Thoughts on Education in America

I found Jim Book’s article “Education in America” in the September 2025 Restoration Herald excellent. However, there is more that needs to be said. As is so often the case, I largely agree with Jim’s assessment and analysis of the problems. I think his conclusion regarding the need for churches to provide alternative schooling opportunities is spot on. Permit me, if you will, to add something to this important topic which Mr. Book never quite stated. With that introduction, here we go. 

As Jim indicates, many today lament the degree to which the national government controls local government schools. Education used to be a very local matter, and it is true that, as the national government inserted itself into schools, the schools have generally gotten worse. 

However, there is more that needs to be said about this. Let me be very clear here: the problem with public schools is NOT just the fact that the wrong level of government controls them. The problem is the very existence of government schools, and this is not just some minor policy matter. There are moral problems inherent in the government control of schools, and that includes government at any level. 

To illustrate this with just one example, consider the county where I live. It is very politically conservative in the way that term is usually used today. It is one of the most “red” counties in one of the most “red” states. Yet, a couple of years ago, the county school board published, at taxpayer expense, of course, a document defending the “equity” part of DEI. The point of that article was to convince people that mere equality was not enough. That is, it is not enough to treat students equally. They argued that, instead, the schools in our county had an obligation to try to achieve “equity,” by which they meant equal outcomes for all students. They made it clear that nothing should get in the way of this goal. 

The point is this: in this county, where the Republican primary determines almost all elections, people voted for a school board that was willing to spend any amount of money necessary to attempt to reach “equity.” Clearly, while removing the influence of a national Department of Education might help, it is not the root of the problem. 

Many years ago, I was involved with a group called the Alliance for the Separation of School and State. It was the brainchild of a fellow I got to know fairly well, named Marshall Fritz. Marshall died many years ago now, but the group still has a website at https://www.schoolandstate.org. Many of the people involved with that organization were from various churches, as was Marshall. That is because, at its heart, this is a religious matter. 

Education cannot avoid having some worldview or religious basis. Some have tried to pretend that education can be neutral in these matters, but that is never possible. Almost every field of study will arrive at radically different conclusions based on the matter of creation. If we are creatures of a Creator, the world is a very different place than if we are not. That, of course, is just a beginning. A world with a personal Creator is a very different place from a world of, say, pantheism. We could continue here with several related points. Education cannot avoid being religious. It cannot be neutral—it is just not a logical possibility. This means that government schools will always be teaching religious things, whether anyone wants to admit this or not. 

It is very common for Christians to agree with this, but then simply think the solution is for “Christian values” to be included in government schools. However, this has not been, and is not, enough. Every curriculum will be based on some worldview. The “educational establishment” does not now and probably never will accept a worldview that is in harmony with the Christian faith (and, thus, with reality, we could add). 

We need to acknowledge that the nexus of teachers’ unions, state departments of education, and universities is a powerful conglomerate. It brings all its power to support government schools, and it is very powerful indeed. Try as some have to change this by running for school boards and other political offices, it is very unlikely to change. It doesn’t have to because it is in place by force of law, often law entangled in bureaucracy. This whole situation stems from the fact that governments own schools, and these schools are funded by customers who must pay for the schools, whether or not those customers like what these schools do. 

There are massive obstacles to fixing this situation, apart from some more radical change. In his article, Jim made the point that the National Education Association is an advocate of socialism. Of course it is, and it must be, because governments at any level owning schools is by definition a socialist arrangement. When governments own a means of production, that is socialism. That is exactly what “public” schools are: schools owned by governments. If you are opposed to socialism, to be consistent, you must be opposed to government schools. The ethical problems of socialism have been covered here more than enough in the past. 

As a practical matter, would you want the government to own grocery stores, as one candidate for mayor of New York is now advocating? Would you want the government to own farms? Consider how well that worked in the former Soviet Union. Would you want the government to manufacture automobiles? That has been tried in some places also, with less than spectacular results. 

A common argument is that education wouldn’t be done, or wouldn’t be done right, unless governments made sure it happened and happened correctly. Some claim it is just too important to be provided by anyone or anything other than governments, but here is something else that is very important and necessary, something that can be neglected or done wrongly and often is. That something is the church. Most of us would fight to the death if governments decided to provide churches for us. 

However, governments (using the usual logic) could make sure churches are funded properly. Governments could make sure that only qualified people teach in their churches. Governments could make sure worship gatherings were done properly. In other words, governments could do for churches all the things that many people think governments must do regarding education. Can you even imagine what kind of a mess that would be? 

It would, almost certainly, be a mess very similar to what Jim Book described in “Education in America.” I agree with his analysis of the problems. I think Jim even hints at the solution without ever saying it: the separation of school and state. 

It is true, of course, that separation of school and state would not cure all of education’s problems, but it would allow an opening for more people to try different approaches. It would be parallel, most likely, to our current culture, which completely separates governments from churches. While this does allow for people to work on the restoration of Christianity as described in the New Testament, it also allows for churches based on liberal theology and even all kinds of cults. In the case of the church, we recognize that this is better than government establishing its own government-run and taxpayer-funded cult—and that is exactly what it would turn out to be. We need to recognize that this is what we have now in the matter of government schools: a government-run and taxpayer-funded schooling cult. 

The separation of school and state is very unlikely anytime soon, given the power that has been accumulated by teachers’ unions and the education establishment. That locus of power has and will fight doggedly to prevent this kind of separation because its power depends on that connection. However, Christians should continue to notice these problems and point them out, just as Jim Book has done. But we must not stop there. We need to advocate for the only way to even begin solving those problems: abandon socialist education in favor of the complete separation of school and state.