eChurch Christian Blog

John Piper

1. Jesus Christ, as he is presented to us in the New Testament, and as he stands forth from all its writings, is too single and too great to have been invented so uniformly by all these writers.

The force of Jesus Christ unleashed these writings; the writings did not create the force. Jesus is far bigger and more compelling than any of his witnesses. His reality stands behind these writings as a great, global event stands behind a thousand newscasters. Something stupendous unleashed these diverse witnesses to tell these stunning and varied, yet unified, stories of Jesus Christ.

2. Nobody has ever explained the empty tomb of Jesus in the hostile environment of Jerusalem where the enemies of Jesus would have given anything to produce the corpse, but could not.

The earliest attempts to cover the scandal of resurrection were manifestly contradictory to all human experience—disciples do not steal a body (Matthew 28:13) and then sacrifice their lives to preach a glorious gospel of grace on the basis of the deception. Modern theories that Jesus didn’t die but swooned, and then awoke in the tomb and moved the stone and tricked his skeptical disciples into believing he was risen as the Lord of the universe don’t persuade.

3. Cynical opponents of Christianity abounded where claims were made that many eyewitnesses were available to consult concerning the resurrection of Jesus from the dead.

“After that He appeared to more than five hundred brethren at one time, most of whom remain until now, but some have fallen asleep” (1 Corinthians 15:6). Such claims would be exposed as immediate falsehood if they could. But we know of no exposure. Eyewitnesses of the risen Lord abounded when the crucial claims were being made.

4. The early church was an indomitable force of faith and love and sacrifice on the basis of the reality of Jesus Christ.

The character of this church, and the nature of the gospel of grace and forgiveness, and the undaunted courage of men and women—even unto death—do not fit the hypothesis of mass hysteria. They simply were not like that. Something utterly real and magnificent had happened in the world and they were close enough to know it, and be assured of it, and be gripped by its power. That something was Jesus Christ, as all of them testified, even as they died singing.

5. The prophesies of the Old Testament find stunning fulfillment in the history of Jesus Christ.

The witness to these fulfillments are too many, too diverse, too subtle and too interwoven into the history of the New Testament church and its many writings to be fabricated by some great conspiracy. Down to the details, Jesus Christ fulfilled dozens of Old Testament prophecies that vindicate his truth.

6. The witnesses to Jesus Christ who wrote the New Testament gospels and letters are not gullible or deceitful or demented.

This is manifest from the writings themselves. The books bear the marks of intelligence and clear-headedness and maturity and a moral vision that is compelling. They win our trust as witnesses, especially when all taken together with one great unifying, but distinctively told, message about Jesus Christ.

7. The worldview that emerges from the writings of the New Testament makes more sense out of more reality than any other worldview.

It not only fits the human heart, but also the cosmos and history and God as he reveals himself in nature and conscience. Some may come to this conclusion after much reflection, others may arrive at this conviction by a pre-reflective, intuitive sense of the deep suitability of Christ and his message to the world that they know.

8. When one sees Christ as he is portrayed truly in the gospel, there shines forth a spiritual light that is a self-authenticating.

This is “the light of the knowledge of the glory of God” (2 Corinthians 4:6), and it is as immediately perceived by the Spirit-awakened heart as light is perceived by the open eye. The eye does not argue that there is light. It sees light.

9. When we see and believe the glory of God in the gospel, the Holy Spirit is given to us so that the love of God might be “poured out in our hearts” (Romans 5:5).

This experience of the love of God known in the heart through the gospel of Him who died for us while we were yet ungodly assures us that the hope awakened by all the evidences we have seen will not disappoint us.

Some interesting information and analysis on the relationship between science and religion out today, from the Pew Forum:-

An Overview of Religion and Science in the United States

Public Opinion on Religion and Science in the United States

Religion and Science: A Timeline

Scientists and Belief

Christian Today – Jenny Lyle

David Cameron has admitted his Christian faith may not always be the rock it should be, but is nonetheless a good guide to get through life.

In an intimate interview with the Evening Standard, the Tory leader spoke openly about his fluctuating faith.

When asked if his faith was important to him, he said: “If you are asking, do I drop to my knees and pray for guidance, no. But do I have faith and is it important? Yes. My own faith is there, it’s not always the rock that perhaps it should be.

“I’ve a sort of fairly classic Church of England faith, a faith that grows hotter and colder by moments but … I suppose I sort of started life believing that one’s individual faith was important, but actually the institutions of the church were less important.

“I do think that organised religion can get things wrong but the Church of England and the other churches do play a very important role in society.”

Mr Cameron, who was confirmed at 18, admitted to being in his younger years a “good, sceptical, questioning” Christian who liked to think his faith through.

“I think that it’s perfectly possible to live a good life without having faith, by which I mean a positive and altruistic life, but I think the teachings of Jesus, just as the teachings of other religions are, a good guide to help us through,” he continued.

“Do unto others as you would have them do to you; don’t walk on by. These are good and thoughtful ideas to bring to life.”

Mr Cameron went on to speak of his fear of failure and losing another child after the death of his eldest son Ivan earlier this year.

“Well, my biggest fear is something happening to my family. That’s fear Number One, particularly as it has happened already. It is a sort of permanent fear. The most natural thing in your life is to look after your little ones,” he said.

“There is also fear of failure: letting others down, or not doing your best. I’ve always thought that the fear of getting things wrong inspires me more than the wonder of getting things right.”

Mr Cameron added that he would sack George Osbourne if he did not feel he was up to the job of being chancellor.

He said: “I think he had a very, very tough time last year. He really did suffer quite a lot of slings and arrows. But I have faith in him as a talented politician and a talented shadow chancellor and someone who has a great feel and understanding of politics and the great issues.”

FURTHER INTERNET LINK:-

David Cameron ‘does God’ in fuzzy, sort-of-Anglican way

He will be criticised by the zealots on both sides of the divide: by the religious fundamentalists who demand an unequivocal exposition and adherence to a strict theology, and by the anti-religious fundamentalists for whom any expression of faith in the public realm is anathema.

David Cameron: Would I sack George Osborne? Yes absolutely if I have to…

David Cameron has outlined his religious beliefs in a remarkably personal interview, saying he is a “questioning Christian”. “If you are asking, ‘do I drop to my knees and pray for guidance?’, no,” he told the Evening Standard.

Good response from Justin Thacker to the recent educational developments that have hit the news recently:-

The EU has barred crucifixes in Italian state schools. Are Nativity plays next?

Classroom crucifix violates human rights, European court rules

Media Education Headlines: Sex and drug lessons from age 5 & Sex education opt out is reduced

Guardian

When is a right not a right? When it concerns the education of children. The respective (and entirely contradictory) decisions of the children’s secretary Ed Balls and the European Court of Human Rights this week would be laughable if they weren’t both so serious.

In the first place, Ed Balls tells us that parents no longer have the right to decide how their children are taught about sex. The opt out for children age 15 plus is to be removed. Now not only is this against the findings of the independent review (pdf) that the Department for Children Schools and Families (DCSF) commissioned, and which was published just a few months ago, but far more significant is the simple fact that this will affect a mere 0.04% of pupils. Now I do not personally agree with these parents. I certainly would not withdraw my own children. But why these parents make this decision is not relevant. The fact is they do, and one wonders why the minister feels he has to go hunting them down to ensure that their charges are given the statist education that Ed and his friends have devised. Is it the case that, unbeknown to the rest of us, these children are in fact causing a rash of teenage pregnancies across the country? Are they the ones that make teenage STDs such a severe health problem? I very much doubt it. Ed balls may not like the decision these parents make, but precisely because there are so few of them, why not let them opt out? What is the problem he thinks he is addressing by removing their right to take them out of class? Moreover, the very fact that Britain has one of the highest teenage pregnancy rates in the world hardly suggests that the state will do a better job than these parents.

What makes all of this ironic is that it comes in the same week that the European Court of Human Rights has decided that some atheist children would be so upset by seeing a crucifix in their classroom that their mother deserved damages to the tune of €5,000. This judgment is just bizarre. I take it the atheist commentators on this site will hang their heads in shame. The fact is the European convention was meant to protect our right to freedom of religion, belief and conscience, and in Article 2 of Protocol 1, the right to educate our children in conformity with those beliefs. (Note to children’s secretary – you may want to read that section.) Now, if the Italian schoolmasters were thrusting their Catholicism down the throats of these children, my sympathies would be entirely with the mother.

But that was not remotely the situation. Rather, the school simply wanted to put some crucifixes on some walls. Apparently, however, this was just too much for the atheist kids who obviously on merely seeing these symbols would be in danger of immediately giving up their tenets of faith. In order, then, to protect their ability to believe, it was imperative that these crucifixes be removed. Speaking as an evangelical, if only conversions were so easy – but they’re not. Yet, somehow, the court decided that the mere display of such crucifixes was “imposing beliefs” on these children.

