WISCONSIN vs. YODER:
ARE YOU TAKING IT SERIOUSLY?

Many people have viewed the Supreme Court decision of Wisconsin v. Yoder 406 U.S. 205, 92 S.Ct. 1526 (1972) as a solid defense of parental rights in the education of their children. What did this case actually determine?

To answer this question we must first ask, Who was Yoder? Who are the Amish? We are taken back to the sixteenth century and the "Anabaptists" (lit., "re-baptizers"). Also called "the left-wing of the Protestant Reformation," their views on the Civil Magistrate are actually to the right of even the John Birch Society. Basic to our analysis of the Yoder case is the unique Vine & Fig Tree worldview, which, while standing in the heritage of the Reformers (Luther, Calvin, et al), is also indebted to the Biblical insights of "the Reformers' stepchildren," the Anabaptists. In our Generic Christianity Studyletter we explore the important contributions of these lesser-known reformers and show how essential their insights are to a Faithful Christian life. The Anabaptists were generations ahead of the Reformers in their understanding of the relationship between church and state, and we owe our First Amendment freedoms to such men as Conrad Grebel, Menno Simons, and other Anabaptists who were persecuted by the Reformers.

"Home schoolers" in particular have looked to Yoder as a statement of their Constitutional rights to educate their children. It is the purpose of this paper to examine the strengths and weaknesses of the Yoder defense of home schooling.

We will examine first the Biblical judgments rendered by the Court, showing how these force an examination of the consistency of our Christian walk. We will follow this by a look at the explicit barriers to home education in the Court's decision.

YOUR FAITH ON TRIAL

Wallis Metts, in his book, Your Faith on Trial, made the important point that any time a Christian Family is put on the witness stand in a court or hearing, the Christian himself will be on trial. The State will be examining him to find out if he really believes what he says he believes, and practices what he preaches. To qualify for legal protection, a belief must be "sincerely held." Any use of the Yoder decision will put our faith on trial. If we are going to assert that we fall under the category of people protected by the Yoder decision, the State will interrogate us to see if we hold as sincerely and practice as rigorously the Anabaptist/Christian beliefs protected in Yoder. The success of a Yoder-based defense will depend in part on the consistency of our own beliefs and practices.

The Christian Mindset
Biblical Faith is a world-and-life view. Every area of our lives is to be governed by God's Word. This puts Christians in conflict with the system of man, which constantly attempts to seduce the Christian to forsake the beauty of holiness for the short-term "benefits" of worldliness. The Christian is called to separate himself from the greed, selfishness, and hatred of the world and display contentment, charitable service, and peace. The Love of Christ is to permeate his entire life: his family, his vocation, and his interaction with the powers that be. These important points were given renewed consideration by the Anabaptists of the 16th century, and by the Amish in our own day. The Court noted again and again the world-and-life view of the Anabaptists. At trial in Wisconsin,

"The history of the Amish sect was given in some detail, beginning with the Swiss Anabaptists of the 16th century who rejected institutionalized churches and sought to return to the early, simple, Christian life de-emphasizing material success, rejecting the competitive spirit, and seeking to insulate themselves from the modern world. (406 U.S. 205, 209-210)

[T]he traditional way of life of the Amish is not merely a matter of personal preference, but one of deep religious conviction. . . . [I]t is in response to their literal interpretation of the Biblical injunction from the Epistle of Paul to the Romans, "be not conformed to this world. . . ." This command is fundamental to the Amish faith. (at 216)

Amish objection to formal education beyond the eighth grade is firmly grounded in these central religious concepts. They object to the high school, and higher education generally, because the values they teach are in marked variance with Amish values and the Amish way of life. They view secondary school education as an impermissible exposure of their children to a "worldly" influence in conflict with their beliefs. The high school tends to emphasize intellectual and scientific accomplishments, self-distinction, competitiveness, worldly success, and social life with other students. Amish society emphasizes . . . a life of "goodness," rather than a life of intellect; wisdom, rather than technical knowledge, community welfare, rather than competition; and separation from, rather than integration with, contemporary worldly society. (210-211)

Unwittingly, the Court is prompting Christians to examine themselves and to live a life consistent with the teachings they profess to believe. You will not be able to sit silently and allow your attorney to get you off the hook by uttering the magic word "Yoder" any more than the Apostle Paul could remain silent (Acts 22-26). Your faith and life will be on trial if you claim rights under Yoder. Consider these questions:

The courts will ask you these questions, and will determine the sincerity of your faith based on its consistency.

