The sorry saga of Christian teachers being sacked for mentioning their faith in public

The clash of political and religious ideologies

Tim Dieppe reviews ‘Pride: Identity and the Worship of Self’ by Matthew P. W. Roberts (2023)

Whom will it serve?

You don’t have to be a prophet, or even a believer, to recognise that deep divisions are wracking Britain today. The 2016 Referendum exposed some of these. People are starting to realise that ‘politics as usual’ is no longer possible: we have entered a period of unprecedented turmoil and upheaval: what we have frequently referred to on Prophecy Today UK as part of the ‘shaking of the nations’.

While the spiritual forces underneath this shaking may be black and white, so to speak, how all this bears out in individual thinking and behaviour was never going to be clear-cut, because human beings are complicated. For instance, the unforgiving binary options of the Referendum masked complex concerns and ideological standpoints on both sides, which has been a point of frustration for many.

But despite this complexity, the oppositional worldviews underlying the battle for the soul of the West are gradually becoming more and more apparent. At the polls and in virtually every sphere of daily life, people are increasingly being forced to choose, one way or the other.

Political Polarisation

It may have taken a generation for the cultural Marxism being preached in universities to filter down into mainstream culture, but that project is now nearly complete, enabled and encouraged by a political establishment purporting to take the centre ground. Those who accept this radical left-wing worldview are lining up on one side of the debate; those who react against it on the other. Because the worldviews at stake are vastly opposing, we are witnessing a general movement away from the political centre towards the extremes.

This polarisation is visible in the recent EU election results, which saw centrist parties lose considerable ground to parties both farther to the left (e.g. greens, ultra-liberals) and farther to the right (e.g. nationalists). Whether ordinary citizens are becoming more radical in their politics, or simply expressing frustration, the result is an empowering of parties farther outwards on the political spectrum.

We are witnessing a general movement away from the political centre towards the extremes, underlain by worldviews that are vastly opposing.

Dig a little deeper than left-right divisions, however, and the battle lines are really being drawn up either around the defence of the ‘old order’ that emerged from Christendom (including the nation-state system, a strong family unit and the importance of individual freedom from state interference), notwithstanding its imperfections, or around its destruction and replacement with the inverse (i.e. globalism, anti-life and anti-family movements including LGBTQ+/radical feminism/abortion/euthanasia, and the subjection of the individual to increasing state control).

All this means that wherever one sits on a variety of hot-button issues, it is increasingly difficult to forge a compromise path or remain neutral. This is especially the case for Christian institutions and ministries, who ostensibly hold the truth. The time has come to nail some colours to the mast.

Oceans Apart

The reality of this was exposed strongly this week with news of a vicar in Essex resigning, from both his positions as governor of a CofE primary school and local vicar, over the promotion of transgender ideology. The school had allowed a child under 12 to announce his gender transition to his class, without any agreed procedures and without informing other parents, but with the full support of the diocese. The Revd John Parker submitted his resignation letter, in which he expressed concerns that children are being “sacrificed on the altar of trans ideology”.¹

Mr Parker is one of many clergy and lay Anglicans who have borne the CofE’s drift away from biblical principles and into radical left-wing identity politics (the schools issue being just one manifestation of this) for as long as they can, hoping and praying for change from the inside, but who have finally decided that enough is enough.

These defectors are seeking spiritual safe havens in other denominations or breakaway Anglican groups, including GAFCON (Global Anglican Future Conference, an international Anglican body championing traditional biblical teaching), while the CofE establishment has drifted ever farther out to sea, lured by siren calls of ‘compassion’, ‘tolerance’ and ‘welcome’.

Across the vast distance that has opened up in between, calls for unity, dialogue and peaceful disagreement sound ever-more faint and hollow. It is difficult to see any other future for the CofE than one of disintegration, barring some drastic repentance, especially within the upper tiers of its leadership.

Mr Parker is one of many clergy and lay Anglicans who have borne the CofE’s drift away from biblical principles for as long as they can, but have finally decided that enough is enough.

However, there is yet a sense that the CofE has not capitulated completely, but is still being pulled in both directions. The Lambeth 2020 international meeting of bishops, for example, is being boycotted by both conservative GAFCON members and ultra-liberal bishops who think the Church is not going far enough in its ‘welcome’ of gays and lesbians.

The Archbishop of Canterbury’s weak attempts to appease both sides in the sexuality debate have failed to give strong leadership one way or the other, permitting the gradual permeation of the Church with LGBTQ+ ideology in a way that has angered both pro-LGBTQ+ activists (for not being fast or far-reaching enough) and those trying to remain faithful to Scripture. In other words, attempts to forge a middle-ground, compromise position have only made matters worse, fuelling polarisation – just as we have seen more widely in national politics.

