Life's busy, read it when you're ready!

Create a free account to save articles for later, keep track of past articles you’ve read, and receive exclusive access to all RP resources.

Search thousands of RP articles

Articles, news, and reviews that celebrate God's truth.

Get Articles Delivered!

Articles, news, and reviews that celebrate God's truth. delivered direct to your Inbox!



Christian education, News

“Early Years” mornings help preschoolers, and their parents, build connections

The gym at Smithville’s John Calvin Christian School (JCCS) is almost always filled with the delightful sounds of kids having fun. Once a month, however, the voices heard come from a particularly younger set.

Through the initiative of the JCCS promotions committee, an Early Years morning for moms of preschool-age children has been running for over a year now. The idea was that often in the preschool years, parents and children never have the opportunity to actually visit the school. This means that when their children eventually do start kindergarten, it can be quite overwhelming and unfamiliar for them.

The preschool years are also a time when parents might feel disconnected from the larger community and the school and when it comes time to be making decisions about pre-tuition etc., they have no feelings of personal connection to the school. In an effort to close that gap, the Early Years morning initiative was born, and it has turned out to provide so much more than an introduction to the school.

Once a month (on random days of the week so that the same class does not miss Phys Ed) the gym is set up into stations. Gym mats are laid out and at each station are different types of toys, like Thomas the Train sets, Paw Patrol figurines and trucks, a kitchen with dress-up clothes, and a craft and coloring table.

All moms, dads and grandparents with preschool-age children are invited to attend, including those who already have older children in school. For the first hour and a half the children play at all the different stations, meeting their future peers and burning off some energy. The parents or grandparents stay close by and chat with others while enjoying the coffee and baking provided. A toonie donation per child covers the cost of some of the expenses that occur (new toys, snacks and craft items). When playtime is finished the toys are put back in buckets and set against the stage wall for Grade 6 to come and clean up later (thanks Grade 6!).

The children enjoy a snack while all the mats are pulled together. Then it's time for circle time and boy, is that energetic! The children have a fun story read to them and sing songs – the animal freeze dance song is a crowd favorite. If the weather allows, everyone heads outside to the playground after circle time to enjoy the sunshine; and if the weather is cold or rainy, parents are invited to bring a clean bike or trike and the kids have some fun riding around in the gym.

The morning has been well received by all and is such a blessing for the community. Parents have reported that they love seeing their children interact with other kids. Kindergarten students have told their teacher with confidence that they know exactly where the gym is, as well as all the toys (and that very loud recess bell is not quite as scary anymore!). Relationships have been made as moms from different churches (we have five feeder churches at JCCS) enjoy conversation and fellowship. The Early Years mornings have created an opportunity to bring together the communion of saints and develop a love for our school, and what a blessing that is!