All of this just makes me wonder why it is that the atheists and secularists are so scared? Is it really the case that their belief systems are so fragile that the mere sight of a religious symbol is enough to shake their faith? Surely not. Come on you secularists, be a bit more confident. I’ve no doubt that in the next 10 or 20 years you will lose significant numbers of adherents as they appreciate the vacuity of your arguments, but in the meantime don’t go overreaching yourselves by banning all religious imagery or by forcing parents to accept a statist education. Rather, in the words of one atheist: “Let a thousand flowers bloom”. Though perhaps in contrast to him, when they do, let’s tolerate the diversity rather than use every excuse to shut it down.

Hat-Tip – Gever – Rosh Pina Project

A deeply disturbing post today from Cranmer, regarding the growing acceptance of shari’a law in the UK:-

Cranmer

From ‘Very Worried of Richmond Hill:

Islamic shari’a councils are now recognised as arbitration tribunals under the 1996 Arbitration Act, and are part of the Alternative Dispute Resolution (ADR) procedure available to UK citizens. So far, at least five councils have been recognised as tribunals and moves are afoot to have scores more throughout the country.

The tribunals cover all disputes that come under civil law or family law but exclude criminal matters.

In the case of a civil dispute, the decision of the tribunal is recognised by the UK courts and, if it is a family matter, will be accepted as the basis of a UK court decision and in both cases, if necessary, enforced under UK law.

In the one case, the court is upholding the judgement of the shari’a tribunal; in the other, it is using it as the basis of its own decision and which it is very likely to accept as courts are generally reluctant to overturn a tribunal judgement.

The Arbitration Act simply requires that both parties make a prior agreement to submit their dispute to the tribunal and that the outcome does not break any UK law.

It would do an aggrieved party no good to appeal to a UK court that the shari’a ruling to which he or she had submitted was wrong or that he or she would have been treated differently in a UK court not acting on shari’a principles: unless it could be shown to be unreasonable and outrageously unfair it would be enforced. Thus, Islamic shari’a is propagated by UK law.

We have cause to be worried.
(1) Has anything changed?

Apologists for shari’a claim nothing has changed. A shari’a tribunal decision cannot be enforced if it breaks UK law. This view is out of touch with how things really work and what is going on today.

We have, for example, the Archbishop of Canterbury’s revelation in a BBC interview that the adoption of Islamic shari’a law in the UK is ‘unavoidable’. This gives a disturbing insight into the minds of some of our leaders.

Twisting the law to meet cultural requirements is not unknown. Lord Pearson asked this question in the House of Lords in June: “…. will Her Majesty’s Government take steps to ensure that resident Muslim men will no longer be allowed to commit bigamy by bringing in their second, third and fourth wives and all their children to enjoy the benefits of our welfare state?”

He was not given an answer.

And, most importantly, judges judge: they assess witnesses, weigh up the worth of arguments, and apply social criteria, interpretations and precedents as they believe they fit the facts of a case. There is plenty of scope for keeping to the letter of the law.

Recognition of shari’a tribunals introduces a new breed of judges with a mindset alien to this country and which provides ample evidence of its hostility both to western Christian and Enlightenment secular values.

(2) Unequal treatment of men and women

Under shari’a, men and women are not treated equally. In matters of inheritance, property division, divorce and the custody of children, shari’a law disadvantages women and they are considered inferior as witnesses: a man may easily divorce his wife whereas a woman must argue her case and undergo a lengthy legal process.

A Muslim woman seeking a divorce is subjected to an interview process aimed at keeping her married and she risks financial ruin by the obligation to return her dower.

Shari’a rules on child custody can be rigid and were described by judges in the House of Lords as ‘arbitrary and discriminatory’. In general, child custody reverts to the father at a preset age (seven for boys) no matter the circumstances or the behaviour of the father, and if a woman remarries she loses custody of her children.

If a wife refuses to agree to give the husband access to their children, even in cases of possible child abuse, the divorce is stalled until that issue is resolved.

A Family Court judge may find himself presented with an ‘agreement’ produced at a shari’a tribunal that gives custody of the children to the father which in normal circumstances the court would register and enforce. But how is he to tell if this is a truly mediated agreement or simply the woman’s resigned acquiescence in shari’a law which does not explicitly consider the interests of children?

Women inherit half what a man inherits. And, of course, a Muslim man can have up to four wives.

Under shari’a, a Muslim woman will get a decision from a tribunal far less favourable than she would get from a British court under the Crown.

Shari’a councils are entirely male: there are no female shari’a judges. Nearly a quarter of judges in UK courts are female and in magistrate courts it is half. The Islamic Shari’a Council is listed as a charity and people who seek a divorce pay a fee. For a man, it is £100; for women, it is £250 because (they say) it is more work to process a woman’s application as her word has to be corroborated.

(3) Community pressures and exploitation of ignorance

Muslim women will be under enormous pressure to use shari’a tribunals rather than civil courts. If they don’t use a shari’a tribunal, they run the risk of being ostracised by their family and their community as bad Muslims or even as apostates.

This pressure already exists but giving any shari’a council recognition as a tribunal under the Arbitration Act massively increases it.

Many women may simply be ignorant of their rights, due to language or cultural barriers. Many of those dealt with by shari’a councils are from the most marginalised segments of society with little or no knowledge of their rights under English law.

This will be true of male and female workers, especially the poorly-educated and low-paid, who find themselves unfairly treated by a Muslim business owner, or of tenants in disagreement with a Muslim landlord.

The appearance of ‘officialness’ will give the uneducated and the vulnerable the impression that there is a parallel Muslim system of law in England which is the one that Muslims should use.

This is already being exploited. The home page of the website of the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal (MAT) goes out of its way to look official. It has a photograph of Lord Phillips when he was Lord Chief Justice in his wig and finery. A bold heading declares: ‘Lord Chief Justice endorses ADR (alternative dispute resolution) under Shariah Law’.

Underneath it has a picture of Lord Hunt, a government minister. The website emphasises that MAT rulings are binding under English law.

(4) The importance of civil and family law – what binds people together

Proponents of shari’a tribunals make the point that they are involved only in civil and family matters and are not involved in criminal cases, as if this somehow lessens the impact on society.

Family, marriage, children, inheritance, relations with neighbours, doing business, are the most important matters for most people. Very few of us are touched by the criminal courts, but civil and family matters touch us all.

By recognising shari’a councils as tribunals, the UK authorities are saying it is fine for some British citizens not to exercise certain rights, even if English law and tradition grants them those rights, and to accept deals that are worse than what they would get from other British courts with regular judges.

Rights are established for the good of society as a whole, and they are often achieved only after a long and hard struggle, so why should a particular group of people be allowed to ditch any of those rights against the wider interest of society?

Why should my next-door neighbour live by a different idea of what is ‘fair’ – for example, what is seen as fair in a default position on inheritance or the relative difficulties between men and women in the procuring of a divorce? Surely ‘what is considered fair’ is a universal that binds people together and gives them a sense of identity.

(5) Quick and cheap justice

A vital foundation for any society is a legal system that provides justice quickly at a reasonable cost. The breakdown of the legal system in parts of Pakistan is the underlying cause of the anarchy and strife that prevails there. In the UK, we do not have massive corruption but we seem to be well on the road to a system that is too expensive and takes too long.

It is claimed that an advantage of shari’a tribunals, and a good reason for having them, is that they take on some of the burden of solving disputes and relieve an overburdened courts system (this was the justification given in Canada for a similar proposal to recognise shari’a tribunals in family matters, but it was eventually rejected largely due to the protests of Muslim Canadian women). This theme crops up all the time. Shari’a tribunals are a way of helping people to resolve their differences in their own way without clogging up the higher courts: it is cheaper and quicker. Apparently, shari’a tribunal judges are not paid a fee.

It seems unlikely that the availability of an alternative justice system for Muslims would ease the burden to the degree that cost and efficiency issues are solved for everyone else who only has the regular court system to turn to.

If this is good solution, you might ask why we do not also have a parallel tribunal system for civil and family matters for Christians? Why not tribunal systems for Sikhs, Hindus, Buddhists, and even one for atheists?

But the question we should really ask is why do we not have a system for all citizens that delivers timely justice at an acceptable price?

(6) Criminal matters

Notwithstanding the numerous statements that shari’a tribunals do not cover criminal matters, under the heading ‘Types of Cases that we deal with’, the Muslim Arbitration Tribunal website lists:

Forced Marriages, Domestic Violence, Family Disputes, Forced Marriage (Civil Protection) Act 2007, Commercial and Debt Disputes, Inheritance Disputes, Mosque Disputes

In relation to domestic violence, it says:

“MAT is unable to deal with criminal offences as we do not have jurisdiction to try such matters in the UK.

“However where there are criminal charges such as assault within the context of domestic violence, the parties will be able ask MAT to assist in reaching reconciliation which is observed and approved by MAT as an independent organisation.