The Time is Now

All this is really to say that the era of easy ways out – of fudging compromises, of appeasement and of sitting on the fence – is all but over. But perhaps that is not a bad thing, for, “I know your deeds, that you are neither cold nor hot. I wish you were either one or the other! So, because you are lukewarm…I am about to spit you out of my mouth” (Rev 3:15-16).

The Church in all quarters badly needs to choose whom it will serve (Deut 30:19; Josh 24:15), heeding James’s warning that “whoever chooses to be a friend of the world renders himself an enemy of God” (4:4). The disagreements in which the CofE is mired result from it befriending a worldly ideology that stands in total opposition to God. This ideology cannot save, and only leads to division and disintegration. As with the Church, so with the nation.

Our study this week looks at Jeremiah, the ‘weeping prophet’, and expresses hope that in our day we will see people who humbly cleave to the Lord’s council, grieving over the nation and daring to speak prophetically from that place to both king and priest. If ever Britain needed such prophets, it is now.

Meanwhile, may the faithful continue to rally – not primarily to one political party or another, but to the Lord and his word, just as the Levites rallied to Moses (Ex 32). Therein we will find salvation, security, hope and light which will radiate out through us to the nation.

References

1 Read more at Christian Concern.

Blow the trumpet!

“Announce in Judah and proclaim in Jerusalem and say: ‘Sound the trumpet throughout the land!’ Cry aloud and say: ‘gather together! Let us flee to the fortified cities! Raise the signal to go to Zion! Flee for safety without delay!’

For I am bringing disaster from the North, even terrible destruction. A lion has come out from his lair; a destroyer of nations has set out. He has left his place to lay waste your land. Your towns will lie in ruins without inhabitant. So put on sackcloth, lament and wail, for the fierce anger of the Lord has not turned away from us.” (Jeremiah 4:5-9)

This is Jeremiah at his strongest and most confident; delivering a broadside in the early days of his ministry when news had reached Jerusalem that the Babylonian army was on the march. The whole pronouncement is in poetry, which would no doubt have made it more striking for those who heard it in Jerusalem, at a time of complacency and comparative prosperity.

It is difficult to date this passage but the indications are that it came soon after the untimely death of Josiah and early in the reign of his son Jehoiakim, which puts it in the period 607-600 BC. The Babylonians were busy acquiring sections of the old Assyrian Empire and steadily moving towards Judah (the Northern Kingdom of Israel having already been scattered by the Assyrians).

This proclamation from Jeremiah is a perfect example of the prophetic ministry in action, performing his role as the ‘watchman’ of the nation and messenger of God. It is a series of announcements, each in the imperative to add drama to the news being conveyed: “A lion has come out of his lair; a destroyer of nations has set out” (v7). But this was no ordinary piece of news. The Babylonians may have been the army that was threatening Judah and the holy city of Jerusalem, but the agent was God!

Claiming Immunity

Ever since the Temple, envisioned by King David but built by Solomon, was dedicated, it had been more than just a place of worship for the God of Israel. It was a living monument to the covenant between God and the house of David – the dynasty that David founded, that was endorsed and blessed by the Lord.

Hear God’s solemn promise at the dedication: “If My People who are called by my name, will humble themselves and pray and seek my face and turn from their wicked ways, then I will hear from heaven and will forgive their sin and will heal their land” (2 Chron 7:14).

This proclamation from Jeremiah is a perfect example of the prophetic ministry in action

That promise had become the focal point of a ‘royal-temple ideology’¹ that screened out covenantal reality and permitted self-deception. The aristocratic families surrounding the King who were in charge of the national government, and the priestly aristocratic families who were in charge of the Temple, were all under the deception that Jerusalem (represented by the Temple) was inviolable and that Judah as the Promised Land could never be invaded by a foreign army because it was under the protection of Almighty God. It was this delusion that Jeremiah’s harsh poetic pronouncement aimed to dispel.

Jeremiah alone seemed to perceive that they had failed to recognise that their covenantal relationship with God was conditional! It was conditional upon the people of Israel being totally faithful to the Torah, with the Decalogue at its centre – especially having no other God than Yahweh, the God of Israel.

Judgment Inevitable

The royal-temple ideology assumed that the covenantal conditions were fulfilled through morning and evening prayers in the Temple, conducted by the priests on behalf of the nation. But this was a mere religious ordinance.

This was the message that Jeremiah was called by God to proclaim (hence the imperative in his poetry): “Sound the trumpet throughout the land!” The purpose of sounding the trumpet was not simply to warn of the dangers on the international horizon, but to bring a message of warning from God: “I am bringing disaster from the north, even terrible destruction”.