Parenting

Preparing to inherit the earth

Does slow and steady growth have Christianity primed to take over the West? **** First published in the November 2013 issue. Current events make it appear that Christianity is on a downward slide in North America, as well as all the other Western countries. But are appearances deceiving? This is the surprising conclusion of a book by University of London politics professor Eric Kaufmann in his book Shall the Religious Inherit the Earth? His answer to that question is “yes.” He's come to this conclusion despite being a liberal who doesn't like what he sees. Kaufmann has carefully studied demographic trends and thinks the coming increase in the influence of Christianity in North America (and other religions in different regions) basically amounts to a return to the Dark Ages. He wrote this book to warn fellow liberals that the sky is falling. Despite the dramatic gains for secularization over the last four or five decades, those gains are about to be lost. Kaufmann summarizes his thesis thusly: “this book argues that religious fundamentalists are on course to take over the world through demography.” Demographic direction What’s going on here? Well, to make a long story short, secular people don’t like having large families. Many don’t have any children at all. As a result, for many years, most Western countries have had below-replacement birth rates. That is, the average number of children born to each child-bearing-age woman is below 2.1, the number necessary to keep the population stable. This is the result of what demographers are calling the “second demographic transition” (SDT). (The first demographic transition occurred decades earlier when urbanization and the improvement in medical care decreased infant mortality and led to a decline in the fertility rate.) The SDT is a result of the 1960s sexual revolution and the rise of feminism, when the values of many people in the Western countries changed. Individualism became much more important and the ideal of getting married and raising children was severely diminished. As a result, the desire for many people to have a traditional family has declined dramatically. There are fewer marriages, more divorces; fewer children, more abortions – you get the picture. The bottom line is that most women are having fewer (if any) children. Relatively robust This trend is affecting conservative Christian families to a certain degree as well. The average Christian family is having fewer children than in previous generations. However – and this is a big “however” – the fertility rate of secularist women fell much further than the fertility rate of conservative Christian women. Christian women still have a relatively robust fertility rate. For example, one 2002 study placed the fertility rate of evangelical Protestant women at 2.5 compared to 1.5 for women without religion. Thus the proportion of conservative Christians in the United States relative to the secularists is growing through the natural increase of child-bearing. There is no reason to believe that this trend will stop, and the long-term consequences are enormous. According to Kaufmann, the influence of conservative Christians will increase: "After 2020, their demographic weight will begin to tip the balance in the culture wars towards the conservative side, ramping up pressure on hot-button issues such as abortion." Kaufmann refers to the population growth of conservative religious people as “demographically turbo-charged piety.” Demographic change, then and now Interestingly, there’s a precursor in history to a rise in Christian influence through demographic growth. Some scholars believe that the success of Christianity during its first two to three hundred years was partially the result of demographic factors. Christianity had a more family-centered ethos than paganism and therefore attracted a disproportionate number of female converts. Thus the Christians likely had a higher fertility rate than the pagans. Christians also cared for their sick during plagues, so they had a lower morality rate. "Higher fertility, lower mortality and a female skew in the childbearing age ranges endowed Christians with a significant demographic advantage over pagans." In addition to evangelism, this contributed to the rapid growth of Christianity in the Roman Empire before Emperor Constantine became a Christian himself. Demographic change takes time, so the results don’t become evident immediately. Nevertheless, it will ultimately have a large impact. For example, the so-called “mainline” Protestant churches which abandoned the Bible decades ago are part of the secularist trend. This contrasts sharply with the conservative Protestants who still uphold the Bible as the Word of God. Kaufmann notes the effect on demography: "Between 1960 and 2000, liberal Protestant denominations saw their share of the American religious market cut in half from 16 to 8 per cent, while conservative Protestants doubled in size from 7 to 16 per cent." Although not as pronounced as in North America, the higher fertility of conservative Protestants in two European countries is notable. According to Kaufmann, "In Europe, the roughly 100,000 Conservative Laestadian Lutherans of Finland and more than 1 million Dutch Orthodox Calvinists have both bucked secularizing trends. These high fertility endogenous growth sects are starting to make an impact: there are now more Orthodox Calvinist church attenders than those of its liberal parent, the Dutch Reformed Church, whose parishioners once outnumbered them six to one." In various regions of the world conservative religious believers have a higher fertility rate than secular-minded people. Thus Kaufmann discusses the high fertility rates of Muslims in the Arab world and parts of Europe, as well as the high fertility rate of Orthodox Jews in Israel. So the complete picture offered in his book is not all good news for Christianity. But for North America, certain regions of Europe (and hopefully places like Australia and New Zealand), conservative Christianity has the upper hand demographically. Ideas have consequences In obedience to God, Biblical Christianity strengthens the family, encourages married couples to have children, forbids abortion and frowns on divorce. This leads to high fertility and the growth of the church over time. In contrast, the modern secularist mindset emphasizes individualism: focus on yourself, not others. Having children will tie you down, especially if you are a woman, and prevent you from reaching your potential. You could be the president of a corporation or a high-flying lawyer – but only if you don’t have children. People who believe this way will not leave many descendants – they and their ideology have a barren future. It shouldn’t be surprising, then, that the proportion of conservative Christians in North America will grow relative to secularists. Ideas have consequences, and since the secularists (generally speaking) emphasize their own personal and individual ease and happiness, having children won’t be an important part of their lives. Thus they are beginning to lose the demographic race with conservative Christianity. Because of these demographic trends Kaufmann laments, “In effect, secularism must run to stand still and sprint in order to succeed. In America, as in the world, it looks destined to fail in the long term." Even more to the point, due to its emphasis on individualism at the expense of having children, “Secular liberalism lies hoist on its own petard.” Conclusion The pervasiveness of pornography, the legalization of abortion, the invention of no-fault divorce and gay marriage, and the spread of euthanasia, are just a few of the events that might make it seem as if Christianity is on the wane in the West. But the day-to-day faithfulness of conservative Christians in their families, bearing and raising children, is the tortoise that will win the race against the child-avoiding secularist hare. There’s a common saying that “demography is destiny.” That might be somewhat overstated, but the basic point is sound: significant change in the size and structure of populations determines the future of nations. With this in mind, current fertility rates give conservative Christians in North America a reason to be optimistic for the long-term future....