A Non-Compartmentalized Faith

"Broadly speaking, the Old Order Amish religion pervades and determines the entire mode of life of its adherents." (Yoder at 210)
"The Amish mode of life and education is inseparable from and a part of the basic tenets of their religion -- indeed, as much a part of their religious belief and practices as baptism, the confessional, or a sabbath may be for others." (at 219)

If the court discerns that our faith is practiced on Sunday but not the rest of the week, they will not be impressed with our plea for political sanctuary under Yoder. We may not think the Court has a right to judge our faith. Yet these are the same questions the Bible asks us. Far from saying to the State, "You have no right to ask," and then remaining silent, we must be prepared to give an answer both to men (I Peter 3:14-17) and to God (I Peter 4:17).

As you read these characteristics of Anabaptist life and thought are you comfortable? Is this the kind of life you even want to lead? If you feel at home with such non-worldly views, are you consistent with them? If the answer to either of these questions is "no," you may find the courts unwilling to grant you the Yoder protections.

In many ways the Court is judging our faith on same terms that the Bible judges us. This is both a strength and a weakness of the Yoder decision: We must be consistent with our profession as disciples of the Lord Jesus. And we must be prepared to give our testimony before men. And yet this is also the great "weakness" of the defense: Are we consistent? Are we at least increasingly consistent, that is, are we growing in our faith? These are questions put before us both by the Bible and by the Yoder Court.

But the Court also makes some rather unBiblical judgments that work against the home schooler. We must examine them.

Yoder's Built-in Limitations

Home schoolers are quick to quote the pro-Family, pro-freedom rhetoric in the Yoder decision. We can appreciate the Court's apparent willingness to protect sincerely-held Christian beliefs from State intrusion.

But as as we watch the Court continue to define and delimit the groups it is willing to protect, we may find ourselves increasingly excluded from its purview. We shall see that modern Anabaptists at times provide a caricature of the truly Christian life. We may not agree with the entire Amish package, and our disagreement may be based on Biblical principles. Yet because we fall between the extremes of modern Anabaptism on the one hand and modern Hedonism on the other, the Yoder decision may be deemed not to apply to us.

We shall see that the Court has very narrowly applied the principles of parental rights with which the Court so broad-mindedly opened.

Neither Of nor In the World
All true Christians agree that the Christian is not to be "of the world." They are to "be separate" from unbelievers (II Corinthians 6:14-18). But there is a limit to this. Generally speaking, it is a physical limit: we are not to be separated from unbelievers to such an extent that we must "go out of the world" (I Corinthians 5:10).

As a result of their common heritage, Old Order Amish communities today are characterized by a fundamental belief that salvation requires life in a church community separate and apart from the world and worldly influence. This concept of life aloof from the world and its values is central to their faith. (at 210)

The Court made note of the Anabaptist "way of life in a church-oriented community, separated from the outside world. . . ." (at 217) We can applaud the Amish desire to escape the influences of the world, particularly on behalf of their children. But if religious sincerity requires that we not even be in the world, but utterly isolated in distinct geographical communities, then the courts may not find our beliefs to be "sincerely-held," and will not grant us Yoder protections.

