Sphere Sovereignty and Christian Education

The Importance of Christian Education

Explaining the critical importance of a Christian education to many, even devout, believers today often winds up sounding like the warning label on a bottle of medication: this activity can lead to looks and expressions of disorientation, disbelief, and dismay. This is despite the radically secular humanistic direction that has been pursued in the state-funded government schools of the United Kingdom for so long.

Not infrequently, after an uncomfortable silence, there is an implicit or explicit denial that a distinctly Christian and family-directed education is either possible, necessary, or desirable. Education, it is assumed, is the role of the state and its professional educators. Such common conclusions are one of the reasons the church is in the marginalised position it is today, and why we are currently losing the majority of our churched children to unbelief before they have even finished university.

In marked contrast, Abraham Kuyper, the great Dutch theologian who served as Prime Minister of the Netherlands in the early twentieth century, was convinced that in the late-modern world, since the so-called Enlightenment, it would be critical for Christians to once again begin (as in the past) independent and unapologetically Christian institutions and organisations that approached life and culture from a truly scriptural standpoint. Kuyper recognized that Western culture was pulling up its roots that were embedded in the gospel of Christ, and consequently, that biblical truth was no longer allowed to set the direction in state institutions and schools:

The leadership in such organisations never falls to us [i.e. Christians], but always and inflexibly to our opponents. They carry out their intention, and whoever of us embarks with them ends up where they want to land but where we never may land. The spirit at work in such principally unbelieving organisations is so alluring and contagious that almost none of us, once he enters into such company, can offer resistance to it. One absorbs this poison without suspecting it … once one is part of such organisation, one sees one’s Christian principle doomed to silence.^[i]

Spoken at the beginning of the last century, these words have proven remarkably prescient, given the lack of Christian influence in education in modern Britain – a decline that began with the state’s meaningful involvement in education through the Education Act of 1870.

Many Christians do not recognise the slow contagion affecting their children, reducing the faith to a place of near irrelevance. And yet the utmost concern of the Christian, and especially the Christian parent, should be the relating of their faith in Christ Jesus and his infallible Word to the real world around them – beginning in the family and the raising of children in the faith. In fact, Christian education in essence is the relating of the biblical worldview to the totality of life.

Education and the State

In today’s world, with the conquest of the revolutionary and contractarian view of society, the relationship between personal freedom and state power has grown increasingly complex and often contradictory.

On the one hand, there is a strong desire for total freedom from all forms of perceived oppression, yet this desire paradoxically goes hand in hand with a growing dependence on the state to provide and enforce these new ‘freedoms.’ This paradox has given rise to a disturbing trend – a movement toward a totalising state absolutism, where the state is not only seen as a facilitator but also as the primary power shaping every aspect of life, including education. The current dominance of this statist ideology is so emphatic and so basic to our lived experience that its pervasive presence goes almost unnoticed and yet it fundamentally challenges the Christian understanding of authority and government which is built upon the biblical principle of sphere sovereignty, the idea that different areas of life, such as family, state, church and other private institutions, including schools and universities, each have distinct and delimited roles, their own office-bearers, and a jurisdiction under the sovereign rule of God.

As such, contemporary social democracy has become statist, with some irony given its other claim to liberalism, centralising control and power in the state and extending its reach into all areas of life. This manifests in the increasing reliance of the population on civil government to address a wide range of social issues: from economic disparities, and physical and mental health, to sexual and moral education, with much of this control and provision delegated to government schools. The applause given to the current Labour government for providing breakfast for all children is a prime example of this.

Under this statist doctrine, civil government is elevated to a position of supremacy over all other societal structures, disregarding the unique roles and responsibilities of historically independent, pre-political private institutions such as the family, the church, and the school. Prior to the late nineteenth century, it was churches, charities, and private schools that provided education for children and young people. It was not until 1944, with the Butler Act, that the modern primary and secondary state-funded system was established in the United Kingdom.

This growing reliance on a massive bureaucratic state is evident in the widespread acceptance of government intervention in numerous aspects of daily life. Progressive, confiscatory taxation, including VAT being slapped on private schools in 2025, as well as tax-funded education, health, and welfare programs, are commonly accepted, with little question of their legitimacy or limits. Even areas traditionally outside the state’s purview, such as family life and religious practices, are increasingly subject to government intervention and control. We expect this in places like communist China, where all of life is heavily monitored and regulated. But a similar trend is emerging in Western countries, where Christian schools, charities, private organisations, and churches are facing regulations limiting their activities or teachings under the guise of public health, equity, inclusion, or social order. Consider, for example, the imposition, through mandatory Relationships and Sex Education, of the promotion and celebration of same-sex sexual relationships and even gender identity normalisation, and inspectors questioning the harms that may exist to children from a school that brings a strong Christian foundation to what is taught on such matters.