News

Saturday Selections – Oct. 21, 2023

Click on the titles below to go to the linked articles... On the Irreducible Complexity of sperm cells This video is not a Christian presentation, but the many precise and intricate steps it shows – one after another after another – that are all involved in the creation of a new human being can't help but have you praising our Maker. The link above is to an Intelligent Design article on just some of the amazing aspects of sperm cells. Pill may double a woman's risk of depression Christians have another reason not to take it: the pill acts not only to prevent conception but also "thins the uterine lining to hinder the implantation of a fertilized egg." A fertilized egg is, of course, an unborn baby, so one of the actions of the pill is to prevent any conceived child from implanting in its mother's womb. Why a No to trans, but still a Yes to gay "marriage"? (10-min read) The world is beginning to tread the line of rejecting transsexuality, even as it continues to embrace gay marriage. Christians can ask "If people aren’t gender-neutral, might marriage not be either?” Christian Nationalism and blasphemy laws Every nation has blasphemy laws. What they are just depends on what a nation considers sacred and profane. Why some in the Left embraced Hamas "One of the more ridiculous images to make its way around social media sites in the wake of the horrific attack in Israel was a photo of four Westerners with a sign, 'Queers for Palestine.'" John Stonestreet talks about this unity as being based on a mutual hatred of Western traditions. To put it more pointedly, what unites them is Who they hate. Taking a lesson from Pierre Poilievre In a recent exchange, Canadian Conservative Party leader Pierre Poilievre gave a Masterclass in dealing with hostile questioners – he managed to put an opponent in his place, all while really enjoying an apple. So how'd he do it? Click on the title above to get a fuller explanation, but the short of it is, as Tim Barnett explains below, Poilievre questioned the accusations. The attack was baseless so, in simply asking the accuser to explain himself more fully, Poilievre disarmed him. The takeaway for Christians is to do the same when we are attacked for our beliefs, whether about the unborn, creation, sexuality, or God Himself. The accusations will also be baseless, so our best response will often be to get our accuser to expose the emptiness of his attack by getting him to more fully explain himself. We, too, should question the accusation. ...