Ecclesiastical Regulation and Structure
The Court noted not only the Anabaptists' way of life in a "church-oriented community," but that Amish life is regulated "with the detail of the Talmudic diet through the strictly enforced rules of the church community." (at 216)

In 1980, a number of churches in California and elsewhere faced the possibility of closure by the State when the State challenged the claim that they were bona fide churches. Tax authorities have been attempting for some time to gain approval for a checklist that would determine a true "church." This checklist would include the presence of seminaries and other educational institutions, and a fairly lengthy established history. (The Court emphasized on at least five different occasions that the Amish are historically distinctive and have existed in their present state for over three hundred years -- at 209-10, 215, 216-17, 226-27, and 235-36.)

But how many home educating families can make a similar claim? How many have the support of an established institutional church? Many home non-schoolers have broken away from such institutions precisely because of their worldly influence and opposition to Family Education. Some have been forced out. Many home-educators do not even want the support of top-down ecclesiastical structures, finding them contrary to Biblical Faith. Few home educators are fortunate enough to find themselves in a community of like-minded families, especially those just starting out. Isolated home educators are not likely to meet the Court's criteria for a legitimate religion, for the presentation made by the Amish is "one that probably few other religious groups or sects could make. . . " (at 236).

Home schoolers have already recognized the need to band together; community is clearly an important priority. But we just don't have it yet.

Amish Inconsistencies
The Amish have an unfortunate reputation for self-righteousness or pharisaism. Perhaps there is a tendency for them to center in on their unique lifestyle, ignore the Biblical basis that once undergirded it, and then develop inconsistencies in life and thought.

One startling inconsistency, which the Court may have delighted in, could be disastrous for the home educator seeking protection under Yoder. "The Amish do not object to elementary education through the first eight grades. . . ." (at 212) Once the Amish had made this extraordinary concession, the Court found no compelling argument against "accommodating the religious objections of the Amish by forgoing one, or at most two, additional years of compulsory education. . . ." (at 234, our emphasis; cf. 232)

When all the rhetoric is sifted away, the actual right granted in Yoder is the right to skip the last one or two years of compulsory schooling. Many home educators are aware that it is the last two years that could be most easily handed over to the State! The evidence from educational research indicates that it is the first years of the child's life that are the most crucial, and these formative years require the most extensive child-parent contact. The Court apparently protected the Amish failure to understand the role of the parents in the most formative years.

The State as Educator
Far from granting the parents an educational carte blanche to oversee their young children, the Yoder decision explicitly pointed out the ultimate priority of the State in the role of educator. Many other previous cases have granted limited rights to parents, while retaining ultimate power in the State, and these cases were quoted:

There is no doubt as to the power of a State, having a high responsibility for education of its citizens, to impose reasonable regulations for the control and duration of basic education. See, e.g., Pierce v. Society of Sisters, 268 U.S. 510, 534, 45 S.Ct. 571, 573, 69 L.Ed. 1070 (1925). Providing public schools ranks at the very apex of the function of the State. (at 213)

Most Bible students would be surprised to hear education, which the Court elsewhere says has traditionally been a parental responsibility, being given such a high priority among the duties of the State; much more that it "ranks at the very apex" of the functions of the State! Are these the words that are supposed to remove the State from Family Education?

Notably, and in general, those cases which are most commonly cited by supporters of home education have very carefully limited the rights granted to the parents, and have carefully re-asserted the ultimacy of the State as educator. Any argument for home education should be apprised of the Court's religious devotion to the State as Educator.

"Put on the whole armour of God, that ye may be able to stand against the wiles of the devil. For we wrestle not against blood and flesh, but against principalities and power, against the rulers of the darkness of this world, against spiritual wickedness in high places."
Ephesians 6:11-12


The Christmas Conspiracy


Virtue


Vine & Fig Tree


Paradigm Shift


Theocracy
Subscribe to Vine & Fig Tree
Enter your e-mail address:
vft archive
An e-group hosted by eGroups.com

Vine & Fig Tree
12314 Palm Dr. #107
Desert Hot Springs, CA 92240
[e-mail to V&FT]
[V&FT Home Page]