There is no call for repentance in this pronouncement – only a call to put on sackcloth and lament. Jeremiah perceived the inevitability of judgment upon the nation and he knew the hardness of the hearts of the people. He had already called for them to break up their un-ploughed ground - the hardness of their hearts - but there had been no visible response.

Without repentance and turning, the covenantal relationship between God and Israel was dead. In fact, it was worse than that: it was a dangerous delusion that would bring disaster upon all the people, the priests and the prophets as well as the King and his family. No-one would be spared.

But the stark message of this pronouncement was that it was not the Babylonians who should be feared, but the God of Israel who had been deserted through the idolatrous practices of the people. There were even hints of this within the Temple itself, which showed the utter spiritual corruption that had become embedded into the nation.

Jeremiah perceived the inevitability of judgment upon the nation and he knew the hardness of the hearts of the people.

Depths of Conviction

The poetic pronouncement concluded with a declaration from God himself, beginning with the apocalyptic phase “In that day”. It stated the stark reality of the judgment that was about to descend upon Judah: “The King and the officials will lose heart, the priests will be horrified, and the prophets will be appalled.”

The fact that there is no ‘unless’ - no call for repentance or softening of the message - shows the depths of conviction that Jeremiah had received in his time of standing in the council of the Lord. In those moments in the presence of the God of Israel, time had been suspended, the future had become the present, shadow had become reality. The full horror that was about to descend upon the nation had been revealed to the Prophet. Like the Apostle Paul some 500 years later, he could not keep silent: “Woe unto me if I do not declare the truth of the word of God!” (1 Cor 9:16).

Of course, Jeremiah knew that if there were repentance in the nation, the Babylonian army could not penetrate the walls of Jerusalem or bring devastation to the cities of Judah, because there was no power on earth that could defeat the God of Israel. But he also knew the hardness of the hearts of the king and the priests and the leaders of the nation, who were blinded by a powerful spirit of corruption from the world that prevented them from perceiving the truth.

We Need Prophets!

The New Testament has many warnings of a similar blindness coming in the days leading up to the Second Coming of Jesus. 2 Timothy 3 speaks of this and the letters of Peter have strong warnings of the delusion that will drive the nations into a time of darkness and infect the Church with different forms of corruption.

Those who have prophetic gifts today need to spend more time in the council of the Lord, as Jeremiah did, and then to declare boldly what they are hearing and seeing revealed. In these days when the leaders of the Western nations have turned away from truth, and when many church leaders are also blinded by various forms of spiritual delusion so that they are unable to declare the word of the Lord, the greatest need is for the Lord to raise up prophets in our midst.

May those who have learned to stand in the council of the Lord, to recognise his voice, to understand how he is working out his purposes today – be given boldness by the Holy Spirit to declare the word of the Living God in this godless generation that is hungry for truth, but does not know where to find it.

References

1 E.g. Brueggemann, 1999. A commentary on Jeremiah: Exile and homecoming. Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans Publishing Co.

This article is part of a series. Click here to read previous instalments.

Don’t let the media steer your priorities this year.

As we enter another calendar year (albeit on the Roman rather than the biblical calendar), what will be the central focus of our attention as a society, and as individuals? A delayed vote on the Brexit ‘deal’? Concerns over immigration? Climate change? The fortunes of our favourite sporting team? The next TV cooking competition?

We can be sure that the news media will be full of their own top priorities, all shouting loudly to draw our attention. Three days after Christmas, I ran a search on the name ‘Jesus’ on the BBC website. Among a multitude of news items, sporting fixtures and scores, entertainment, travel and so on, apart from a small amount of archived material, Jesus was barely mentioned: a late-night Christmas Day programme, an early morning Sunday radio show, and an upcoming Daily Service on 14 January. Nowhere else.

Yet, unless Jesus is at the centre of all that we think and do, our focus will be out of balance and our priorities skewed more towards worldly affairs and opinions than we might realise. In this fast-paced, media-driven culture we must be careful to check our priorities, even as Christians - that would be a good new year resolution for all of us!

Check Your Sources!

Personally, I have become more concerned than ever about the way the media focusses our attentions and dictates our concerns. We can be beguiled into thinking that the latest BBC news headline is the key issue in the world. But the choices of news editors can blinker us away from what might be God's priorities.

When I was a child I was brought up in a working class family and worked with my father on building sites, where I am glad to have come into contact with many ‘ordinary’ folk. I was impressed by the depth of understanding that they seemed to have of political affairs, debated hotly in the tea and lunch breaks. It was only in later years that I smiled when I realised that most were only expressing the opinions that they read in their daily papers, such as the Daily Mirror. Many of these workmen had their choice of newspaper in their pocket as they went to work.

