The conservative Texas State Board of Education adopted sweeping changes to its social studies textbook curricula on Friday. Among the most controversial changes is the way “separation of church and state” will be presented to students. I wonder what the school board members think about separation of school and state.
The Constantinian struggle between church and state characterizes much of Western history. During the fourth century, Constantine made Christianity the official religion of his empire. As Dr. L. John Van Til illustrates in his paper, “A Motorcycle Ride With America’s Religious Right: Changing Views of Church and State,” Constantine placed the state above the church and persecuted those who failed to convert. Christianity became the glue of Constantine’s empire and dissenters were not tolerated. For much of the following 1,500 years, church and state have struggled mightily with one another as the state imposed various forms of Christianity on its subjects.
When the state has been placed above the church, rulers used the power of the sword to impose their preferred form of Christianity on their subjects. The state-above-church model has prevailed in various forms, including early American history, until Roger Williams left the Puritan Massachusetts Bay Colony, stating that “forced religion stinks in the nostrils of God,” forming his Providence Plantation colony (Rhode Island) in 1636 and disestablishing the church. People gained liberty to worship, or not, according to their consciences. Eventually, this principle became national law when the Bill of Rights and the First Amendment passed in 1791. Freed from state control, religion—Christianity in particular—thrived in America.
But just as the nascent nation was jettisoning the historic state church model, it began to use state power to impose a Protestant form of education. Having experienced oppression under the state-above-church worship model, early Americans ironically adopted a state-above-school education model. With its establishment, state and federal governments grew in influence, imposed their will on local communities, and became increasingly secular.
I should recognize here that a small minority of citizens, about 10 percent of the population (the percentage has been growing lately), has opted out of the state-above-school model and adopted the parent-above-school model.
In short, the state-above-school model politicizes education, and it’s not at all surprising to see the rancorous battle taking place in Texas over the content of public school textbooks. Sure, there are textbook battles in the parent-above-school realm but they are contained to private school boardrooms or kitchen tables where parents are free to follow their consciences about selecting curricula.
Our forebears understood that disestablishment of religion was beneficial and they made freedom of religion a legal right after nearly 1,500 years of struggle. They threw off the state. I hope it won’t take as long to recognize the value of disestablishing education. Rather than reading headlines such as the ones reporting the political contest over the content of Texas textbooks, we’ll find those stories in history books chronicling the growth of American educational freedom.

















Click to Print
Include Comments











back to top17 Comments to “Separation of school and state”
Our First Amendment makes what Constantine did completely incompatible with what we have done and are doing in America. Bringing Constantine into any meaningful discussion on this topic can be misleading. Constantine is not the relvant point in our discussion of church and state relationships. Absolutely nobody (to my knowledge) is advocating andthing comparable to a Constantinian state. It’s apples and spaceships.
Report comment to moderator
By the way,m Lee Wishing made good points about the Constantinian struggle in history, but that struggle has not found its way to America. Here, the issue has never been that serious people are trying to establish a religion, but that some want full and open religious freedom verses those want to establish strict secularism as our reliion/worldview.
I oppose the rising influence and power of federal government in education, but I think it is reasonable to suggest that some state and local influence should be treated at a different level of consideration. But the more local the better, in my view.
Report comment to moderator
Sadly, the historical development of public schools does not support the thesis Wishing advances. Briefly, the publicly funded school model comes from two sources: first is that the of the frontier where under the NW Ordinance schools are provided for through the sale of the 18th and 36th Twps; a second model is that of Horace Mann in the mid 19th C, where taxation is used for the support of public education in Massachusetts. For Mann, the resort to family-centered schooling would be a harking back to older, aristocratic models seen as fundamentally economically limited and more importantly, models that are odds with the ideals of the American Republic.
Later in the 19th C there came an extension of Mann’s ideas in the shaping of urban education as a tool for Americanization or of enculturation to the immigrant. These models are more centralized and consequently more in the statist model Wishing decries.
Even today, in most communities, the schools are far more organic, far more entwined in daily life than the statist conception of Wishing and other conservatives (urban education being the exception, as noted). That’s not to say there haven’t been the interventions of the elites and other statist conceptions, but often it was the community that pushed back (fwiw, Diane Ravitch’s Left Back provides a good summary of this conflict).
Report comment to moderator
Lee: I wonder what the school board members think about separation of school and state.
Frank: Indeed, I wonder what World Magazine thinks about separating school and state!
They say Social Security is the “third rail” of American politics? Bushwah! Public education is that third rail — America’s favorite welfare program, hands down, with zero regard to party (or religious) affiliation.