Book Reviews, Graphic novels

Mister Invincible: local hero

by Pascal Jousselin 96 pages / 2020 My dad wasn't a fan of superhero comics because he figured that Superman and Batman were too much like God-substitutes. And when you consider how many DC and Marvel characters are gods (Thor, Hercules, Loki, Odin, Eros) or are super-powered beings able to fight toe-to-toe with gods (Hulk, Captain Marvel, Wonder Woman, Iron Man, etc. and etc.), he might have been on to something. But Mister Invincible is not that kind of superhero. His superpower isn't laser beam eyes or invulnerability: he's just the only comic book character to realize he's in a comic book!  As Gene Luen Yang explained it in his own New York Times review: "He can poke his head past the borders of his current panel to see into the future or the past. He can pass objects and even himself from one panel to another, moving through time and space." This is such a brilliantly original work that there's nothing else to compare it with. And that originality makes it a hard one to properly describe. But I'm going to give it my best go. In the opening one-page comic strip, we see Mister Invincible, in the top row of panels, look down and notice that further on down (in his future) a lady and her little boy are being robbed. So, he jumps down a row to land on one of the clueless villains. Then, to take down the second bad guy he relies on an intervention from future him, from further on down the page. Future Mister Invincible is looking up (to his past) and shoots the robber's gun right out of his hand.... using the bad guy's own gun, which future Mister Invincible picked up from the ground because, as we just saw in the past, the bad guy dropped it. You might have to read that last paragraph a couple of times before it'll start making some sense. That's true to the comic, which also requires repeated readings to follow. Normally, that kind of confusion would make a comic annoying. But what's different here is that it all really makes sense – it's like a puzzle most kids will be able to decipher, but one that no one gets at their first go. Still don't quite get it? Let me show, rather than tell, sharing an excerpt of a couple of rows from one adventure. I've handed this comic to just about everyone who's walked into our house this last week, and for anyone under 20, it's stopped them in their tracks. They've sat down and just started reading and rereading. I think a lot of adults will enjoy it too – anyone who appreciates a good logic puzzle. Cautions There are some minor language concerns with the bad guy calling his minions "morons," "maggots," and "toilet monkeys," and a bratty kid calling one of the villains a "fat loser big butt." Not a lot of that, but there is some. Also, one of the villains reforms her ways from caring only about money to caring about the planet, and that care is shown with her, in just one panel, marching with environmentalists singing, "We've only got one planet." True enough, but that sentiment is often used to justify policies that prioritize the planet over the people (particularly the poor) living on it. Those two concerns are minor when the comics' intended audience is considered. The little kids who'd titter at the juvenile insults probably wouldn't be interested in Mister Invincible because its puzzling nature would be a bit above them. The only other concern is a practical one. I think this is such an imaginative work it should be in every school library but, unfortunately, there is a foldout page that might not stand up well to library usage. Maybe librarians can reinforce that page ahead of time. Conclusion The French original is called Imbattable or "unbeatable" which is a better descriptor than "Mister Invincible." It's not that you can't hurt him - he's not invincible. It's just that with his creative comic-crossing abilities, you can't beat him. And I don't know whether you can beat this comic. It is utterly creative and so much fun to read again and again. I'd recommend it for ages 10 to 110....

News

5 years of legal marijuana is wreaking havoc on children and adults

In 2018, Canada’s federal government legalized the recreational use of cannabis. Two of the three goals that they used to justify this abrupt change were to improve public health, and to reduce access by children. This October, the Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ) released a study, looking at the impact that legalized cannabis has had, pointing to a dismal failure in accomplishing either of these goals. Kids are getting harmed more often The CMAJ study found that, in addition to an increased number of Canadians using cannabis, there has been a startling number of hospitalizations resulting from cannabis use. This includes a large increase in the number of poisonings for young children, who consumed edible forms of cannabis. CBC has reported that prior to legalization, there was an average of 2 hospitalizations per month for children under the age of 10 in Ontario, Alberta, and BC. That spiked to nearly 15 hospitalizations a month through 2020 and 2021, which is far higher than the 2.1 average for Quebec, where cannabis edibles are not legal. Adult episodes are up too One study looked at the connection between cannabis and hospitalizations for adults in Ontario, Quebec, Alberta, and BC, and found that there were a staggering 105,000 hospitalizations reported between 2015 and 2021, one third of which were for people aged 15 to 24. They broke the data up into three groups: pre-legalization, post-legalization with store restrictions, and post-legalization with commercialization. Although the rate of hospitalizations didn’t change much when cannabis was legal but tightly controlled, it increased in the third stage, with commercialization. Other studies found a 20 percent increase in emergency department visits among youth in Ontario and Alberta, and increased emergency department visits due to cannabis-induced psychosis, and a doubling of “acute episodes of pregnancy care in which cannabis was present.” The impact can be long-term, with cannabis users having a significantly increased risk of developing schizophrenia within three years. Love laws, just not God’s laws With all this data contradicting the intended goals of the legislation, one would expect the federal government to admit a need to reconsider its course. But that isn’t likely, unless this research is widely circulated and Canadians are willing to speak up to their elected representatives. There is a glaring contradiction between our secular government’s concern for health when it came to the COVID virus, and how it is responding to the many immoral activities and choices that come with their own devastating health consequences. With COVID, our leaders were willing to undermine fundamental freedoms to minimize hospitalizations. Not so with marijuana use. There are also health impacts from other sins like pornography, no-fault divorce, abortion (hurt happens not only to the child, but to the mother too), sex outside of heterosexual marriage, and, of course, euthanasia. When health could come as a result of obeying God’s commandments (which are good for our heart, soul, mind, and body – Ps. 119), our government isn’t all that interested in exploring what laws could help....

