In the past there have been many calls, and much prayer, for Reformed education. People struggled to realize this vision. People knew what they were doing. And they worked at it!

What were their motives? What was behind it? Believers will ask themselves these questions in their lives of self-examination – and not only for themselves, but also to serve others by it. There may be times of being lukewarm about it, perhaps even aversion. Caricatures have also been made of Reformed life and instruction. There is a great of deal of misunderstanding and ignorance about the subject. Who are our children? Who are we to those children? What is our God like in his care and in his love? There is abundant reason to reflect on these questions. This article aims to stimulate such reflection.

The Reformation⤒🔗

Luther and Calvin were much involved in the reformation of instruction to the youth. As early as 1524 Luther called upon governments to establish and maintain Christian schools. He did not do this because he failed to see a task for the parents in this regard. But the parents, through both impotence and unwillingness, were negligent in this. For that reason, in Luther's opinion, the government had a calling to step in and to ensure that both boys and girls would receive Christian education. He considered Scriptural education of the youth necessary not only for the church but also for civil and social life. He had a twofold motivation for this:

1. the youth needed to be protected from the pernicious education provided by the monastery schools;
2. but first and foremost it was a positive matter: the duty of Scriptural education was derived from baptism.

Calvin joined Luther in this and continued to stress this importance. Both reformers were convinced and pronounced:

1. that the corruption of the churches brought with it the corruption of education;
2. that the corruption of education brought with it also the corruption of the churches.

There were two kinds of schools in those days: monastic schools and institutions of humanism. Both were dangerous for the youth and consequently for the church as well. The Reformation of the church brought about a radically different education.

The reformers' objectives were very positive: all areas of study were to be made subservient to the one goal: to promote the true knowledge of God and to serve God in all of life.

The Secession (1834)←⤒🔗

As in the sixteenth century, church deformation and church reformation had consequences for all areas of life in the nineteenth century. As with Luther and Calvin, the Secession was about a return to the service of love that the Lord in his covenant of love requires of his church and children. In that service, the thoughts of the parents and of the other seniors in the church certainly go out to the children: the older generation in the church shows complete care for the coming generation.

An impressive example of this has been handed down to us from the struggles of the Secession. It is clear to anyone who studies the archival documents that the eyes of the believers were opened by the church struggle to two issues regarding education:

1. the children of the church, as heirs of God's covenant, were to receive the only proper education, namely, instruction according to the confession of the churches;
2. the children had to be safeguarded from destructive teaching and kept from it.

In the archives of the separated church at Smilde there is a letter from the elders and deacons, dated 11 December 1835. They write “as representatives, leaders, elders and deacons.” In this letter they beg his Majesty the King [William I] for freedom of worship. But halfway through this letter we find this moving request for “the protection of religion” being formulated as a prayer for the freedom of education for the children:

For we have promised before God and the congregation, in baptizing our children, to instruct them in the true doctrine of salvation. And since we are fully convinced that at present in the schools not the true doctrine of salvation, but all kinds of false doctrines are being promulgated there, we cannot send them there without sinning against God, for God's command tells us: Teach the children the first principles according his ways, so that when they are older they will not depart from them.

Like the reformers Luther and Calvin, these shepherds of the flock give a double motivation for Scriptural and confessional instruction: a positive and a negative reason.

But not only the elders and representatives of the congregation, also the parents from the church have voiced their plea: first in a letter to the mayor dated Dec. 12, 1834 and later in a letter to the governor of the province dated May 26, 1835. In it they write, among other things, concerning

... the lamentable corruption of the school system, on account of which we cannot justify before God that our children are nourished, instead of by the lively Word of God, with vanities, or even worse, with false religion;

while at the same time we bound ourselves on oath at the baptism of our children to bring them up in the right service of God: as parents and witness, ‘to instruct our children in the true doctrine or to have him or her instructed therein.’

In one of these letters, the parents emphasize their commitment to God’s Word and the Reformed confessions: the Three Forms of Unity (Belgic Confession, Heidelberg Catechism, and Canons of Dort).