Report comment to moderator
Daniel Chapter 1, verses 3 and 4
“Then the king instructed Ashpenaz, the master of his eunuchs, to bring some of the children of Israel and some of the king’s descendants and some of the nobles, young men in whom there was no blemish, but good-looking, gifted in all wisdom, possessing knowledge and quick to understand, who had ability to serve in the king’s palace, and whom they might teach the language and literature of the Chaldeans.”
There will always be a remnant of God’s elect learning state-authorized curriculum.
Report comment to moderator
“Eventually, this principle became national law when the Bill of Rights and the First Amendment passed in 1791. Freed from state control…”
C’mon Lee. As social conservatives are wont to point out, the bill of rights only prohibits the federal government from establishing a state religion, or supporting one religion over another. It did not, for instance, prohibit individual states from doing either of these, nor did it immediately do away with laws that blatantly favored Christianity. Blasphemy, for instance, was illegal in many states even during the 20th century.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blasphemy_law_in_the_United_States_of_America
Here’s an 1879 example from Maryland:
“If any person, by writing or speaking, shall blaspheme or curse God, or shall write or utter any profane words of and concerning our Saviour, Jesus Christ, or of and concerning the Trinity, or any of the persons thereof, he shall, on conviction, be fined not more than one hundred dollars, or imprisoned not more than six months, or both fined and imprisoned as aforesaid, at the discretion of the court.”
There’s your separation of church and state.
Report comment to moderator
I think it is apt to compare Constantine’s regime with pre-Constitutional America. Several colonies had either church and state intertwined or a state-above-church model.
Public schools, if they exist at all, should be cooperative ventures by a local community. Not, as Frank points out, a national (or state, for that matter) welfare program.
Report comment to moderator
MAESTRO (5): There will always be a remnant of God’s elect learning state-authorized curriculum.
Frank: True enough. But Daniel, Shadrach, Meshach and Abednego were forcibly hauled off into captivity.
It does not follow that Christians should voluntarily enroll their kids in Chaldea Elementary.
Frank: The “Separation of School and State” guys arguments leave something to be desired. That doesn’t mean their overall thesis is wrong, but I’m not sure how well they support it.
http://www.schoolandstate.org/home.htm
Here’s what they list as the problems of public schools:
1. poor academic performance
2. grade inflation
3. low expectations
4. violence
5. physical and emotional bullying
6. cheating and lying
7. wide-spread immorality
8. drugs and alcohol
9. worldview conflicts
They then propose private schools and home schooling as a solution. Private schools, as a group, also suffer from #s 1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 7 and 8.
Home schooling, taken as a whole, will also suffer 1, 2, and 3.
Morever, individual public schools suffer these things to varying degrees, some more than others.
When touting how much better private schools are on these metrics, they totally ignore the key fact that private school students are pre-selected to have “involved” and “conscientious” parents. If they weren’t, then their kids would be attending the default public school.
I’m willing to bet that if we examined the set of kids who attend a public school other than their geographic default for reasons of academic superiority, that these students would perform comparably to the set of private school students who are attending private school for reasons of academic superiority. Private school, then, is just a proxy for “parental academic concern”, with “parental academic concern” being what truly matters.
I would also suggest that private school students are probably wealthier, as a group, than public school students.
Elsewhere in their “case for separation” section, the first bullet point:
http://www.schoolandstate.org/Case/case1.htm
basically talks up U.S. accomplishments during the first 75 years of its existence when there were no public schools. Alright. If they want to play that game, let’s talk up U.S. accomplishments since then? How about putting a man on the moon and becoming the world’s sole superpower? It’s very easy to point out the ills of public education over the last 50 years, but that ignores the preceding 100 years. Maybe the problem isn’t so much the public schools, but the direction the culture has taken over the last 50 years, with the schools simply being a reflection of that larger malaise?
They also make the points:
“Government schooling stands in direct opposition to the liberty this country was founded on.”
Why? Not explained. Compulsory government schooling without any right to opt out? I’d be on board with the claim that that system stands in direct opposition to liberty. But simply having public school as one option among many? Not so much.
On the “Why shouldn’t the Govt. be involved” page they list the following reasons why public education might be useful or beneficial:
1. To make sure equal educational opportunity is available to everyone.
2. To force parents who might otherwise neglect their children’s education to send their children to school.
3. To make education affordable for everyone.
Then, over the rest of that page, they make no effort to explain how, in the absence of public education, these goals will still be achieved.
Report comment to moderator
Being informed by history and our current experiences, and considering the 3 valid reasons for public education above, what might work better than our current system?
Report comment to moderator
hasn’t atheism been legally recognized as a form of religion?
how then is the complete removal of God from the public school not a violation of the 1st?
Report comment to moderator
#11: “hasn’t atheism been legally recognized as a form of religion?”
Not as far as I know. It’s a world view, but not a religion per se.
“how then is the complete removal of God from the public school not a violation of the 1st?”
Because the public schools aren’t running around saying “there’s no God”. They’re just not saying anything. You act as though “not mentioning God” equates to “atheism”, which is false on its face.