Unless Jesus is at the centre of all that we think and do, our focus will be out of balance and our priorities skewed more towards worldly affairs and opinions than we might realise.

In conversations I have had this Christmas break, I was struck again by the way opinions across all social classes are still formed by the media. It was standard media opinions and the arguments of charismatic media personalities that were used by my non-believing friends to defend evolution against creationism, or LGBTQ+ ‘rights’, or to debate questions of our membership of the EU, or President Trump, Theresa May and so on.

"Check your sources!" is my constant cry against arguments that are too often based on no solid foundations. Certainly the mainstream media is not usually a primary source of truth, even if it is a primary source for opinion.

Steering Public Opinion

I read Andrew Marr's book, My Trade, recently and this confirmed my view of much corruption in the news industry: always seeking a headline (whether true, part-true or contrived) in order to make sales. Fake news is a new term, but it is not a new issue. Fake news or biased news reporting has permeated news media from its inception.

Not all is bad and rotting of course, but overall, the general public is often faced with a variety of selected ‘news’ stories that they cannot check and which are cleverly contrived to steer their opinion in a certain direction.

What we witness in the public arena is a power struggle for who shall govern our nation. The media has a legitimate place to hold politicians to account, but it has become a manipulating power that often weakens government instead of strengthening it. This adds daily to the corruption which is all around us - a corruption that is deepening because Jesus – the Truth - is no longer the central focus in our nation.

Generation Gap

Young people are not always as beguiled as older generations by what they see in the news arena. They have grown up in a world where you can no longer believe what you see. I discovered this from other conversations that I had this holiday season. These conversations made me wonder whether I really understand our younger generation who, through their own interactive and online communities, seem to be separating themselves away from a failing world.

The mainstream media is not usually a primary source of truth, even if it is a primary source for opinion.

The up-side is that many young people are thinkers. The down-side is that they are vulnerable and susceptible due to our cultural drift away from the Gospel message (which many young people have never heard). The nation is ripe for a youth-led revolution: but whether an uprising or a revival - it could go either way.

Jesus at the Centre

My challenge for 2019, therefore, is for us who know him to bring Jesus fully into the centre of our lives once more: to see things as he sees them and not according to worldly agendas that make no reference to him.

The Bible speaks so often, though sometimes in mysteries to be understood through prayer, about the days in which we live - days like the days of Noah or of Sodom and Gomorrah - days leading up to the return of Jesus, on which we need to be focussed more and more.

Perhaps, if Christians were to strengthen their focus on our Lord, then he may be gracious enough to revive us once more and through us speak truth to this needful generation. The days are urgent.

Trump vs Macron and the battle for all our futures.

These days, I am routinely and necessarily suspicious of the BBC. So when Auntie reports a major international speech given by the most powerful man in the world by poking fun at him, it makes me want to listen to the speech in full and see what I’ve missed!

The speech was given by President Donald Trump to the annual UN General Assembly meeting in New York. The UNGA brings together in one room world leaders of vastly different political backgrounds, from 153 nations. Since a lot of politicking is done off-camera, the podium is the tip of the iceberg; a nonetheless vital indicator of a more extensive reality just below the surface.

Podium Wars

It is fascinating to watch Trump’s speeches and the reactions of other world leaders. Ever since his arrival on the world scene, things seem to have become more threatening and unstable – or more exciting and hopeful, depending on your perspective. He has certainly succeeded in exposing to the air an ideological war that has been raging in the West for decades.

As with ‘populist’ movements like Brexit, such an open challenge to the left-wing secular humanist orthodoxy is usually decried (by left-wing secular humanists) as divisive. But what else should be expected of any attempt to stand against the prevailing direction of Western politics?

And if Trump embodies one side of the ideological war, the other is embodied by French President Emmanuel Macron, whose UNGA speech was essentially a point-for-point rebuttal of Trump’s. This article looks at some of the key issues over which they tussle, putting them both into biblical perspective.

Polar Opposite Views

President Trump dedicated much of his speech to a solidly conservative defence of nationhood, vowing to “never surrender America’s sovereignty to an unelected, unaccountable global bureaucracy” and to reject “the ideology of globalism.”

His argument was that whilst supra-national organisations like the UN have “unlimited potential”, they cannot and should not replace the “beautiful constellation of nations”, since “Sovereign and independent nations are the only vehicle where freedom has ever survived, democracy has ever endured, or peace has ever prospered.”

If Trump embodies one side of the ideological war for the West, the other is embodied by French President Emmanuel Macron.