State Absolutism or Sphere Sovereignty

The growing danger lies not only in the state’s expansion into areas it has no mandate or right to interfere in, but also in its fundamental misunderstanding of the nature of authority and governance that recognises no intrinsic limits. The Bible teaches that all authority belongs to God, who delegates limited authority to various spheres of life: the individual, the family, the church, private institutions, and the civil government. Each of these spheres has its unique role and authority that should not be infringed upon by the others or treated as merely lesser parts of a greater whole.

When the state (civil government) oversteps its delegated sphere of competency, it undermines the God-given autonomy of these other life-spheres, effectively absolutising itself and setting itself up as the ultimate authority. This overreach is not only an abuse of power but also a denial of the fundamental Christian doctrine that all power is subject to Christ’s Word and Lordship (Ps. 2; Col. 1). Statism leads inevitably to a form of practical atheism, where the state assumes a god-like role, controlling every aspect of life and dictating the terms of human existence and social relationships. This pattern directly opposes the biblical teaching that only the living God, manifest in Christ and his Kingdom rule, has total authority and that all human institutions must operate within the limits He has established. This includes the family, the church, and any school, which should be understood to be under Christ’s lordship, not the rule of the state.

The principle of Sphere Sovereignty, as helpfully articulated by Abraham Kuyper and further developed by Christian thinkers like Herman Dooyeweerd, provides a scripturally rooted framework for understanding the proper limits of authority under the Kingdom of God. No given law-sphere should dominate or control the other spheres of life. Each must operate within the limits set by God’s law-word, so that each area of life is free to obey God.

Several fundamental principles are involved. The first is the sovereignty of God over all spheres of human existence. At the heart of Sphere Sovereignty is the belief that God is sovereign over all creation. Every sphere, whether political, social, familial, educational, or ecclesiastical, is created and ordered by God and is subject to His authority.

The second is the delimitation of the state. The Bible clearly describes the state’s role as being concerned with public justice, punishing wrongdoing, and promoting good conduct. The state should wield the “sword” to maintain public order and ensure that righteous laws are upheld (Romans 13:4). However, its authority is not unlimited; it must respect the equally sphere-sovereign nature of other God-ordained law-orders, such as the family and the church. For instance, the state should not interfere in the doctrine, worship, or teaching of the church, which belong to the ecclesiastical sphere and are under the authority of the church’s officers. Nor should it intrude into (let alone redefine!) the fundamental authority, role, and responsibility of the family, such as the upbringing and education of children by family and church, unless crimes are being committed.

The state, therefore, is not an absolute power; it should be a servant of God, with a specific role to play in maintaining justice in the public-legal order (Romans 13:1-7). Its authority is limited by God’s law, and when the state exceeds its God-given mandate, encroaching into the life of the family and its responsibility to direct the education of its children, it becomes tyrannical.

As such, each law-sphere has its unique role and authority, granted directly by God. The family is a government-given authority over raising children, education, and domestic affairs, while the church has the authority to proclaim the gospel, administer the sacraments, and exercise church discipline as another form of government. The state has no right to dictate how these spheres should operate within their God-given boundaries. Any attempt by the state to assume coercive control over these areas of life represents an overreach of its authority and a usurpation of God’s sovereignty.

The Consequences of Violating Sphere Sovereignty

When the state overreaches and assumes authority in areas beyond its jurisdiction, the consequences are far-reaching and detrimental. Statism, by its nature, tends toward totalitarianism because it brings the proper coercive power of the state into areas of life it does not belong. For example, when it usurps the family, it may try to redefine marriage, control the upbringing or discipline of children, and interfere in pre-political parental rights. The government does not confer rights and responsibilities on parents; it is simply to recognize and protect these central aspects of God’s creation order.

When the state dominates the church, it can censor religious expression and limit the freedom to worship. When the state seeks to control education, invading the private domain of families, parental authority, and private societal institutions, it can impose secular ideologies and ban Christian teachings, using educational institutions as a means of state indoctrination. In fact, it will also seek to undermine or even crush private education in the home or independent school, as it is seen as a threat and competitor to the ideological interests and totalising authority of the state. This is well illustrated by the British Labour government’s addition of VAT to the fees parents pay for education.

For over four hundred years, the advancement of education in Britain was viewed as a charitable purpose. It was independent and exempt from taxation because it was always assumed to serve the public interest. What in America and Canada today are called private schools are referred to as public schools in England. This is more than a historical anomaly. As we have noted, state education is a new idea; before there was any state-funded government school system, education was not the province of state bureaucrats as it is today.

Historically, education was largely done in the home and through church institutions, so when independent fee-paying schools were launched, they were open to the public and were therefore called public schools. Education was not seen as a tool of class warfare, a source of state revenue, or a means to enforce state-approved ideology. Rather, it was seen as for the good of all society and necessary for the advancement of culture and the preservation of freedom via the liberal arts curriculum, which literally meant the ‘art of freedom.’