News, RPTV

RPTV: Ed Fast wants to stop gov't from offering euthanasia to the mentally ill

OCT 18, 2023 UPDATE: The vote today failed to pass, but it was close, with the entire NDP and Conservative caucuses supporting Ed Fast's Bill. For more on the vote, see ARPA Canada's update here. TRANSCRIPT Welcome to Reformed Perspective. I’m Alexandra Ellison. In March of 2021, Parliament passed Bill C-7, which amended the criminal code, changing the provisions for doctor-assisted suicide in Canada. Medical Assistance in Dying, otherwise known as MAiD, became available to those whose natural death is not reasonably foreseeable. It also expanded euthanasia to become available for those with mental illness to come into effect in March of 2023. Last March, the federal government delayed the mental illness provision of Bill C-7 by one year, promising to create safeguards. However, they have yet to act on this promise. Today, we bring you a critical development in this ongoing debate. Conservative Member of Parliament Ed Fast is putting forth Bill C-314, aimed at stopping the Canadian government from expanding euthanasia to those suffering solely from mental illness. Ed Fast: “Well, this is an existential issue for Canadians because it's quite a step to expand Canada's assisted suicide laws to the most vulnerable in our society, the mentally ill being among the most prominent of those. I want to make sure the mentally ill are protected against government overreach. We know that they are intensely vulnerable to abuse, and we want to make sure that Canada's laws do not extend to the degree that those most vulnerable Canadians risk unnecessary death, and needlessly die." On October 3, the Euthanasia Prevention Coalition hosted a press conference in support of Bill C-314. Anike Morrison is a recent graduate of an Ontario university, whose passion for advocating this bill stems from her own experience with mental health. Anike Morrison: “I have gone through quite a bit when it comes to my mental health, and I've had some really hard times. But I am coming through the other side of that, and I can say from personal experience it gets better. And I am living proof that with help, with counseling, therapy, family and friend support, medical care, that you can actually come out through that other side of a dark period of time without having to take your own life, or without having to leave your family and friends grieving for the loss of your life. You can actually get better and enjoy life.” Whether the bill passes or not, Morrison hopes this will open the conversation about euthanasia nationally and internationally. Anike Morrison: “I’ve been hearing that Canadians across the country are in support of Bill C-314. So I'm hoping that that movement and progress carries the Bill to be passed. But even if it is not, I'm hoping for increased conversation around medical assistance in dying in Canada, and even internationally, and having a national discussion about what is appropriate, and what is merciful, and what is truly helpful for our society, and what, maybe is going too far.” Dr. Paul Sabba is a family physician in Quebec who has been advocating for pro-life policies. In 2020, he wrote a book called Made to Live reflecting personal stories and debunking the myths of euthanasia and assisted suicide. Dr. Paul Sabba: “For example, if I refer a patient to a psychiatrist here in Quebec, it's about a 5-month waiting time from the time I make the referral to the time they actually get treatment. In the present legislation, which will be coming into effect for people with mental disorders here in Canada in March of 2024 – people will have access to be euthanized – there's only a three-month waiting period. We don't end the person's life because they have a disorder, or health or mental challenge, or are in distress. We have to help them in that distress. We have to meet what their needs are. That's our goal. That's the idea of the Good Samaritan; you don't leave the person half dead. You care for them. You treat them. We make every attempt to bring them to wellness, as close to wellness as you can, and find out what their needs are." Bill C-314 is currently at its second reading, with a vote scheduled for October 18 to see if it will go on to further study. Ed Fast: “I'm hoping that cooler heads will prevail and that members of all parties in the House of Commons will understand what's at stake here – the lives of the most vulnerable in Canada – and that they will support my Bill.” The reality is the general public is in opposition to the government’s expansions to euthanasia. According to the most recent Angus Reid Institute survey, just 28% of Canadians are in favor of MAiD for individuals with mental illness, while a significant 82% of Canadians emphasized that enhancing mental health care should be a priority before considering MAiD. For Reformed Perspective, I’m Alexandra Ellison in Ottawa. Other RP euthanasia resources For resources on how to understand and respond to arguments for euthanasia, check out the articles below. Euthanasia and the folly of downward comparisons Why euthanasia restrictions fail – “safeguards” become “barriers to access” Euthanasia film highlights horrors, but offers the wrong solution ...