Meanwhile, President Macron took the podium to exalt the virtues of global government as the only way to solve mounting international crises and ensure prosperity for all. He argued that “nationalism always leads to defeat”, blaming it for two world wars, genocides and countless worsening global emergencies.

He then claimed that we are witnessing a “crisis of the Westphalian world order" (i.e. a world of individual sovereign states) and “this is a turning point” where we need “a new world order” based on “new rules” and “a re-forging of the global collective system”.

Trump addresses the 73rd session of the Assembly, 25 September 2018.While Macron waxed lyrical about international co-operation, Trump criticised the dangerous lack of accountability of global institutions (e.g. the ICC, the WTO). Declaring that they have “no jurisdiction, no legitimacy and no authority”, he then proclaimed:

America is governed by Americans…we believe in the majesty of freedom and the dignity of the individual. We believe in self-government and the rule of law. And we prize the culture that sustains our liberty - a culture built on strong families, deep faith, and fierce independence.

Macron denounced this thinking as ‘isolationism’. He argued that populist movements championing democracy are mere expressions of frustration from groups ‘left behind’ by the modern world. To combat this, he argued, what is needed is not insular nationalism, but more and better globalism.

These are just a few examples; I recommend comparing the full texts of both speeches (links below).

More Than Different Opinions

Importantly, Trump and Macron do not simply represent different opinions about how government should be done: they embody two diametrically opposed worldviews.

Underlying Trump’s defence of national sovereignty is a biblical valuation of individual dignity and freedom, as given by God. From this starting point, the role of government is to protect and encourage individuals, not least by investing in the structures (also God-given) that enable them to flourish, such as the family, the rule of law and the nation itself.

Underneath Macron’s ‘new world order’ is precisely the opposite: a firm belief in the pre-eminence of the universal rather than the individual. The role of government is then to impose freedom from the top down, not by protecting units like the family and the nation, but by subordinating them to a ‘universal’ moral and political system:

I believe in universal values…I think there should be unconditional protection of our values…Let us address the crises, let us work together…mindful of the principles guided by our history and the principle of universality and universalism.

Under Trump’s defence of national sovereignty is a biblical valuation of individual dignity and freedom, as given by God. Underneath Macron’s ‘new world order’ is precisely the opposite.

Digging even further down, underneath these different claims lie very different visions for humanity’s future, and very different beliefs about human nature and God.

Macron’s vision is the realisation of a world where poverty, disease and conflict are gone, climate change is reversed and prosperity is enjoyed by all. Appealing though all this sounds, it is grounded in a utopian fantasy: the creation of heaven on earth, without God, humanity dictating its own morals and working out its own salvation.¹ Both history and Bible prophecy testify to the terrible ends of such millennial dreams.

Trump’s world-view is not nearly so grandiose. He does not assume that a universal utopian vision is necessary, possible or desirable, but instead concerns himself with unleashing individual potential: enabling people to make the best of a fallen world, responsible for their own lives before God.

This does not preclude impulses to international co-operation; it just does not prescribe them as the way to humanity’s ultimate self-realisation.

The Spiritual Dimension

These two men and their two speeches remind me that ultimately there are really only two worldviews, or two directions in which to move: to pay respect to the God of the Bible and his created order, or to write God out of the picture, revising the world accordingly.² Whichever side wins out will change the lives of millions, even billions of people.

The biblical context of all this, of course, is the spiritual battle spoken of in Ephesians 6:10-19. This invisible battle is for the hearts, minds and eternal destinations of all mankind. It is therefore fundamentally a battle for the freedom of the Gospel to be proclaimed, heard and accepted. Satan’s strategy is to deceive with counterfeit offers of salvation and freedom, working meanwhile to close down opportunities for the truth to be heard.

One day, Macron’s vision of a ‘new world order’ will be realised, temporarily (Rev 13), though Satan’s attempts to achieve this through history have so far been allayed. By God’s grace, until the appointed time the Holy Spirit is acting as a restraint, safe-guarding our freedom to proclaim the Good News:

For the secret power of lawlessness is already at work; but the one who now holds it back will continue to do so till he is taken out of the way. And then the lawless one will be revealed, whom the Lord Jesus will overthrow with the breath of his mouth and destroy by the splendour of his coming. (2 Thess 2:7; also 2 Pet 3:9)

In these two men, and in these two speeches, we are reminded that ultimately there really are only two worldviews.