“The terms of such a reconciliation can then be passed by MAT on to the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) though (sic) the local Police Domestic Violence Liaison Officers with a view to reconsidering the criminal charges. Note that the final decision to prosecute always remains with the CPS” (emphases added).

So, Muslim domestic violence cases are treated differently from those in the rest of the population!

Just imagine – the vicar can get involved: he can formally tell the police that the suspect is a regular church-goer, he attends every Sunday, and he really regrets what he has done. He has agreed to go on an anger management course and the vicar thinks he deserves a second chance. The policeman, who is also a Christian because it is a Christian area, agrees.

This is precisely what is going on in some Muslim areas. In incidents severe enough to be referred to the police, the Muslim men involved have been directed to take anger management courses, and the women to withdraw their complaints. This has caused considerable disquiet suggesting that the police are turning a blind eye to domestic violence in the name of community cohesion or cultural sensitivity.

(7) Support for barbaric laws and practices

Shari’a is a system of laws and a mindset which approves, inter alia:

(i) Death for apostasy
(ii) Amputation of limbs as punishment
(iii) Stoning to death for adultery
(iv) Belief that a woman’s evidence is worth less than a man’s
(v) Blood money
(vi) Polygamy

Recognition of shari’a in the UK – even of just those sections which do not conflict with UK law – bestows status and respectability to a system which produces these barbaric practices. They are not some distant echo of the past but a fact in many parts of the world today.

Faisal Siddiqi, a Pakistani-born barrister and the founder and chairman of MAT’s governing council, criticised the British media for its obsession with beheadings and other extreme punishments. He said: “They constitute only 10% of shari’a.”

What a relief.

For an insight into current thinking by some Muslims on the matter of death for apostasy, one might consider: Muslim chaplain at Harvard to be toying with idea of executing apostates? And Supreme Court dismisses plea against death sentence for blasphemy.

For current views on stoning for adultery, consider: Indonesia’s Aceh to stone adulterers under Islamic law.

Inayat Bunglawala, the assistant general secretary of the Muslim Council of Britain, says that stoning to death for adultery is acceptable in a country that chooses to have that as the law.

And for an explanation of why the evidence of a woman is worth less than that of a man (you may laugh or cry), see the Islamic Sharia Council.

Conclusion

The Government has allowed and is encouraging the establishment of a parallel legal system for Muslims on matters that affect all of us. It is wrong for the country and wrong for Muslims.

The official recognition of shari’a councils as arbitration tribunals is simply another mechanism by which Muslims are being segregated from the rest of the population: it is a further barrier to integration and reinforces the fragmentation of society. The UK authorities are undermining both the Christian font of jurisprudence and the Enlightenment values by which this has been developed. The British concept of justice has been forged over centuries, sometimes at great cost. It would be ironic if it were to return to primitive expressions of inequity and unfairness.

Previous related posts:-

Bishop of Rochester The Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali: Church of England must do more to counter twin threats of secularism and radical Islam

Dr Michael Nazir-Ali has been of one of the well-informed voices that has exploded the myth that the Qu’ran really belongs to moderate liberal Muslims and not to the militants who ex animo believe it.

A Discussion of Islam and Western Culture with Bishop Michael Nazir-Ali

A radical Muslim group wants to hold a series of marches in British cities calling for Sharia law to be implemented throughout the UK. The group, Islam4UK, is fronted by Anjem Choudary.

UK: Muslim group demands full Sharia law

Islamic Sharia law in the UK, which has recently been given the backing by the government, is now operating in 5 Sharia courts in London, Birmingham, Bradford, Manchester and Nuneaton.

Islamic Sharia Law courts operating in West Midlands

Modern Day Trojan Horse: The Islamic Doctrine of Immigration

English legal system threatened

Muslim women oppose Sharia councils in Britain

The British Dilema: Right, Liberal and Islamic – by David Booth Christian Peoples Alliance

Western Immigration and Global Jihad by Bill Muehlenberg

Non-Muslims turning to sharia ‘courts’ in Britain to resolve disputes

At least 85 sharia ‘courts’ operating in Britain, says Civitas report

Islamic Sharia law in the UK, which has recently been given the backing by the government, is now operating in 5 Sharia courts in London, Birmingham, Bradford, Manchester and Nuneaton.

The Rt Rev Michael Nazir-Ali said that the rejection of Christian values is having a damaging effect on the country.

Christian hotel owners Ben and Sharon Vogelenzang hauled before court after defending their beliefs in discussion with Muslim guest

The British police forget what they are for

Will Heaven over at the Telegraph, has commented on the recent ruling by the European Court to ban all Crucifixes in Italian schools because one atheist mother was offended.

He concludes with this statement:-

Telegraph

So, we have a court in Strasbourg overruling the Italian courts in favour of one persistent atheist. It goes without saying that most Italians are seriously angry about this, with everyone from the Mayor of Rome to some 30,000 Facebook users voicing their opposition to the court’s decision.

But could this ruling have wider implications for other EU countries – for Britain, in particular? It would certainly seem so, especially if the Italian State fails to win its appeal. Imagine an atheist mother in Britain - or, for that matter, a Muslim or a Hindu one – deciding that her local state school’s Nativity play was imposing a “particular religious belief” on her children. Would she be able to persuade an EU court to ban it? You betcha.

Read More

I completely agree! If the EU is allowed to continue down this path unchallenged, believe me, we ain’t seen nothin’ yet from our new EU rulers!

Previous Related Post

Classroom crucifix violates human rights, European court rules

The Examiner

In an act of solidarity with Israel, Christian and Jewish leaders are expressing their deep concern for Israel, the US, and countries that boarder Iran in the event that Iran should acquire nuclear weapons. According to The Christian Post, “Dr. Richard Land, president of the Southern Baptist Ethics & Religious Liberty Commission, joined Paul de Vries, president of the New York Divinity School and leader of the New York Evangelicals, and Joseph Potasnik, executive vice president of the New York Board of Rabbis, in issuing a statement urging all governments to apply sanctions as a tool for effective diplomacy and to encourage human rights efforts in Iranian citizens.” The leaders went on to state that for Iran to have nuclear weapons would be a “grave threat,” in the region that could spark a “nuclear arms race that would cause instability in the region; strengthening the rule of the militant Shia regime against Iran’s new reform leaders and youth attracted to human rights; and likely total confrontation with Israel and the world to hasten the return of the 12th imam.”

The primary reason why the Shiite Muslims would want such a confrontation to happen is because they believe that it would hasten the coming of their Imam Mahdi, who apparently comes to the Earth as a physical being, and has a supernatural ability to enforce Islam as a one world system.  It is thought that Iranian President Ahmadinejad also embraces this belief, and that it is one of the root reasons why he has said that he wants to wipe out Israel and the US – in his mind, they are the root of Judaism and Christianity.

A resistance group in Iran called The National Council of Resistance of Iran is also urging the nations to take stronger action to stop Iran’s nuclear program. Chairman Mehdi Abrishamchi has said that the international community’s attempts to pacify Ahmadinejad are only serving to further his regime’s nuclear ambitions.

The Catholic Herald

An American exorcist has said the film The Exorcist led people to believe wrongly that the devil could “come and zap them” when in fact the devil is afraid of the power of Jesus inside them.

Mgr John Esseff, retired exorcist of the Diocese of Scranton, Pennsylvania, told an audience of 400 students at Bowling Green State University, Ohio that the power of Jesus within them was “enormous”.

He said: “The devil is afraid of you – if you would just awaken to who you are.”

In describing one of his exorcisms, he said: “As she came in, she saw me and she shrieked – and the language and the growls – and then she slithered across the floor and was going up the wall. Well, there was obviously a force here, a presence. And I just simply silenced her in the name of Jesus.”

Mgr Esseff said that each baptised person was united to Jesus by the power of the Holy Spirit. He read passages from the Gospels in which Jesus exorcised demons and then sent his disciples to do the same.

He said that Jesus ultimately defeated Satan through his death and Resurrection and then sent the power of the Holy Spirit to his Apostles at Pentecost.

“When God looks down, he sees Jesus in you,” Mgr Esseff said. “You have that power as baptised, confirmed Christians. And so when he [Satan] sees you, he hates what you would discover about that power that is within you.”

He suggested that each audience member had been tempted that day because temptation was the ordinary activity of the devil.

“Your soul is a battlefield because there is also someone who hates you,” he said. “That one is the devil. The devil knows who you are and what you have. God passed him by. God did not choose to become one of the angels. God chose to be one like us.”

But just as each person was tempted, Mgr Esseff said, another spirit also was at work.

“In your life today, this very day, has been the Holy Spirit,” he said. “God is in you. God the Holy Spirit is operative in you. God the Holy Spirit wants to bring into your heart love. God wants to bring you peace.”

Mgr Esseff also told students of the power of angels and encouraged them to renew their devotions to their guardian angels.

“His [the angel's] job is to protect you all through this world. And when you close your eyes, he wants to deliver you to God,” Mgr Esseff said.