Politics

Being in the room at the Conservative Convention

There’s a line from the musical Hamilton that’s been on repeat in my head: “I wanna be in the room where it happens.” That’s why I attended the Conservative Policy Convention this past September: I wanted to be where the decisions are made that change history.  Now, it turns out, Canadian history isn’t changed in one room; it starts in 338 rooms across the country. Ridings, rather. In each of these ridings, there is a local Conservative board called the Electoral District Association, or EDA. Each EDA is made up of a group of about 15-30 locals. The EDA hosts local Conservative events and they represent the party to the riding. They also create policies and policy amendments that are voted on at the bi-annual Conservative Policy Convention. And last but not least, they send delegates to the Convention. In other words, the EDA is the voice of the Conservative Party to the riding and also the voice of the riding to the Party.  Attending the latest Convention as a delegate, I was struck by just how much impact you have when you're willing to show up. So here I am, typing. Day one was speeches and mingling. On the second day, delegates split into three different breakout sessions: one on social issues, one on economic issues, and one on foreign policy. Here, delegates are deciding what policies will make it to final voting: only 10 out of 20 policies in each session will move forward. Social issues were the last on the agenda for the plenary voting. The ten that had made it through were voted on by all the delegates. The “for” and “against” sides advocated back and forth until we were ready for a vote.  A new friend had 30 seconds to advocate a policy against child pornography. We cheered so loud we never heard his finish.  A 15-year-old girl spoke against men using women’s spaces. We clapped so emphatically my hands hurt. Finally, my trip was made worth it when we voted against expanding doctor-assisted suicide to youth and the mentally ill. That passed with flying colors. Now, it’s important to note that party leader Pierre Poilievre isn’t bound to these party policies. Policy Conventions tell leaders what their EDA’s and members care about, and they give principles for decisions made in Parliament – you know, that other important room. But just because policies aren’t binding, doesn’t mean they don’t offer some form of accountability – it doesn’t look great for a leader to ignore their grassroots. Some of what happened was less encouraging.  A policy that would've removed the current abortion policy was short three EDA's votes in order to make it to convention. The policy it would've removed states, "A Conservative government will not support legislation to regulate abortion." Throughout the Convention, one name kept coming up: Gerrit Van Dorland was a Reformed Christian nominee seeking the Conservative candidacy in Oxford, ON. The former MP had stepped down and the seat was open. Van Dorland was disqualified by an EDA committee from the race, and a fly-in candidate (someone not from the riding) won the nomination. Van Dorland appealed to National Council, and the majority wouldn’t overturn his disqualification. Three members voted in favor of the appeal and 11 voted against. Why? The party said that he failed to disclose something in his application. Nobody in the room will/is allowed to say exactly what. Some people have speculated that Van Dorland was disqualified on a technicality because some of the party leaders had a preferred candidate. Others take it further, saying that Van Dorland was disqualified for his Christian values – but we see other candidates who share those values remain in the party. One policy voted down in the preliminaries was on the transparency of National Council – that policy would’ve made the whole situation… well, transparent. Delegates from each province vote in members of National Council. This situation made me realize that National Council can have a big impact on disqualification. Funny enough, a familiar name – former ARPA Canada Lighthouse News anchor Al Siebring – was a name on the Alberta ballot. He lost by less than 30 votes. In two years, at the next Convention, we will have a chance to vote again – a chance to bring new policies to the table, and to vote again on National Council. With just a few hundred delegates from each province, our votes have a loud voice. In B.C., there was a four-vote difference on two National Council members. In two years, we could also pass that policy on the transparency of council. More than that, we may yet have the chance to give some anti-abortion policy a standing ovation.  What we’re told is true – Poilievre doesn’t call himself pro-life, and the Conservative party won’t yet touch abortion. But when you are in the Conservative party, you have the opportunity to shape the Conservative party. What the party looks like in ten years is, in some ways, up to us....