For Believers

Why is it important to understand the battle raging between our political masters, especially if God ultimately scoffs at their posturing and plotting (Ps 2)? It’s important because it should jolt us out of complacency and galvanise us:

• To make bold use of our Gospel freedoms while we still have them,
  
• To take care that we are not deceived into aligning ourselves with ideologies behind which lie the ‘powers of this world’s darkness’,
  
• To be deliberate in applying God’s truth to our political thinking and acting, and
  
• To pray with understanding, listening to the heart of God and (if so called) yielding ourselves to the vital ministry of intercession.
  

It is a mistake to poke fun at Trump instead of listening to what he has to say. This is a debate – nay, a war – about human nature and purpose, and ultimately about God. Ephesians 6 makes no provision for Christians sitting on the side-lines: it is a call to arms.

Listen to/read the full speeches:

• President Trump: text / video

• President Macron: text / video (quotes taken from the latter)

Notes

1 In this schema, the major evil is not sin, but the freedom which has allowed inequalities to flourish and resources to be abused. The only solution, therefore, is the submission of freedom to the ‘greater’ goals of equality and unity. The biggest potential threats to this are sovereign nation-states or movements of people that might use their independence to deviate from this agenda.

2 Nowhere do these worldviews clash more voraciously than on Israel, although I have not included this example here. Israel will always be at the crux of the global battle for truth and freedom, because she stands for the inevitable fulfilment of God’s covenant purposes and the soon return of Messiah.

Paul Luckraft reviews ‘Guardian Angel’ by Melanie Phillips (Bombardier Books, 2018).

This is an intriguing look at the life and career of one of Britain’s most forthright and controversial journalists who regularly champions our national identity and Judeo-Christian heritage. Here we discover what shaped her early life and the key factors and influences that precipitated, in the words of the subtitle, her “journey from leftism to sanity”.

The book is perhaps better seen as a memoir than an autobiography but it does nevertheless take us chronologically from Phillips’ childhood in London through her career path to where she is now.

Poignant, Personal, Illuminating

The opening chapter is by far the longest as Phillips describes the angst and anxieties she experienced as a child. Clearly her family home was not a happy one, although it provided the moral foundation she would need in later life.

It is interesting that after describing her (Jewish) parents and upbringing in some detail there is little about her own family. We learn how she met her husband and that she has two children, but almost nothing about them. Later family relationships are also noticeably absent. It seems Phillips wants her personal story to be understood more in terms of the social and political changes that have happened in Britain during her professional lifetime (though intuitive readers will undoubtedly feel keenly the ways these have intersected with her family life). 

This is an intriguing look at the life and career of one of Britain’s most forthright and controversial journalists.

In the second chapter Phillips describes how she learnt her trade as a reporter and eventually joined the staff of The Guardian as a promising writer, by all accounts. Later chapters recount her ups and downs (mainly downs) at that publication in a way that is eye-opening and often entertaining (at least for those of us simply reading about them). We are led through the inner and outer turmoil she experienced as she gradually became aware of and came to terms with the vast ideological differences between herself and her co-workers.

Her account is deeply personal and yet illuminating for anyone learning their way around the problems with the ideological left-wing (cf. classic liberalism, Phillips’ background) and desiring to work through them intelligently and face the consequences bravely.

Overall, the account of her career path away from The Guardian is a poignant one - a move as traumatic and bewildering as any she could have imagined, but which was necessary if she was to remain true to her principle of “following the evidence where it led, and only then reaching a conclusion” (p119).

When towards the end of the book she states that “I believe what has happened to me illustrates what has happened to British society and western culture during the past three decades” (p172), we can readily agree. This is not over-inflated egotism but a logical conclusion that clearly follows from what she has recorded of her experiences.

Alfred and Mabel’s Daughter

Anyone familiar with Melanie Phillips’ writing will find this informative and for those who are not regular readers of her articles or blog, this is an excellent introduction to a social commentator who is both prescient and provocative.

An excellent introduction to a social commentator who is both prescient and provocative.

In some ways the book comes across as a sort of self-explanation, an attempt to understand what actually happened to her, personally and professionally. Certainly the book helps us understand her better and appreciate her even more.

When summing up who she is, Phillips concludes that she is neither on the left nor the right: “I am simply Alfred and Mabel’s daughter, a Jew who believes in helping make the world a better place and a journalist who believes in speaking truth to power” (p175).

'Guardian Angel' (175pp) is available on Amazon for £12.50 (paperback) or £5.91 (Kindle). Melanie Phillips writes regularly for The Times, the Jewish News Syndicate, the Jerusalem Post and for her own blog, at www.melaniephillips.com.

The nationwide attempt to re-programme young minds.

Last week we received a letter from one of our readers describing what is happening in an infant school where she was assisting the reception class teacher. The school used the occasion of Prince Harry’s wedding to do a project on marriage. But the whole focus was upon the marriage of two men! She said that she did not dare to complain because she would lose her job and no other school would employ her.