Earlier in the evening Mgr Esseff invited students to invoke angels to fill the area and make a perimeter around the talk for protection.

The event was hosted by St Thomas More University parish and Veritas, the Catholic student organisation at Bowling Green State University.

JonMarc Grodi, president of Veritas, said: “One of the ways I sold it [the event] on campus was that, regardless of what people believe about good and evil, the devil, etc, this is a guy that has been around the world and experienced some of the lightest and darkest moments of the human experience, and so his is a perspective that everyone should hear out.”

In addition to serving as the official exorcist of the Scranton diocese Mgr Esseff has travelled extensively around the world, working in Latin America and Lebanon and accompanying Blessed Mother Teresa for a period of time.

It was Mother Teresa, he said, who directed him to his current work, which focuses on the formation of priests.

After the talk Megan Dowell-Howko, a first-year student, said she now had a better understanding of how she experienced temptation, and that she would remember she could say no to the devil.

She said: “I guess I’m taking away a renewed confidence that the devil only has as much power over me as I give to him,” she said.

Before the event Mgr Esseff said he saw three indications of Satan’s presence in the world: money, lies and war.

“I think one of the greatest things he has done is have people forget he exists. People deny he exists,” he said

Catholic Herald

Britain’s “two-party system” is ebbing away and a space is opening up for a new Christian Democratic political party to take its place in the spectrum of electoral options. Although the scandal over election expenses hastened the process in June’s European elections, dissatisfaction with the current parties has been reflected in patterns of voting for some time now.

The share of the vote won by Labour, the Conservatives and the Liberal Democrats together slumped from almost 96 per cent in the 1987 general election to 57 per cent in this year’s European poll. The 44 per cent overall vote this year for Labour and the Tories was the lowest in any national election since 1945. The advent of proportional systems of voting has helped the electorate to get into the habit of voting for parties that are either a closer expression of their own values and ideals, or which allow them to vent their anger at the ruling political system.

It’s likely that by next year, when first-past-the-post voting will be used at the general election, much of the big party vote will recover. But the underlying pattern will remain of weakening loyalty to the major parties. This is because of the cumulative impact over a decade of PR voting in elections to the London Assembly, the Scottish Parliament, the National Assembly of Wales, Stormont and, of course, the European Parliament. In Scotland, the adoption of single transferable vote (STV) voting in council elections has also served to transform the political landscape at local level.

As party loyalties have broken up, into the mix has come the Green Party, nationalist parties of various hues (some at the extreme Right of the spectrum) Leftist parties and a cross-denominational grouping of Christian Democrats, the Christian Peoples Alliance (CPA).

A glance across the channel to the rest of Europe will show that this same ideological spread is reflected in every parliament, as well as in coalition-style governments. It should be no surprise that as a postmodern, post-industrial society Britain too should have room for a Christian Democratic party. In northern Europe Christian Democrats have succeeded in driving through their own policies even when the junior partner in government. That kind of influence is the CPA’s goal in Britain from local to national level.

Over four elections in London, the Christian “ticket” has tested the waters by campaigning on a breadth of issues in order to promote the social teachings of the churches. Literally a handful of activists – both Catholic and from other Christian backgrounds – succeeded in winning votes from 100,000 people, entering the political marketplace with a consistent average of three per cent. A modest start, but in Scotland two Green MSPs now play a crucial role in Alex Salmond’s SNP government with a vote in their regions not far higher than that. The threshold for PR in Britain is five per cent for a party to qualify for a seat under the list system.

In Northern Ireland, where the CPA has supporters but no organisation, the kind of vote achieved in London would likely have delivered non-sectarian but distinctly Christian Democratic members into the Stormont Assembly because there is no hurdle to cross.

So what does the Christian Peoples Alliance do when elected? In the London Borough of Newham the party has three local councillors elected in the most deprived part of the capital, Canning Town. Alone against a distant Labour council, the group has fought Labour’s “redevelopment” plans for the docks that saw local people moved out of their council housing to make room for City workers, plans to demolish a section of the popular (and cheap) Green Street Market to make room for another Asda and the holding of a major Government-backed arms fair at the Excel Centre. The CPA’s stance on these issues – and traditional Christian commitments towards the poor, older people, marriage and family values in schools – has seen strong support from Newham’s large immigrant population of all faiths.

***

Christian Democracy is an established and successful fact across European politics and further afield. It has taken 20 years of activity by the Movement for Christian Democracy in Britain (from which the CPA emerged) to prepare the ground here. And some of the conditions identified by the grand figure of Christian Democracy, Professor Michael Fogarty, for Christians in Britain to turn to parties of their own are increasingly apparent. Traditional anti-clericalism on the continent that forced Christian trade unions and parties into existence alongside their secular counterparts is now rampant in some sections of British public life. The ideologically driven onslaught by big teacher unions against Catholic and other faith schools is one case; the unjustified closure of Catholic adoption agencies is another.

The newspapers have been good at providing the details – whether nurses forbidden to pray with those they care for, or for wearing a cross on their uniform, or a senior Anglican bishop interviewed by police for publicly upholding church teaching on sexuality. Overt “christophobia” may be rare, but secular intolerances of all kinds are gradually closing down the public space in which the voice of the Church and Christian conscience has traditionally been heard.

The one public forum where some Christian bishops can speak freely (though not always cogently) is the House of Lords. But even that is subject to the latest proposals outlined by the Prime Minister. Lords reform has been in limbo since the plans for a predominantly elected upper chamber were approved by the Commons in March 2007. The plans then predictably became bogged down in the House of Lords, with the parties continuing discussions on how a new system would work.

Gordon Brown now wants a predominantly elected system for the Lords, again using some kind of alternative voting arrangement. No party is saying yet that the privileged position of the bench of bishops is under threat. But the secularising tendency is clear. So perhaps now is a good moment for the churches to be realistic and relinquish this political anomaly of clerics in an elected chamber. In a post-Christendom era, if the voice of church teaching is to be heard and weighed, let it compete openly with other perspectives. This requires members of the laity to submit themselves for election as Christian Democrats, themselves subject to dialogue and critique through church circles. Readers of The Catholic Herald wanting to play their part are welcome to approach the Christian Peoples Alliance.

David Campanale (press@cpaparty.org.uk) is president of the Christian Peoples Alliance (www.cpaparty.org.uk)

Church Times

SWINE-FLU precautions should be maintained, the Archbishops of Canterbury and York have told the Bishops. New government evidence had shown that nearly a third of all children could catch the virus.

Dioceses that have resumed use of the common cup and the sign of Peace at holy communion have said that they will review their advice. “The number of new cases has risen. There were 78,000 new cases in England this week with 751 people currently hospitalised,” the Archbishops told the College of Bishops in a statement last Friday.

The evidence showed that under- 16s were “significantly more susceptible to the virus”: up to 30 per cent could fall ill during the second wave of the pandemic. Deaths worldwide had increased by 12 per cent in the last week of October, the Health Protection Agency had said. In England, about 520,000 people had been infected. “In the light of this, our recom­mendation, made on 22 July, to those presiding at Holy Com­munion in parishes and dioceses, remains unchanged.” It was important to encourage everyone to recognise that the Church had a responsibility to take public health seriously. It was about avoiding transmitting infection “unwittingly” to others. It was im­portant, too, “to ensure commun­ica­tion around the Church is good so that we don’t appear at sixes and sevens”.

The diocese of St Edmundsbury & Ipswich, where the common cup is back in use, was due to review its advice yesterday. A diocesan spokes­man said on Monday that the Bishop, the Rt Revd Nigel Stock, had called a staff meeting to con­sider its policy “in the light of the note from the Archbishops”. The Bishop of Hereford, the Rt Revd Anthony Priddis, who advised use of the common cup in a letter to his clergy in September (News, 19 September), would consider the latest guidance, his spokeswoman said. But the Bishop of Wakefield, the Rt Revd Stephen Platten, who had advised resumption of the common cup and the sign of Peace in September, had not changed his advice, his spokesman said.

SWINE FLU : STATEMENT FROM THE ARCHBISHOPS TO THE COLLEGE  OF BISHOPS

Following our statement in September this year, we have reviewed the situation in light of the latest advice from the Department of Health

Their latest update, issued last night, shows that the number of new cases has risen.  There were 78,000 new cases in England this week with 751 people currently hospitalised. The additional information now available confirms earlier guidance that children under 16 are significantly more susceptible to the virus, and up to 30% may fall ill during this second wave. Deaths worldwide have increased by 12% this week. The Health Protection Agency (HPA) believes that about 520,000 people have been infected by swine flu in England since the outbreak of the pandemic.

The vaccination programme in this country has started this week.  The plan is to offer it to all at risk groups by the end of November.

In the light of this, our recommendation, made on 22nd July 2009 to those presiding at Holy Communion in parishes and dioceses, remains unchanged.