News

England joins growing group of countries banning phones in schools

Earlier this month, England’s Education Minister announced a plan to prevent children from using phones during the entire school day. “We know that mobile phones are a source of distraction and bullying in the classroom,” Gillian Keegan shared in a government tweet. “Yet, 40% of 14-year-olds report that their lessons were disrupted by phones. So today, we’re banning phones in schools.” That sounds stronger than it is, as schools will simply be given “guidance” to ban phones, and it remains up to the schools to enforce it. But the ban includes barring phone use during breaks and between classes. According to coverage by TheMessenger.com, China and France have similar policies, and the Netherlands will be following too. In Canada, only Ontario has restrictions on cellphones in school, banning them during instructional time. The province reported that 97% of the parents, students, and educators they consulted said there should be restrictions. Phones aren’t only a distraction, they also are rewiring young and old minds alike, making it difficult to concentrate or listen. One public school in BC has banned phones from the classroom and saw some very positive results after just five months. Chatelech Secondary School counsellor Tulani Pierce reported: "We are seeing improved mental health, we're seeing decreased bullying, we're seeing more engagement in class, we're seeing more social interaction, kids are playing again instead of being on their phones and we're seeing increased academic success." Most children won’t have the ability to regulate their own media usage. They need responsible adults to set boundaries. Like a fence around a swimming pool, these restrictions are not an imposition but an act of love and care (Eph. 6:1-3)....