The Liberation (1944)←⤒🔗

When, in the years following the Liberation, there was renewed reflection and attention for the education of the youth of the church, it was, as far as motives and backgrounds were concerned, again quite simply Reformed: in line with the Reformation and the Secession.

Some have said that those ‘Liberated people’ sought isolation and that with their negative attitudes they ‘always were “against”.’ This was stated so often that others started to believe it. This impression of the people of the Liberation continues after decades, even where no one would expect it. Their critics implied that the negative stance of the Liberated motivated the establishment of their own schools just because all ‘general Christian education’ was bad by definition. After all, was that education all that bad? There were reliable teachers at many schools, weren't there? And later – when others too discovered the decline in this instruction and searched for new schools – the reproaches were formulated in a different way: why special, Reformed schools? Why should the members of the school society have to be members of the Reformed church? Why do the teachers have to be professed members of a Reformed church in the country? Can't they establish schools together with evangelicals, Baptists and other Christians? Is it really such a tragedy when a teacher does not accept so-called infant baptism, or does not want to acknowledge elders as a gift of the Spirit, or denies election? Aren't we all united against Scripture criticism? Don't we all deplore the fact that ‘Biblical values’ are being abandoned? As long as we are faithful to the Bible, and not so overly confessional! Special Reformed schools: that represents too narrow a focus on one church! In this way, being ‘faithful to Scripture' became differentiated from ‘being Reformed,’ After all, said many, not only when it came to the instruction of the youth, but also in general, we all want to be faithful to Scripture. But the Three Forms of Unity, according to such people, act as a “specialité de la maison” [house special], and the desire to have everything ‘Reformed’ is in fact sectarian...

Now it is true, unfortunately, that Reformed people stumbled in both the church struggle and the school struggle time and again. With good intentions they did not always manage to choose the right words. Anyone who attempts to find fault can find many reasons for accusation and denunciation. Reformed people express this themselves –not as a matter of course, but filled with shame – in their confession!

And there is also something else. When our God in his grace calls for the struggle to keep the church faithful, radicals also make themselves heard. This has been the case in all reformations and other conversions. Luther and Calvin have suffered from it. The Secession was plagued and hurt by such persons. It was no different in and after the Liberation.

But the Reformed people after 1944-45 were not in the first place entirely negative in their motivations, but instead positive. Not radical, but consistent. In other words: motivated by their love for God. Allow me here too, to showcase something from the ‘archives.’ It is known that in Amersfoort Reformed education is provided at various levels. Those who experience it are always moved by it, and feel small under it. But how did all this begin? Very modestly: as a result of a simple introduction by a humble member at an ordinary men's Bible study society in the least significant district of the city. The introducer and others had come to stand amazed again at the words and works of their Lord and God. When it was demanded of them that they would put question marks around the trustworthiness of God's given promises, they were instead seized with amazement by what God had made known about his covenant and about himself as their covenant God. How they spoke of the faithfulness of their God, the assurance of his promises! More than ever it became clear how deep was God's compassion for redeemed sinners: when in a family only the husband or only the wife had come to faith, the children also shared in the promises that applied to the father or the mother. After all, these children were sanctified – as they read what Paul wrote in 1 Corinthians 7. They were drawn by God to God's side and given to the Son of God to enjoy the Holy Spirit in his works? At the men's society the members talked more about it: also at home, and when visiting. Thus the education of the children also received new interest. These children are holy. Being set apart, they need to be led like saints, protected from the attacks that would come upon them. The best is not even good enough for them. And the time in which this took place was not only the time right after the Liberation. It was also the time when God's trustworthy words were being challenged. It was also the time of the ‘breakthrough’ - a political manifestation of the rising relativism of that time. At that time, believers came to the founding of a Reformed school association and a Reformed school, with a grateful sense of responsibility. They perceived dangers, and they stood up against them. But first of all they knew about covenant and baptism - the main inspirations for their work.

Without realizing it, these unsuspecting men of the men’s study society were in complete agreement with the Secession and the Reformation. They knew what baptism implied, and celebrated God’s covenant.