It remains important
a) to encourage everyone to recognise that the Church has a responsibility to take public health considerations seriously and

b) to ensure communication around the Church is good so that we don’t appear at sixes and sevens, and

c) to remember that responsible practice in these areas is not primarily about protecting ourselves but about avoiding transmitting infection unwittingly to others.

In the light of this rapidly changing situation, we do not believe this is the time to issue fresh advice.  We are keeping in regular contact with the Department of Health and will continue to consider all relevant information.

We will review our own advice in a month’s time. Until then, we would encourage you to continue to show patience and to pray for all those affected.

+  Rowan Cantuar +  Sentamu Ebor

Two lovely timely reminders from the Christian Post, the first written by Greg Laurie and the second by Charles Stanley:-

A Watered-Down Gospel

You therefore must endure hardship as a good soldier of Jesus Christ. – 2 Timothy 2:3

Without question the greatest life to live is the Christian life, because God takes a life that was empty, aimless, and, worst of all, headed for a certain judgment and then turns it around and transforms it. He forgives all our sin, removes our guilt, and literally takes residence inside of us through the Holy Spirit. Most importantly, He changes our eternal address from a place called hell to a place called heaven. This all comes about as a result of the power of the gospel proclaimed and believed.

Yet some have believed what I would describe as a watered-down version of the gospel, a gospel that promises forgiveness but rarely mentions the need to repent of your sin, a gospel that promises peace but never warns of persecution, a gospel that says God wants you to be healthy and wealthy and never have any problems to speak of, a gospel that says you will so find the favor of God that a parking space always will be available for you. But that is not the gospel of the New Testament.

The Christian life is not a playground, but a battleground. Not only is there a God who loves you and has a plan for your life, but there is also a devil who hates you and opposes God’s plan.

I am not suggesting that once you become a Christian, you will be sick, poor, and miserable. But the essence of the Christian life is knowing and walking with God. It is about sticking with Him when the sky is blue and also when it is filled with clouds. It is about pressing on. Jesus made it clear that storms will enter every life. But as we seek to know and follow Christ, we will find happiness as a fringe benefit.

Know What You Believe

2 Timothy 1:12-14

All people have a belief system, whether they realize it or not. Even those who claim there is no God have faith that He does not exist. What we believe affects every area of our lives and shapes every decision we make, yet few of us take the time to really think about what we accept as true.

All belief systems have a foundation. Some people base their convictions on what fits their lifestyle, reasoning, and desires. However, Jesus calls His followers to adapt life to their faith in Him and the authority of His Word.

Anytime we add other philosophies or ideas to Scripture or pick and choose which parts of the Bible to believe, we create our own version of faith based on personal reasoning. God’s Word is the only true and reliable foundation for belief, because it contains the recorded thoughts of an eternal, all-knowing God. All other concepts must be measured against it to determine their validity.

Knowing what the Bible says is essential for developing a sound system of beliefs founded on the truth and wisdom of God. This world will offer you a variety of philosophies which sound good but are laced with lies. A faith anchored in the Scriptures is your protection against deception.

Each time you face a problem or decision, search for the answer in Scripture. Begin your day by reading the Word and asking God to help you understand what He is saying. He loves communicating with you, and as you spend time with Him, He’ll open your mind to know His thoughts.

I personally don’t listen to the BBC’s ‘thought for the day’, although I do find it sad that such an already marginalised Christian voice should be under assault. However, my main concern is that atheists don’t turn this programme into simply another ‘there is no God’ monologue. How boring and tedious that would be.

It comes as no surprise to me that atheists should campaign so hard to hijack a rare BBC Christian slot, when they could have targeted so many different areas of the BBC. Oh my goodness maybe atheists are not impartial!

Telegraph

Lord Birt said the BBC must “loosen the stranglehold” of established religious organisations and “embrace” the humanist movement.

He spoke in debate held in the Moses Room at the House of Lords on the eve of the BBC Trust’s deliberations on whether to allow non-religious contributors to the Today programme’s religious slot.

Secularists claim the three minute slot – which is only open to representatives from the main faiths – discriminates against non-believers. They have complained to the Trust, the governing arm of the corporation, which is expected to deliver its response next week.

Lord Birt, who was head of the corporation between 1992 and 2000 appeared to agree that there needed to be a greater range of views.

He said: “The BBC must one day soon loosen the stranglehold of the established religious organisations and more fully embrace the humanist movement.”

He described the humanist tradition as “a loose network of individuals broadly exercised by questions of the spirit, concerned to optimise the sum total of human happiness here on earth; individuals naturally respectful of others, wedded to rationalism and to scientific rigour, revering all life, unafraid to proclaim and to celebrate the joy of existence and the richness of human expression.”

When plans for a non-religious Thought for the Day on Radio 4’s Today programme were mooted earlier this year, it sparked criticism from faith leaders. They said that in an increasingly secular climate, it was “vitally important” that religion retains its voice.

Read More

Previous Related Posts

Christians say the BBC’s Thought for the Day radio programme will lose its distinctiveness if it is opened up to humanist speakers.

Thought for the Day controversy to be aired in public debate – The Church and Media Network will host a public debate on BBC Radio 4’s controversial Thought for the Day next month.

Christians want BBC Thought for the Day to stay religious

BBC Trust considering non-religious Thought for the Day

A cross-party group of MPs say Radio 4’s Thought for the Day should remain a religious slot and not to be handed over to atheist commentators

Just one thing missing – the fact that he was a Muslim who apparently entertained dreams of Jihad. Maybe that’s not news? Best to focus on US foreign policy and how it enraged him….

FURTHER INTERNET LINK

Ex BBC head: let atheists break in to religious slot

By Thaddeus M. Baklinski

WELLINGTON, NZ, November 5, 2009 (LifeSiteNews.com) – A study conducted by Professor David Fergusson and a research team at New Zealand’s University of Otago has found that having an abortion will likely increase a woman’s chance of developing mental health problems such as anxiety and depression.

The study appeared in the most recent issue of the British Journal of Psychiatry and examined data from a sampling of 500 women who were interviewed six times between the ages of 15 and 30, each time being asked whether they had been pregnant and, if so, what the outcome of that pregnancy had been.

The study revealed that unwanted pregnancy leading to abortion is likely to be a risk factor for mental-health problems that include depression, anxiety, suicidal ideation, alcohol dependence, and illicit drug dependence, while unwanted pregnancy that ends in the birth of the baby does not carry the same risk factor.

Dr. Fergusson observed, “those having an abortion and reporting negative reactions had rates of mental health disorders that were approximately 1.4 to 1.8 times higher than those not having an abortion.”

Of those women who had undergone an abortion, more than 85 percent reported a least one negative emotional reaction, including sorrow, sadness, guilt, regret, grief and disappointment.

A similar number reported at least one positive reaction, including relief, happiness and satisfaction. The findings suggest that many women experienced a mixture of both positive and negative emotions about having an abortion.

Earlier reports from the same study, released in 2006, found that more than 40 percent of those who had an abortion suffered major depression within four years prior to the study, nearly double the rate of those who had never been pregnant. The 2006 report also found that the risk of developing an anxiety disorder also doubled in women who had abortions.

The report concluded: “Collectively, this evidence raises important questions about the practice of justifying termination of pregnancy on the grounds that this procedure will reduce risks of mental health problems in women having unwanted pregnancy.

“Currently there is no evidence to support the assumptions underlying this practice, and the findings of the present study suggest that abortion may, in fact, increase mental health risks among those women who find seeking and obtaining an abortion a distressing experience.”

The report further stated that the study showed no evidence to “support strong pro-choice positions that claim unwanted pregnancy terminated by abortion is without mental health risks.”

Brendan Malone, from Family Life International New Zealand, said the report was just one of several new studies which highlighted the fact that women are not receiving all of the facts when they seek out an abortion.

Citing a Canadian study published in September in the International Journal of Obstetrics and Gynaecology, which showed women who had an abortion in the first or second trimester had a 36 percent increased risk of later having a premature baby, and women who had undergone more than one abortion had a 93 percent risk of later having a premature baby, Malone said, “Counselling provided to women seeking out abortions is so woefully inadequate that it is practically non-existent.”

“In the vast majority of cases, abortion ‘counseling’ in New Zealand (and elsewhere) merely consists of ticking a series of boxes, and women are very rarely, if ever, informed of the scientifically established risks that they will be exposing themselves to, and the support that is available to them to pursue alternatives to abortion.”

Malone said one of the consistent themes his group’s post-abortion counselling team hears is that women were never informed of all the risks and alternatives available to them before opting for an abortion.

“Tragically, these same women also state that they probably would have chosen not to abort their babies had they received proper counseling about the risk factors, and the other options that were open to them.”

Malone said pro-abortion lobbyists “like to throw the word ‘choice’ around.”

“But how can we honestly claim that women choosing abortion are making a free and informed decision when they haven’t been properly advised about the risks of having an abortion, and the alternatives available to them.”