This is part of the strategy in infant schools of normalising the abnormal to create a ‘new normal’. In other words, brainwashing the children to accept the new standards of British values.

Earlier this month we heard of a Primary School in Croydon where parents were informed that their children would be taking part in a ‘Pride’ march to celebrate lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender lifestyles. The school decreed that it would be compulsory for the children to take part and there was ‘no opt out’ for parents. Even the reception class of the youngest children were to be forced to take part in this march on the public streets of Croydon.

Many of the parents at the Heavers Farm Primary School voiced their objection but the school refused to change their plans, so on the day 110 pupils were absent in a display of parent power - forcing the school to cancel the parade and instead to hold a themed assembly for the children who did attend.

Concerned Parents Now ‘Extremists’

This is part of the moral and spiritual war that is taking place in Britain to try to force the nation to accept a new set of ‘British values’. Dame Louise Casey, who has led a Government inquiry into so-called ‘extremism and integration’, reported to the Housing Communities and Local Government Committee that parents at the Croydon Primary School who objected to what was happening to their children were ‘extremists’.

A moral and spiritual war is taking place in Britain to try to force the nation to accept a new set of ‘values’

She also said that all holders of public office should be forced to swear allegiance to the new set of British values, including same-sex marriage, because this is now the law of the land which has to be enforced. This sounds very much like what Paul foresaw when people give up believing in the God of Creation:

Since they did not think it worthwhile to retain the knowledge of God, he gave them over to a depraved mind, to do what ought not to be done. They have become filled with every kind of wickedness, evil, greed and depravity… (Rom 1:28-29).

Are we now becoming a totalitarian state? Will we soon have morality police enforcing the law? It was reported on BBC News this week (18 July) that there is to be a new drive to enforce the so-called ‘hate laws’. Police are to be retrained so that anyone who complains of being abused must be seen by the police within one hour!

Emotional Conditioning

Britain today is rapidly becoming a fully secular society. It has taken only 50 years, since the 1960s, to destroy almost completely the Judeo-Christian heritage of 1,000 years. The process of normalising the abnormal¹ has been extended right down to the primary school and the nursery. It uses a curriculum known as CHIPS – ‘Challenging Homophobia In Primary Schools’.

Brian Hadley says that CHIPS uses “heart-warming stories about lovable, cute and cuddly animals (e.g. the rabbits in ‘Rabbityness’; penguins in ‘And Tango makes Three’; and cats and kittens in ‘The Whisperer’) to plant and entrench ideas about ‘difference’ and ‘homosexuality’.”² It uses certain words frequently to implant them into the minds of small children. This is part of a process of ‘emotional conditioning’ to indoctrinate the children to accept homosexuality and gender transition as normal conditions of human existence.

It has taken only 50 years, since the 1960s, to destroy almost completely the Judeo-Christian heritage of 1,000 years.

Hadley states, “CHIPS starts to deconstruct the true meaning of ‘male’ and ‘female’ as being a person’s biological sex, by planting the idea in young children’s minds that they can create for themselves any gender and sexuality they wish.”³

But the great danger of what is being done to children in our schools is that they are disturbing their emotional balance at a formative time in a child’s life when they are just learning basic things such as how to read and write and tell the time. At this stage in development, children are also learning their own identity and how to cope with other children outside their own family.

Grooming Now Government Policy

This policy of deconstruction is creating enormous emotional strain upon children that will affect them for the rest of their lives. Already, in Britain our Health Services are almost at crisis point in dealing with the vast numbers of people in the population who are suffering from depression and various forms of mental illness. Last year, 300,000 people left employment due to mental health problems, according to Government statistics.

If our schools are allowed to continue deconstructing the emotional lives of small children in the nurseries and infant schools, the resultant level of mental health problems in the nation will be unbearable.

Those are the practical problems: but what about the moral and spiritual significance of Government education policy? There has been a huge public outcry at the revelations of gangs grooming of vulnerable young girls for sex and warnings have been given to children about paedophiles using the internet to target children and begin grooming them. As a nation we hate this kind of abuse. Yet it is now becoming Government education policy to groom the nation’s children in nurseries and primary schools to force them to accept new definitions of sexual relationships, marriage and family.

If our schools continue deconstructing the emotional lives of small children, the resultant level of mental health problems in the nation will be unbearable.

Moreover, all those who wish to hold on to traditional values are labelled “extremists” and made liable to prosecution. Are we becoming a nation of child abusers?

