Dear Ofsted...

Background: http://www.christianconcern.com/our-concerns/education/ofsted-chief-should-resign-says-senior-mp

You can write to Ofsted too... the address is: enquiries@ofsted.gov.uk

* * *

Dear sir/madam,

I am writing about concerning comments in Sir Michael Wilshaw's LBC radio interview of 15th January 2016, in which he confirmed today that Sunday schools (and similar ventures) will be required to register and be subject to inspection, under plans the government has introduced as part of its "Counter-Extremism Strategy".

This, apparently, is required not because of any solid, substantial evidence of harm, or of harm that's not already covered by existing legislation on the UK statute books. Rather, it's called for by a perceived need to "deal with" the problems raised by Islamic extremism "in an even-handed way", something that Sir Michael said we've "go to" do.

Allow me suggest that we've "go to" do no such thing. Rather, it will be a phenomenal waste of time, resources, and a cause of much frustration and pointless trouble, to do so.

Recently, a national newspaper commentator wrote, concerning the following words concerning police:

"The police have been subjected to a 30-year inquisition and revolution, in which old-fashioned coppers have been pushed aside (and into retirement) by commissars of equality and diversity. Deprived of their proper occupation, preventive patrolling on foot (long ago abolished), they have become officious paramilitary social workers. These new police are obsessed with the supposed secret sins of the middle class, and indifferent to the cruel and callous activities of the criminal class." - https://tinyurl.com/zhhg692

Whether this commentator is correct concerning the police or not, the phrase "officious paramilitary social workers" is rather memorable, as is the suggestion that some government agents are too "obsessed with the supposed secret sins of the middle class". Do Ofsted seriously think that the real-world, actual danger posed by Islamic terrorism is in any way mitigated by officiously registering and investigating Sunday Schools, or the like? Do we need make-work schemes to help employees of the state feel good about themselves, or do we actually want to tackle problems that exist?

If we cut out of our thinking what offends always-offended activists, then in a sensible world an "even-handed" approach would mean that the educational facilities run by people linked to known groups associated with Islamic terrorism would be suspect, whereas other groups should be allowed to continue enjoying the precious blessings of liberty. "Even-handed" should not mean "let's annoy everyone, good or bad", but "let's investigate where there's a real reason - backed by solid evidence that actual crimes are being incited - to do so". Shouldn't it?

Yours sincerely,

Glory to God in the highest

"Fear not, for behold, I bring you good news of a great joy that will be for all the people.

For unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, who is Christ the Lord.

And this will be a sign for you: you will find a baby wrapped in swaddling cloths and lying in a manger."

And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the heavenly host praising God and saying, "Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace among those with whom he is pleased!"

Luke 2:10-14

Thinking rightly about motherhood

I'm grateful for some of Tim Challies' readers writing in, to correct/improve one of his recent articles. Though Tim had good and useful things to say concerning the value of being a mother and home-maker, he used unhelpful terminology which failed to recognise the Bible's portrayal of a mother and home-maker as being the highest, and most glorious calling of a married woman. It is a unique privilege to be embraced, not depicted as a second-best, or equal option.

When a career in the work-place is "given up" or "sacrificed" in favour of this calling, that which is "given up" is a less glorious, lower calling. That may not immediately feel like it's the case when one is still in the grip of the world's thinking, and on day one of exchanging being a praised professional for a pile of poo, but that does not make it any less the case, when evaluated Biblically. Saying this is emphatically not to pre-judge every individual case and set of every family's circumstances. But it is an important matter for Christians to get right, when living in a society which comprehensively rejects the Bible's vision for how the sexes are to live together.

http://www.challies.com/articles/letters-to-the-editor-8-homemaking-reading-humility

Tim publishes a variety of responses, and not all of Tim's correspondents get this right. One grinds an axe by taking Tim to task for not saying anything about singleness. But Tim's article was about the choices facing married women. Taking needless offence because our particular case isn't discussed  in detail every time is unhelpful. Similarly, not every married couple is fertile, etc. Unfortunately, though, the particular correspondent I'm thinking of makes her individual case a gold standard for every article about married women to be judged by, and makes absurd comments like "I am afraid articles like yours inadvertently encourages a middle-class Christianity - where women tie their identities to husbands and children instead of God." To read a mild post about the blessings of being a home-maker, and read in between the lines an encouragement to people to turn away from God, is absurd. You don't have to be an expert psycho-analyst to detect someone who protesteth too much.

"It’s violence. It’s a person. It’s killing."

In which an employee of an "abortion provider" admits that the work she's involved in is the violent killing of an innocent human being, but suggests that it'd be tactically better for abortionists to admit that and then make the argument that that killing innocents doesn't really matter that much:

http://www.lifenews.com/2015/11/13/abortionist-admits-the-brutality-of-abortion-its-violence-its-a-person-its-killing/

Why is it so hard?

Why, when raising children, is it so hard to get them to do what's in their own best interests?

Take that question to Calvary. Our Saviour had to die so that we could learn, slowly and stubbornly, to do what's in our own best interests - which is, to walk closely with God, avoiding and putting to death sin. How quickly are you learning?

Does that give a new perspective on the matter?

Because it is according to my principles

The biggest selling science-fiction book ever (thus far!) is Dune, by Frank Herbert. I've been reading it. In one of the sequels, I came across this memorable quote:

" When I am weaker than you, I ask you for freedom because that is according to your principles; when I am stronger than you, I take away your freedom because that is according to my principles."

That was penned in the 1970s. If we applied it to the course of the anti-Christian movement of the last couple of generations, could there be a better description?

Act one: tolerance, tolerance! Let's all get along! We just want the same freedoms as you have!

Act two: Die, you bigots! You have no place in our society!

The finding of non-fossilized dinosaur bones

http://creation.com/unpermineralized-hadrosaur-bones-alaska