The full text of Professor David Fergusson’s research paper “Reactions to abortion and subsequent mental health” is available here.

Our hearts and prayers go out to the victims relatives….

This is cross-posted from Joel’s Trumpet

Yes, this is the fruit of Islam. My heart is too grieved to comment any further… Please do take some time to pray for the families that have lost loved ones.

FOX: A shooting rampage Thursday afternoon at the Army’s Fort Hood in Texas killed 11 and wounded 31 before the gunman was killed and two suspects taken into custody.

All three of the people believed to have carried out the shooting were soldiers, Lt. General Bob Cone told reporters Thursday evening, though the motive remains unclear.

AP cites an unnamed source saying the gunman was Major Malik Nadal Hasan, though authorities have not publicly identified him.

Cone said witnesses reported seeing more than one shooter, but that couldn’t be confirmed. The primary shooter used two handguns, he said.

The shooting took place 1:30 p.m. Thursday at the post’s Soldier Readiness Center, where soldiers undergo medical screening before being deployed or after returning from overseas.

“We have a terrible, tragic situation here,” said Cone. “Soldiers, family members and the civilians that work here are absolutely devastated.”

Cone said the injuries “vary significantly” among the victims wounded in the shooting. The victims include one civilian police officer.

President Obama called the shooting a “horrific outburst of violence” on members of the nation’s armed forces. “It is horrifying that they should come under fire at an army base on American soil.”

He said he doesn’t yet know all the details but promised the government would get “answers to every single question.”

A US major believed to have killed 13 people in a gun attack at a Texas army base was due to be deployed soon to Afghanistan, a military official said.

Fort Hood: Speculation vs. facts

“Muslims should stand up and fight the aggressor.” That’s what Army Maj. Nidal Malik Hasan said about America before he and possibly other Muslim soldiers at Fort Hood shot 43 fellow soldiers, killing 12, who were returning from Iraq and Afghanistan.

“A person behind counter stood up, and he said, ‘Allah Akbar!’ And just opened up on everybody”

A few further comments…

Fort Hood jihad shooter handed out Korans the morning of his attack

Muslim Garbed Jihadi Nidal Hasan Screamed “Allah Akbar” as he Mowed Down US Soldiers at Fort Hood, Death Toll Rises

The shooting on Nov. 5^th in Fort Hood may be indicative of similar attacks to come. The shooter carried out an attack on specifically outbound soldiers for deployment at the Soldier Readiness Center.

US army shooting rampage death toll reaches 13; 30 people wounded

Fort Hood shooting: officials examine ’suicide bomber’ posting – Investigators in the US are examining internet posts promoting suicide bombing which they believe could have been written by the Texas gunman Major Malik Nadal Hasan.

News accounts are spotty; emotions run high; reliable information is rare; rumor abounds. Nevertheless, what are we to make of Maj. Malik Nadal Hasan’s horrific rampage at Ft. Hood, Texas, where in cold-blooded fashion he murdered 12, and wounded at least 31?

A US Army major has opened fire on fellow soldiers at the Fort Hood military base in Texas, killing 13 people and injuring 30, officials say.

Muslim, Arab Groups Condemn Fort Hood Shooting, Brace For Backlash

Fort Hood Jihadi, a devout Muslim, had “Palestinian” Parents, Admired Homicide Bombers

A US Army psychiatrist set to be shipped overseas opened fire at the Fort Hood Army post Thursday, authorities said, a rampage that killed 12 people and left 31 wounded in the worst mass shooting ever at a military base in the United States.

Fort Hood Massacre: A Day of Courage and Cowardice – A self-described “devout Muslim” who praised suicide bombers opens fire on brave American soldiers — and most people in the mainstream media insist there is no sign of terror.

Fort Hood shooting: Muslim army major Nidal Malik Hasan kills 13 and injures 31 in gun rampage at U.S. military base

A Muslim army psychiatrist opposed to the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan opened fire on fellow soldiers at the world’s largest military base yesterday, killing 13 people and wounding at least 30.

A timely reminder:-

Peter Beck – Baptist Press

1. 24. 1440. 7. 168. 28. 30. 31. 744. 12. 365. 8760.

Alone, these numbers are interesting symbols on the page. Separately, you might recognize a few of them. Together they represent the passing of our lives, year by year, day by day, hour by hour. They are time.

Time is a precious commodity. Just ask those who don’t have enough. Time spent is time forever lost to time.

Now, consider Paul’s admonition to “redeem the time” (Ephesians 5:16). He certainly doesn’t believe that we can buy back time spent. Nor does Paul think that we can buy more time for ourselves. Yet, he admonishes the church to improve the time to their own avail.

Of this verse Jonathan Edwards once preached: “And hence it is that time is a thing so exceeding precious, because ’tis by that that we have opportunity of escaping everlasting misery and of obtaining eternal blessedness and glory. ‘Tis upon the improvement of time that there depends an escape from an infinite evil and an obtaining an infinite good. And this puts an infinite value upon time.”

As yet another week of your life ends and another waits to begin, it’s time to check the ledger of your life, to consider the investments you’ve made in eternity.

Have you spent your allotment of time wisely this week? Or have you squandered this great resource on things of temporal, momentary value?

Have you used your daily quota of time for God’s glory and your good? Or did you waste away the hours on things of little import?

Did you spend any time this week living for eternity rather than for the moment? Did you contribute anything of eternal worth or did you miss another opportunity for everlasting gain?

How much time did you dedicate to things of God? How much time did you claim for yourself?

Would you spend your time differently, if you had a second chance? Would you give more of it away, if it were yours again?

Test yourself in the upcoming days. Count your hours. Note your minutes. Tally your days. Sit down. Write down everything you do for the next seven days, the next 168 hours. Ask yourself the hard question, “What did I do with the time that God has given me?” My hunch is that we’re spending it unwisely on things that are perishing rather than things imperishable. See if I’m right.

I am not saying that work is avoidable or unimportant. I am saying that perhaps less time spent pondering spreadsheets in our spare time and more time invested in the spiritual lives of our children would be time well spent. I am saying that hours passed in the Word of God are of surpassing worth when compared to hours wasted on the Internet. Minutes spent in sharing our faith are infinitely richer than hours spent talking about the next big game or the latest political debate.

God has given us a special gift in time. How we act as stewards of that gift speaks volumes about our investment in eternity.

On another occasion much earlier in his life, Edwards resolved “to live so as I shall wish I had done when I come to die.”

Edwards understood what so few of us take into account. Time is too valuable to waste and too fleeting to hold onto forever. He sought to make the best use of it, to proclaim God’s greatness, to lay claim, through faith, on the Gospel for himself, and to be thrifty with it for the gain of others. He wanted to live so that at death he might not regret one moment of time.

The week is nearly over. The time is lost. We can never reclaim a second of the past. The future knocks. Time will wait for no one. Make the most of what God has given you — for your benefit and His exceeding glory.

MUNICH, Germany – Increasing custody cases in Europe are proof that officials there have declared war against home schooling and parental rights, according to some residents.

In Sweden, police burst onto a plane and took 7-year-old Dominic Johansson from his parents as they were about to leave the country.

Months earlier, they told school officials they were going to home school Dominic, prompting officials to open an investigation.

In a similar case in Germany, the government abducted 7-year-old Dan Schulz while the family was sleeping. He can be heard on tape screaming that he doesn’t want to leave his home. His mother, Heidi, pleads with police to not take her son.

Dan was kept out of school because of fears that his mother’s estranged husband might kidnap him. Dan had been home-schooled and began attending a private Christian school one day before the raid.

Germany’s well-established persecution of home-schoolers caused the Wunderlich family to flee for France in hopes of finally being free to educate their kids. A few weeks ago, however, French police raided their home and took custody of their four kids.

Keeping an Unfair Watch

Cases like this are why some say Europe has declared war not just on home-schoolers, but on parent’s rights.

Sweden is about to make home schooling illegal in most cases, and even Britain may clamp down on home schooling.

Germany is by far the most repressive state in Europe toward home-schoolers. There may be as few as 300 home schooling families left. The rest have fled.

Some say that when it comes to home schooling, the old wall around east Germany has just moved west.

Home-schoolers are watched by their neighbors. They’re turned in, investigated, fined and jailed until they either quit or leave the country.

Families Vow to Fight Back

One family that refuses to give up is the Schmidts in the Bavarian town of Otting, near Augsburg.

The government first tried financial pressure against them– more than $20,000 in fines– and is now trying to take custody of their youngest son, Aaron.

Their oldest son, Josua, was home-schooled and has done well on his national exams. The father, Hans, works with the handicapped, teaching them skills. The mother, Petra, is a tutor of other children and is a school crossing guard.

German officials, however, ignore not only that, but their own laws that uphold parental rights.

Joel Thornton of the International Human Rights Group is one of the lawyers representing the Schmidts.

