Vol. 9, No. 3
~ Page 18 ~
We just received a long letter with regard to the propriety of sending a young child to a conservative denominational academy in preference to sending it to a public school where it is constantly bombarded with false doctrine, both religiously and socially corrupt. Several questions were raised, among them was this: Would an enrollment in such a denominational school constitute support of false doctrine?
Our answer may provide some thoughts of value to others involved in such problems. Part of our answer was that support involves showing compliance or agreement with the false doctrine. If simply being enrolled in such a school shows support of their false doctrine, then being enrolled in a public school shows support of the ungodly things that are taught and practiced there. Surely almost every person who may be able to read this would deny that being in a public school indicates support for all the things taught and practiced there. We are allowed to show our support or lack of it in various ways, and should show our disagreement in an appropriate, loving manner.
A parent who tries to shield his/her child from all contamination of any kind needs to understand that the child cannot be immunized to false doctrine or false living unless he/she is exposed to it in some fashion. Many parents have been surprised and disappointed when their child has gone away to college and been exposed to various religious, social or political theories that they had never heard discussed or refuted, and are led away into serious error.
Our conclusion at this time is that we should try to keep our children from being exposed to such ungodliness and false doctrine that we cannot properly refute, but an effort to put them in a monastery where they are not allowed to face the trials and temptations of life is counter productive. It is probable that the idea of balance is appropriate in this situation, as in most others. For example, if one never bears any burden, trial or testing in a physical way, he becomes weak and ineffective. However, if he is burdened unduly, like trying to put a hundred pound weight on a little child, he may be broken and unfit for service. That principle is so applicable in almost any area. A parent who is so afraid of a child being hurt that the child is not allowed to even try to learn to roller skate, ride a tricycle or climb a tree may so stunt the child's growth, both physically and psychologically that he is practically useless in society. However, the parent who allows the little child to ride a motorcycle or climb a big tree without supervision and guidance is probably an unfit parent.
So a parent may support false teaching if he allows his child to go into any situation, either public or private schools, where false doctrine and ungodly living is upheld or condoned without showing the error and danger of such. But the parent does not support false teaching simply by allowing his child to be exposed to it. There is a danger of a young (or old) preacher attending a denominational graduate school where he is exposed to false doctrine, but simply attending does not equate with supporting.