Report comment to moderator
Frank –
I understand your point – I think. I did not intend to suggest that Daniel’s example means parents should or must enroll their children in public schools “Chaldea Elementary” as you say.
But Daniel’s example, along with Joseph’s, serve to remind us of God’s sovereignty in the affairs of man. If ever a believer is in a situation where there is likely no alternative but what the state provides, we can thus be assured that God ultimately is working it for our good.
If one has an alternative to state-sponsored curriculum, by all means take it. You are free to do so. But if you cannot, you have not sinned.
Report comment to moderator
“Curriculum” means “course of life” or “life course”. The on-going difficulties public school curriculum will continue to face boil down to the question of what is the best “course of life” for man? Who is man? What is man? What is his purpose for being here?
Agnostics claim this will never be satisfactorily settled and therefore we must jettison any attempts at answering the question and exist and be comfortable with mild confusion of face. That, however, is a settling of the question – to say it cannot be settled. How do they know that?
Atheists virtually deny the existence of God but will nevertheless lay out a comprehensive theology of what God would or should be if God existed at all. Sometimes they suggest that the multiplicity of gods that have “existed” in the past somehow proves that God doesn’t really exist at all.
Political fundamentalists suggest that “religion” is too controversial to be included in the bureaucratic process of legislation and jurisprudence. We must “separate” the two. This “separation” however, has yet to be adequately explained or demonstrated empirically. How does one “separate” a life-sustaining belief from day-to-day living? We think somehow that making decisions about law, morality, limits, punishment, reward can somehow be divorced from what we believe about God and man.
There isn’t a “side” in curriculum debates which does not attempt to provide solid answers to theological questions.
Whatever your “ultimate” thoughts and beliefs are concerning God and man will resonate in your daily life and practice, no matter what your profession. And these thoughts and beliefs, whatever they might be, are taken on a measure of faith based on authority.
Orthodoxy is not limited to religious belief.
Report comment to moderator
school and state..
IT certainly meant different things at differnt times in America.
Today it most certainly means choice – only if one can afford it. It absolutely means paying taxes (or better yet being pawns at mercy of the teacher unions and their allies…) and having little control over how it is spent.
I discovered a few yeas ago how diffent it was in mid 19th century America on a isit to Gettysburg.
At that time the majority of peope from the community sent ther children to the Lutheran Academy- yes Buford’s HQ. The families only paid for the tuition – the infrastructure was maintained by the Lutherans. A very small percentage who could not afford the cheap tuition sent their kids to charity school on the reverse slope of Cemetary Ridge. This solitary bldg. was paid for by the community.
That solitay bldg is now the public ed blob – asking for more, more, more. New contruction, more teachers, administrators aids etc.
The key point to remember is that these were all community schools – a concept lost in all the forced “new school construction” and rising property taxes.
Report comment to moderator
Lee Wishing’s conclusion makes more sense than his argument.
In abstract, the education industry is an unlikely candidate for State (government, generally) operation. State (g.g.) opperation of schools makes no more sense than government operation of shoe stores or restaurants. State (g.g.) operation of schools is a threat to democracy, just as State (g.g.) operation of newspapers and broadcast news media would be (are, in totalitarian countries).
Compulsory attendance statutes first entered the books in support of State-mandated religious instruction, in Germany to keep the population from backsliding into Catholicism and in the Massachusets Bay colony to address parents’ failure to indoctrinate children into the State religion (Search: “Olde Deceiver, Satan”).
The First Amendment bars Congress form creating a national Church. Massachusets and Connecticut had State religions at the time of ratification and would not have assented to the abolition of their State religion.
Report comment to moderator
Buddy Glass,
Numerous lines of evidence support the following generalizations:
1. As institutions take from individual parents the power to determine for their own children the choice of curriculum and the pace and method of instruction, overall system performance falls.
2. Political control of school harms most the children of the least politically-adept parents.
There is something to the argument that comparisons of homeschoolers and parochial schools to State (g.g) schools inevitably sample systematically different populations, but not much.
1. Research by Caroline Hoxby, Joshua Angrist, and others on random-assignment tuition voucher lotteries find a systematic school-sector effect in favor of parent control.
2. International comparisons of nation-level performance find a positive effect of policies which give to parents the power to determine which institution shall receive the taxpayers’ pre-college education subsidy.
3. The supposition that the home environment and not the school environment makes the difference implies that these successfully involved parents are systematically deluded, since it implies that these parents just wasted $12,000 (or whatever) on tuition that they could have spent on a Nikon microscope, magazine subscriptions, Rosetts Stone, etc, to supplement “free” government schooling.
Report comment to moderator
back to topJoin The Conversation
You need to be a registered user of WORLDmag.com's Community section to "join the conversation."
If you are not a member yet, what are you waiting for? Register / Login Now!