“The state constitution, the federal constitution, the European Convention on Human Rights all specifically and explicitly give parents the right to control the education of their children, particularly because of religious belief,” he said.

Christian families like Schmidts don’t want their kids in German state schools, where very young children may be taught occult practices and explicit sex education, Thornton added.

“A lot of things going on in the second, third and fourth grades are things I’m not comfortable sitting here telling you go on,” he said. “There are homework assignments where children are asked to interact with their parents about their sexual relationship, in the fourth grade.”

Trusting God for Change

The German government treats home-schoolers like common criminals.

The Schmidts have had their bank accounts frozen and been threatened with a lien on their home and jail time. Now, the state wants custody of their youngest son, Aaron. Petra Schmidt is not giving up.

“Ask the children. They know I’m a fighter. And a mother fights for her children,” she said. “With every new challenge, I feel in my heart, ‘Now. Lord Jesus. We’re going to continue on.’”

“The more difficulties that have arisen from this situation, we realize more and more how God was standing behind us, supporting us,” her husband, Her husband, Hans Schmidt said. “And God always, in the end, did the right thing for us. And I want to give Him the glory for that.”

Aaron Schmidt wonders why the state won’t just leave them alone.

“I ask myself why, why does this have to be?” he said. “Why can’t the state just accept home schooling?”

The Schmidt’s German attorney, Gabriela Eckermann, says the answer is political correctness.

The abductions of children from good families in Europe even has some worried that America needs a parental rights amendment to the constitution.

Yet, critics say it would have little chance of passage.

A French court has recently returned the Wunderlich children to their parents. Dominic Johansson in Sweden remains in state custody, along with Dan Shulz in Germany. His mother Heidi says she prays every day for the return of her son.

Previous related posts

The Department for Children, Schools and Families published a consultation on home schooling. Please respond in order to preserve the freedoms of those parents who wish to educate their children at home. The closing date is Monday, 19th October 2009.

Keep families free – The Christian Institute

Parents protest at Ofsted inspections for children taught at home

An independent report, commissioned by the Government and published this year, recommends that home-schooling must come closer to the Government control.

We the undersigned petition the Prime Minister to Reject the Report to the Secretary of State on the Review of Elective Home Education in England by Graham Badman.

Socialist Sweden Moves to Ban Homeschooling for Religious or Philosophical Reasons Government accused of “showing off its worst totalitarian socialist roots”.

Catholic Online (www.catholic.org)

Damien Thompson reported on Thursday in the UK Telegraph that the Traditional Anglican Communion (TAC) members in the United Kingdom have formally passed a resolution accepting the invitation from the Holy See to pursue full communion through the establishment of a Personal Ordinariate. It is expected that the Apostolic Constitution setting forth the process will be released in days.

Damien Thompson wrote the following in a piece entitled “Pope’s Anglican offer accepted by Traditional Anglican Communion in Britain”:

*****

“The UK wing of the Traditional Anglican Communion – a group of rebel traditionalists who have left official Anglicanism – has voted to accept Pope Benedict XVI’s offer of a Personal Ordinariate. The TAC has only a few small communities in Britain, but the Pope will be pleased by this development.

Hat-tip to Fr Tim Finigan, who says on his blog: “I hear a lot of sceptical comments about the Holy Father’s offer of Personal Ordinariates, with the conventional wisdom being that it will not really attract many people. So it is good to hear news of twenty or so parish communities that will be interested. The TAC asked for the provision in the first place so it is to be expected that they would be first off the mark; but I think that there may well be plenty more to follow in due course.”

Here are more details, from the Signum blog:
The Traditional Anglican Communion in the UK voted last Thursday (October 29) to request that they form part of the proposed Ordinariate in the UK.

During the Forward in Faith conference Archbishop Hepworth of the TAC had stated that the motion would be placed before the Synod of the Traditional Anglican Church in the UK (and other Synods of the TAC) that the Apostolic Constitution of Benedict XVI be accepted and that its immediate implementation be requested.

The website of the TAC in the UK is now reporting that the following resolution was passed:

That this Assembly, representing the Traditional Anglican Communion in Great Britain, offers its joyful thanks to Pope Benedict XVI for his forthcoming Apostolic Constitution allowing the corporate reunion of Anglicans with the Holy See, and requests the Primate and College of Bishops of the Traditional Anglican Communion to take the steps necessary to implement this Constitution.

That this Assembly is of the respectful opinion that Bishop Robert Mercer CR might be considered for the position of Ordinary in Great Britain.

This is not unexpected as the TAC was the group that had approached Rome and Archbishop Hepworth had publicly stated that the offer of the “ordinariates” exceeded their expectations.

The TAC in the UK numbers about twenty parishes (they also have one in France). Some of these parishes would be more accurately described as mass centres rather than parishes in the full sense of the word.

This is good news as it is the first indication that the Pope’s offer is being accepted.

I’m sure readers will be lining up in the comments section to point out that the TAC is an insignificant body in Great Britain, though its supporters worldwide run into the hundreds of thousands. Also, I’d be very surprised if a TAC bishop were to be made the Ordinary for England and Wales. But perhaps the group might be granted its own Ordinariate; until the Constitution is published we really don’t have enough information to speculate. Still, as I say, the Vatican will be pleased by this news.”

*****

We followed the formal request of the Traditional Anglican Communion for full communion with the Catholic Church from the beginning. We persisted in doing so even after many other news sources dismissed the possibilities that such a request would ever bring a positive response. We did so because we are dedicated an authentically Catholic vision of ecumenism which recognizes the need for visible unity,with legitimate diversity, within the One, Holy, Catholic and Apostolic Church.

In fact, the overture received more than a favorable response, it far exceeded the TAC’s expectations and surprised some observers. The TAC request, along with many unknown other requests, received a warm, pastoral, prophetic and visionary response from the “Pope of Christian Unity”, Pope Benedict XVI.

We have also closely covered the movement of Anglican Clergy and lay faithful toward the safe harbor that is found in the Bark of Peter as their own Christian community has been torn sunder with a rejection of both orthodoxy and orthopraxy. It is this writers’ long held conviction, as a “revert” to the Church myself, that the influx of other Christians into the Catholic Church is also a great gift to the Catholic Church.

The great beauty and depth of faith, life and worship within the Catholic Church is sometimes not understood or fully embraced by many of her members. The old adage has so often proven to be an accurate assessment of reality, the “best Catholics are converts.”

As a Deacon, I offer a series of talks at my own Parish entitled “Catholic by Choice” which is geared toward instructing those who are often called “Cradle Catholics”. The term is inaccurate because no-one is born a Catholic. One is baptized into the Catholic Church, the Body of Christ, and then the lifelong process of conversion begins. It is God’s great gift which invites our continuing response.

I believe that our new Catholics from the Anglican world will be a source of great inspiration and encouragement to us. They may indeed be leaven that helps to leaven the whole loaf of the Catholic Church helping us us to be faithful to our mission by being faithful to our identity. We are called to feed the hungry with the “Bread of Life” and witness through both our words and our deeds to the truth of the Gospel as lived out in its fullness within the full communion of the Catholic Church.

I encourage all of our global readers to pray for this group of “first fruits”. Pray that these become the first fruits of a coming harvest of return. Reach out and welcome them and the many, many more who will soon join us at the Eucharistic Banquet. Pray also for our beloved Pope Benedict XVI who is increasingly – and properly – being called “The Pope of Christian Unity” for a very good reason.

In an article I wrote two weeks ago entitled “Pope Benedict’s ‘Impelling Duty’: Rebuild the Full and Visible Unity of the Church” I wrote these words:

“The authentic ecumenical mission, the full and visible unity of the Church, was at the heart of Pope John Paul’s pontificate – and is at the heart of Pope Benedict’s – because it is in the center of the heart of the Lord. “I pray not only for them, but also for those who will believe in me through their word, so that they may all be one, as you, Father, are in me and I in you, that they also may be in us, that the world may believe that you sent me.” (John 17: 20, 21)

May this same duty become our passion as well!

FURTHER INTERNET LINKS

Traditional Anglican Communion of U.K. first to accept Pope’s offer

Pope’s Anglican offer accepted by Traditional Anglican Communion in Britain

Anglican Province Accepts Pope’s Offer

By D.L. Adams

The negative spiritual and intellectual consequence of believing two mutually exclusive concepts is “cognitive dissonance.” Our interaction as a society with Islam is a direct cause of “cognitive dissonance” for us as individuals and as a culture.

Resolution of the contradiction requires the rejection of one of the concepts as false. If we continue to ignore our cognitive dissonance about Islam the consequences are dire: we will lose our civilization.

Islam is much more than a religion; it is a complete civilization that includes politics (caliphate), jurisprudence (Sharia law), war (jihad), and a deliberately misleading “religion of peace.” The doctrine of Islam is found in three books: Koran (the literal word of Allah as “revealed” to Mohammed), Sira (Mohammad’s biography), and Hadith (stories about and sayings of Mohammed by contemporaries). The definitive text of Sharia law is “Reliance of the Traveller.” Allah and Mohammed are to be obeyed, not questioned. “” means “submission;” a is “one who submits.” “Islam” does not mean “peace.”