Parents and older members←⤒🔗

We often hear it said: the school belongs to the parents. They are responsible for the education of the children. But what stands out in times of reformation, when the Spirit works powerfully? We only have to look at the minutes of the school board meetings and the annual reports of the associations: single, unmarried church members were on the school board, even married people who had no children of their own. Seniors worked hard and sometimes traveled long distances to collect money for the unsubsidized school.

Did this represent the activism of fanatics?

No - it was an expression of being focused on God! They did this out of respect for their God! They had started to listen to the Scriptures with new ears and hearts, as it were. It was not for nothing that Deuteronomy 32 was recalled several times in those days. It is not for nothing that we come across words from Psalm 78 made visible on the walls in school buildings. The words of Deuteronomy 32:7 had become alive again:

Remember the days of old;
consider the years of many generations;
ask your father, and he will show you,
your elders, and they will tell you.

These words teach us that in addition to the parents, the elders and older members in the church are co-responsible for the youth. They teach more: one’s own father, but also the other elders of the congregation are given as people the youth can approach with their questions. Those older members should stand out: they know God’s Word, they know about his works, they can “tell” what they know. They need to have the confidence of the younger people. The youth should approach them and start asking questions. It is the same with the words of Psalm 78:3-4a:

The things that we have heard and known,
which our fathers have told us.
We will not hide them from their children,
but tell them to the coming generation.

 

We are now told that children are not just the children of their parents, but that in the living community of the covenant relationship they are children also of their grandparents, great-grandparents and further ancestors. Parents who care for their own children care in this respect for the children of their ancestry.

There is much that could be said about all this. Allow me to highlight this: we should not think only in categories of families, but also think of the generations. In other places and in very different contexts the Scriptures also point to this. Therefore, the theme of “the family and the school” or “school and family” is not quite complete. It is too narrow. Parents have their responsibility: a unique, primary, and also continuing (though also changing) responsibility. But others, in their place and with their knowledge and capabilities, are co-responsible. The older generation is responsible for the younger; the younger generation must feel safe first of all with their parents, but also with many others. And when only the parents of school-going children pay attention to the school, and think along with the school board, the school administration and the teachers, then the school and the church are not in good shape. Then we certainly have reason to be concerned for the youth. Do we criticize the youth? Often we’ll have to start somewhere else! For how much residual individualism is present among us!?

At the time of the Liberation and afterwards there was life in this respect, where growth and blossoming became evident – even if it was only a beginning and perhaps not everyone participated by a long shot. However, instead of moving forward we appear to be moving backward. The youth is in danger. The school may become a danger. When will this happen? This will be the case when the older members of the community leave everything to the parents and when the parents leave the school board to do its work.

The school board does not have to consist exclusively of parents of school-age children, although they will, if possible, make up the majority on the board. But when it comes to elections for board members the school society also needs to pay attention to non-married and childless church members: people with their own gifts, sometimes with great expertise, sometimes with more time. We live in a community that is richly blessed!

Identity←⤒🔗

Is the Reformed school now a church school? It all depends on what one understands by this term. It is not ecclesiastical in the sense that the church council appoints the school board, or that the school curriculum is approved by the pastor.

However, the confession of the church does determine all that happens in the board meeting and in the classroom. We can also think about the things that take place in connection with the school, before and after school. The students of the school are baptized children, because they are children of the congregation. The parents and the older members, as well as those who are members of the board of directors or who teach in the classroom, have committed themselves to the faith that is confessed in the church. They have expressed publicly that they would “continue steadfastly in this doctrine” [of Word and confession] by the grace of God” to the end of their life. So all who work together in a Reformed school can rely on each other. They represent a beautiful unity. They can always appeal to the Reformed confessions among themselves. For a teacher who comes into conflict with the Three Forms of Unity, there is no place in front of the class. With a proper dismissal procedure on that basis, for example, the State cannot intervene and undo the dismissal without affecting religious freedom. A dismissal in the context of a school need not affect church membership.

However, church discipline can have far-reaching consequences for the position of a board member or a teacher. In this way the children are being protected. Which children? Those who are being educated. They are the children who are being loved: children who have been presented by the whole community to the LORD as “this your child.”