As Billy Graham once said, “If God does not bring down judgment on such a nation he will have to apologise to Sodom and Gomorrah”.

References

1 See: Nolland, L et al, 2018. The New Normal: The Transgender Agenda. Wilberforce Publications, London.

2 Hadley, B. ‘EDUCATION OR INDOCTRINATION? An assessment of CHIPS’, in Rose, L (ed), 2016, What Are They Teaching The Children? Wilberforce Publications, London, p140.

3 Ibid.

Reflections following the death of Stephen Hawking.

Following the death, last week, of Professor Stephen Hawking, many tributes have been flowing across the scientific world and surfacing in the media. One example comes from the University of Cambridge, where he spent most of his academic career (see here).

When I was at the University of Cambridge in the early 1970s, I would often see him being helped out of his disability vehicle at the Department of Applied Mathematics and Theoretical Physics. There was already an aura surrounding him - perhaps a combination of respect and wonder at the perseverance of such a crippled young man and an acknowledgement of his sharp mind.

So, whilst agreeing with much that has been said following his death, I would like to add a word of caution concerning the exciting scientific theories of our day.

Taking Hypothesis as Fact

Despite all the hype, there is much speculation that requires us to have discernment in these days of growing deception. Are there really black holes? Is there really such a thing as Hawking Radiation? The popular press frequently takes as fact what the scientific world presents as hypothesis.

Furthermore, when we follow the trail of a theory through to its consequences, we often discover that a scientist is really trying to advance an agenda – perhaps trying to explain the origin of the universe or the nature of life. These experts are trying to find answers as much as the average citizen. The next step is to claim that their theories cancel out a need for a Creator God. This was the case with Hawking – which should be a prompt for us to suspect his entire hypotheses.

The popular press frequently takes as fact what the scientific world presents as hypothesis.

There is so much of this sort of thing rising to the surface today that we must see science as a potential tool for the powers of evil. When a humanistic media reports on scientific theories that feed a humanistic, atheistic mentality, we have to be careful that we are not drawn in to accept what is simply speculation, thinking it fact.

Popular Science

If I were to speak even more strongly, I would say that more and more, public presentations of science are far from good science. One reason for this has been a drive in recent years to popularise science. Richard Dawkins had this remit for some years and this resulted in an out-and-out attack on those of us whose faith is founded on biblical truth. With little opportunity for Christians to respond within a media biased towards his point of view, Christians have talked more among themselves than on a public platform.

Then there is David Attenborough, who for many years has brought to the television spectacular programmes on wildlife and pictures of our planet. With modern-day camera facilities what has been presented has been truly spectacular. Yet, there is a difference between spectacular photography and the validity of a scientific commentary that is more founded on unproven evolutionary theories than on hard science. And so, the truth about Creation is hidden from public view.

Now, another popular presenter, Professor Brian Cox, with his colleagues, has come centre-stage, feeding the public beguiling arguments about the origin of the universe as he presents spectacular images of outer space. Indeed, views about the so-called ‘Big Bang’ origin of the universe and Darwinian evolution are not so much argued as assumed, these days. For many scientists, it is not worth risking their career to argue otherwise.

Scientific Proof…or Faith?

Yet, science can never take us beyond conjecture when the instruments used to investigate theories of the origin of the universe are themselves part of Creation. Thus, all science must start with hypotheses and all proofs must be based on assumptions. Therefore, scientists who claim to have ‘proved’ theories such as the ‘Big Bang’ and evolution (and I might add to this the Theory of Relativity) must have based their ‘proofs’ on assumptions.

All science starts with hypotheses and all proofs are based on assumptions.

Any scientist knows this, but it is a fact that passes the general public by in popular presentations. It is when the assumptions become a sort of faith that we must be even more concerned, and that is where science is taking people today.

Among the basic assumptions of more and more scientists these days is that there is no need to believe in a Creator God. This is the strange ‘faith’ behind much science today, but it is as insecure as the sand on which Jesus warned his hearers that we should not build.

Writing God Out

Just as scientists must have a sort of ‘faith’ in order to claim proof of their theories, so have Christians - though in quite a different way. Secular science’s faith is that there is no God. Our faith is founded on the Rock that is Jesus, who was with the Father at the creation of the universe.

The tool for recognising error in the beguiling scientific atmosphere today is the gift of discernment. We must test all things and the beginning of our testing is to recognise the foundations on which ideas presented to us are built – foundations not of truth, but of belief.

Stephen Hawking was a remarkable man, but he was a man who did not believe in the God of Creation. With all due respect to his amazing life, his humour, his ability to communicate despite severe bodily limitations, he was, nevertheless, a man. We serve the God whom he chose to write out of his scientific theories.