Say: Obey Allah and the Apostle; but if they turn back, then surely Allah does not love the unbelievers. (Koran,3:32)
O you who believe! Obey Allah and His Apostle and do not turn back from Him while you hear. (Koran, 8:20)

O you who believe! fight those of the unbelievers who are near to you and let them find in you hardness; and know that Allah is with those who guard (against evil). (Koran, 9:123)

The purpose of the Islamic doctrine is the destruction of all cultures that are not Islamic and expansion of Islam until the entire world is under Islamic rule and Sharia law.

O Prophet! strive hard against the unbelievers and the hypocrites, and be hard against them; and their abode is hell; and evil is the resort. (Koran, 66:9)

Saed had been right about taking prisoners after the battle: take no prisoners until Islam has made all submit. They were to forget the ransom and the money, Mohammed said, because submission of the non-believers was all that mattered.

(Sira:Ishaq:484 – Mohammed and the Unbelievers: A Political Life, Center for the Study of Political Islam, 2006, p.71)
And fight with them until there is no persecution, and religion should be only for Allah, but if they desist, then there should be no hostility except against the oppressors. (Koran, 2:193)

It is difficult for many to accept that such an ideology can be real and that people kill and die for it; we see the truth of Islam in word and deed but pretend that it is not so. According to Sharia law (Islamic law) Islam abrogates, that is “cancels,” all other religions.

Previously revealed religions were valid in their own eras, as is attested to by many verses of the Holy Koran, but were abrogated by the universal message of Islam as is equally attested to by many verses of the Koran.

…It is unbelief (kufr) to hold that the remnant cults now bearing the names of formerly valid religions, such as “Christianity” or “Judaism,” are acceptable to Allah Most High after He has sent the final Messenger (Allah bless him and give him peace) to the entire world. (Reliance of the Traveller, w4.0(2))

Our national cognitive dissonance began immediately after 9/11 when President George Bush visited the Islamic Center of Washington on September 17, 2001, and said, “Islam is peace.” President Obama has reiterated this misperception of Islam specifically in his recent speech of apology in Cairo to the “Muslim World.”

The contradiction of Islam upon which our cognitive dissonance is based is this: Islam is benevolent and peaceful, and Islam is violent and hostile. Both positions cannot be true.

Fight those who believe not in Allah nor the Last Day, nor hold that forbidden which hath been forbidden by Allah and His Messenger, nor acknowledge the religion of Truth, (even if they are) of the People of the Book, until they pay the Jizya with willing submission, and feel themselves subdued. (Koran:9:29)
You will find others who desire that they should be safe from you and secure from their own people; as often as they are sent back to the mischief they get thrown into it headlong; therefore if they do not withdraw from you, and (do not) offer you peace and restrain their hands, then seize them and kill them wherever you find them; and against these We have given you a clear authority. (Koran, 4:91)

Narrated Abu Huraira: Allah ’s Apostle said, “I have been ordered to fight with the people till they say, ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,’ and whoever says, ‘None has the right to be worshipped but Allah,’ his life and property will be saved by me except for Islamic law, and his accounts will be with Allah, (either to punish him or to forgive him.)” (Bukhari, Hadith, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 196)

The majority of the doctrine of Islam is about how Muslims are to interact with non-Muslims; it is essentially about – us. Statistical analysis of the doctrine of Islam by Dr. Bill Warner of the Center for the Study of Political Islam is enlightening:

62% of Koran is devoted to how Islam interacts with the kafir (the unbeliever).

98% of the Sira is devoted to the struggle against kafirs. (70% is jihad; 28% is argument and insults.)

20% of Bukhari Hadith is devoted to jihad.

The evidence to resolve our societal cognitive dissonance about Islam is readily available and painfully obvious.

Lo! those who disbelieve, among the People of the Scripture and the idolaters, will abide in fire of hell. They are the worst of created beings. (Koran, 98:6)

Islamist mass murderers and terrorists/jihadists are not “hijackers of Islam,” they are not “misunderstanders” of Islam; they are the devout followers of a political ideology that is hostile to our existence because we are not Muslims.

We will cast terror into the hearts of those who disbelieve, because they set up with Allah that for which He has sent down no authority, and their abode is the fire, and evil is the abode of the unjust. (Koran, 3:151)

Then, when the sacred months have passed, slay the idolaters wherever ye find them, and take them (captive), and besiege them, and prepare for them each ambush. But if they repent and establish worship and pay the poor-due (jizya tax), then leave their way free. Lo! Allah is Forgiving, Merciful. (Koran, 9:5)

The Council on American Islamic Relations (CAIR) which is under a cloud of suspicion (see “Muslim Mafia” by P. David Gaubatz and Paul Sperry) has been the leading espouser of Islamic “understanding” in America. CAIR’s mission statement that it is “to be a leading advocate for justice and mutual understanding” is not, according to their founder, their true purpose.

Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, “Khosrau will be ruined, and there will be no Khosrau after him, and Caesar will surely be ruined and there will be no Caesar after him, and you will spend their treasures in Allah’s Cause.” He called, ‘War is deceit’. (Bukhari, Hadith, Volume 4, Book 52, Number 267)

CAIR’s founder, Omar Ahmad, said in 1998 that “Islam isn’t in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran . . . should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth.” (San Ramon, CA., Valley Herald, 7/04/1998.)

So obey not the disbelievers, but strive against them herewith with a great endeavour. (Koran, 25:52)

If our culture and society are to survive we must accept the truth of the world and of Islam though it is not what we would prefer.

Warfare is ordained for you, though it is hateful unto you; but it may happen that ye hate a thing which is good for you, and it may happen that ye love a thing which is bad for you. Allah knoweth, ye know not. (Koran, 2:216)

Our cognitive dissonance will be resolved only with honesty and knowledge. Islam is not a “religion of peace.” If we are unsuccessful in resolving the cognitive dissonance which results from our confused view of Islam we will lose our civilization.

Albert Mohler

Every individual human being is embedded in a complex of culture, language, relationships, and ideas. What we see as normal is a product of our perception from within that embedded social location. It takes considerable intellectual effort to escape our own cultural cage. Furthermore, it is far easier to notice when others reveal their cultural assumption than when we reveal our own.

That said, there is something very strange and revealing about the response of the intellectual elites to the fact that their cherished theory of evolution is held by such a small percentage of the world’s population. Indeed, polls indicate that Americans reject the theory of evolution by a significant margin, leading observers like Nicholas Kristof of The New York Times to express public exasperation.

We know that about half of all citizens in the United Kingdom now want intelligent design taught alongside evolution in the British schools. In America, evolutionary scientists are trying to explain why young children seem “hardwired” to see evidence of intelligent design in the world around them. And a quick look around the globe will demonstrate that belief in the worldview of evolution is actually held by a very thin demographic slice of the world’s population.

Now, a really interesting slant on the global perspective comes as the Western media discover that (can you believe it?) Muslims tend not to be evolutionists. That accounts for between 20 and 25 percent of the world’s population.

From a report by Drake Bennett in The Boston Globe:

Americans familiar with the long and bitter battle over the teaching of evolution in our schools likely have a set of images of what creationism looks like: from the Scopes trial, and its dramatization in “Inherit the Wind,” to more recent battles over textbooks on school boards in Kansas and Georgia and in federal court in Pennsylvania. The doctrine of creationism, and its less explicitly religious cousin intelligent design, are extensively developed counter-narratives of the origin of life on Earth, fed by Christian concerns and shaped by Christian beliefs.

And then:

But there is another creationist movement whose influence is growing, and which is fueling challenges to science in countries where Christianity has little sway: Islamic creationism. Campaigners in countries like Turkey, Lebanon, Egypt, and Indonesia have fought the teaching of evolution in schools there, sometimes with great success. Creationist conferences have been held in Pakistan, and moderate Islamic clerics are on record publicly condemning Darwin’s ideas. A recent study of Muslim university students in the Netherlands showed that most rejected evolution. And driven in part by a mysterious Turkish publishing organization, Islamic creationism books are hot sellers at bookstores throughout the Muslim world.

According to the report, the existence of an Islamic version of creationism “has raised concerns among scientists and educators.” Salman Hameed, a scientist at Hampshire College, predicted that “the next major battle over evolution is likely to take place in the Muslim world.”  That is a long way from Dayton, Tennessee and the Scopes trial.

The Islamic form of creationism is different in key respects from the Christian version, which can only be expected. Common to both, however, is the central belief in a divine Creator who designed and made the cosmos and all therein.

You can expect to see more about this, but consider a key question that the media coverage of Islamic creationism raises: How could the fact that Muslims generally reject naturalistic evolution come as a surprise to Western intellectuals?

Get out much?