This changed legally in 2025, when the current Labour government cynically attacked the historic freedom of education and imposed a massive tax levy on ‘private’ schools: a Value Added Tax (VAT) at 20%. The reasons cited were various, but two things lay at the heart of it.  First, it was yet another means of progressive taxation to enrich the state coffers and the size of its massive bureaucracy at the expense of those considered wealthy. It was claimed that applying this tax would raise an additional 1.8 billion pounds in tax revenue per year to fund more state programs, in particular the government school sector. The whole idea of VAT, in the first place, was to further wealth confiscation from the private sector, and it was launched during the massive expansion of the welfare state in the early 1970’s. This is an excellent example of statism because, as civil government encroaches ever further into the various spheres of life, seeking to control them, it has an insatiable need to confiscate people’s hard-earned money to fund its endless provisions.

The second issue at the heart of this tax-raising move is the control of people’s thinking through the marginalisation and diminution of private institutions not yet fully under state control. Government education today is viewed by the state planners and elite bureaucrats as the key means not just of equalisation and democratisation, but of homogenisation. The modern humanistic state views the school as the new pulpit and, effectively, the new church, with teachers as the new priesthood. It is here that they wish to reshape the minds of the young in line with the state-approved ideology, thereby graduating compliant instruments willing to realise the state’s ideology; activists who will promote rather than challenge the approved doctrine. The financial ruin of competitors to state education is the easiest way to eliminate potential opposition. The VAT raid on schools has already resulted in the closure of over 100 independent schools and dashed the aspirations of many ordinary, hard-working people for their children, including small, low-cost Christian schools already under immense financial pressure.[ii]

When the state treats the other spheres of life as lower and lesser parts of itself as a totalising whole, it diminishes personal responsibility, erodes freedom of every kind, and fosters a culture of dependency. This leads to a society where individuals, families, and churches become subservient to the state, losing their autonomy and their ability to fulfill their God-given purpose in service to His Kingdom.

A Christian Response to Statism

In response to this challenging situation, Christians must first become alert to the worldview conflict at the heart of education today and recognize the necessity of recovering the biblical principles of sphere sovereignty if freedom in education is to be regained. Only by a radical change in thinking can we move toward a change of practice.

Secondly, this response will require steadily reducing civil government to biblical limits. Christians should promote the idea of a limited civil government that respects the autonomy of other life spheres and recognises its role as a servant of God under his authority and subject to his Word. This means openly challenging the assumption that the state is the ultimate Lord of life and, instead, advocating for structures and policies that protect the freedom and independence of families, churches, and other private institutions, such as schools.

Thirdly, this cannot happen unless Christians intentionally reengage in public life, bringing their faith to bear in every area of society in a principled and unapologetic way. This includes recovering the scriptural view of the family and its responsibilities, as well as participating in politics, law, education, and business in ways that reflect a commitment to the teaching of God’s word with close attention paid to the principles of Sphere Sovereignty. By doing so, Christians can help reshape a culture that respects the limits of state authority whilst promoting true freedom and biblical justice.

Fourthly, Christians must work to foster a culture of self-sacrifice and faithfulness in which individuals, families, communities, and churches take up their God-given roles and responsibilities to both the past and the present by investing in the future, especially by providing their children with a Christian education. This requires delaying the immediate gratification of our perceived needs and instead giving our attention to a long-term, multi-generational view of life, investing our time, talents, and resources in advancing God’s everlasting kingdom. Only through promoting values such as personal and familial responsibility, accountability, and community engagement from a distinctly Christian standpoint, rather than reliance on state welfare and intervention, can this be accomplished.

The principle of Sphere Sovereignty offers a scriptural, powerful, and culture-transforming framework for understanding the limits of state authority within the all-encompassing Kingdom of God. The state, like the family and the church, must operate within the boundaries set by God’s law, recognising that the authority of its office-bearers is not absolute but delimited and delegated. As Christians, we must resist the trend toward state absolutism, both by living out and advocating for a social order that respects the relative autonomy of each sphere, promoting true freedom, justice, and human flourishing under God’s Kingdom rule. In doing so, we not only free education and our children from state tyranny, but we also bear witness to the Lordship of Jesus Christ and the comprehensive nature of His life-giving Kingdom.[iii]

 

[i] Abraham Kuyper, Pro Rege, or the Kingship of Christ (Kampen: Kok, 1912), 3:184–94 (§ XIX). Translated and abridged by Harry Van Dyke.

[ii] See, Daily Mail, https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-15432119/private-schools-forced-close-Labours-controversial-tax-raid-fees.html

[iii] For a full discussion of the calling of the state in the context of Sphere Sovereignty see, Joseph Boot, Ruler of Kings: Toward a Christian Vision of Government, Wilberforce Publications (2022)