Human Rights

The biblical and historical basis for parental rights

With the onset of parenthood, couples suddenly find that this new role is now dominating their lives. Children have become a central factor in how time and money are spent, and these same children also become a source of anxiety. Are they okay? Are they alright? The well-being of their children becomes an overwhelming feature of parents’ lives. Parents want what’s best for their children so the decisions they make are with this objective in mind. Christian parents will want their children to be instructed about God and his Word because they understand that spiritual matters are of the greatest concern. This normally includes education in a Christian school or homeschooling. Historically, in the English-speaking democracies, parents’ ability to choose Christian education for their children has frequently received widespread support. Of course, parents can choose what education their children are to receive! Who else could make that kind of decision? Sadly, there are threats on the horizon. Powerful forces in the media and various governments are increasingly suspicious about parental influence in education. These kinds of threats make it imperative for Christian parents to understand the basis of their rights in making authoritative decisions for their children. One excellent source of information is American lawyer John Whitehead’s 1985 book entitled Parents' Rights. Many of the matters he discusses in the book are dated because it was written thirty years ago. But the biblical and historical information he provides about parental rights are still valid and useful to know today. The Bible In the Bible, God has ordained three key institutions: the family, the church, and the state. Each one has specific roles and responsibilities. Each one also has specific powers and authority. However, the power and authority are not inherent in the institutions themselves but are delegated by God. Family, church and state have “derivative” authority from God – it comes from Him. Therefore the authority they exercise must always be used in accordance with God’s revealed will. There is no just authority that can be exercised in opposition to God’s truth. To which of the three institutions did God give the oversight and care of children? Clearly, it is the family. Already in the first chapter of Genesis, Adam and Eve are told to be fruitful and multiply. Whitehead notes: "Not only is there a command to have children, but there is the teaching that children are from God. When Eve had borne a child, she recognized that she had not done this alone and understood that the Creator was the ultimate source of the child. She said: “I have gotten a man from the Lord.” In Genesis 33:5, Genesis 48:9 and Joshua 24:3-4, it is explicitly stated that children are given by God. As Whitehead explains: "These verses indicate that children are given by God to families and not inanimate institutions or governments. Not only are children given, but they are also called gifts and blessings: “Behold, children are a gift of the Lord; the fruit of the womb is a reward.” As such, children are not just given to any family. The implication is that specific children are given to particular parents as a gift from God." The centrality of the family in the raising of children is further buttressed by the primacy of the family as an institution: "The family was the first institution created by God, even before the state. Because it was the first, it can be considered to be the foundational institution upon which all others are built." History John Whitehead is American, so the historical discussion he provides about parental rights is primarily about the United States. Nevertheless, the USA is part of the broader Anglo-American culture (“Anglosphere”) that shares legal precepts descended from Britain. The other Anglosphere countries have operated under the same basic principles. During the first half of the seventeenth century, Puritan settlers from England began arriving in the North American colonies. This area became known as New England. Later in the century the colonies adopted laws requiring children to learn to read and to be catechized. It was clearly recognized that teaching children was the responsibility of parents and these laws reinforced that fact. As Whitehead points out, "All of these enactments were concerned simply with the basic education of children, and should not, therefore, be confused with modern compulsory education laws which require classroom attendance at state-approved schools." Parents in the colonies did, in fact, take their responsibility seriously and children learned to read on a wide scale. “At the time of the Revolution, literacy rates had reached unprecedented heights, and by 1800 literacy was virtually universal.” That is, decades before the public school system was created in the USA, almost everyone (excluding slaves, unfortunately) could read and write in that country. Universal literacy was not the result of public education. John Locke John Locke (1632-1704) has been one of the most influential political philosophers in the history of the English-speaking world. He was the key philosopher behind the founding of the United States, and his thought underlays many early American documents and institutions. Although there is a debate over the degree to which Locke reflects a genuine Christian perspective, there are some clear biblical ideas in his work. Locke understood that God had created the world and everything in it. As Whitehead explains, Locke saw children as being the creation of God: "Therefore, instead of belonging to their parents, children belong to the Creator. Parents, then, hold children in trust for God. This means that parents, as stewards, are to take care of their children for God. The child must be raised to live the sort of life which is pleasing to the Creator." Children, of course, are born without the ability to take care of themselves or make decisions for their lives. They will eventually develop those capacities and become independent adults. But in the meantime, it is necessary for the parents to care for them and take steps to see that they grow morally and mentally into responsible individuals. As Locke saw things: "the child’s weakness is a source of parental authority, which in turn is a source of parental obligation. Thus, parents are under a God-mandated obligation to “preserve, nourish, and educate” their children. This is not a choice parents have. The obligation is not to the child, but to God." In other words, parents are accountable to God, first and foremost, for how they raise their children. The children are really God’s children entrusted to the parents, so those parents must answer to Him for their child-rearing efforts. The courts Locke’s perspective on the position of parents reflects the Christian thought that dominated the US during the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries. Whitehead states that, “it was this parental authority and obligation that was embedded in the law and protected by the courts.” Whitehead discusses particular American court cases from the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries that demonstrate how strongly parental rights were upheld in common law. He summarizes the situation thusly: "Parental power, the early court decisions indicate, is essentially plenary. This means it should prevail over the claims of the state, other outsiders, and the children themselves 'unless there is some compelling justification for interference.'" It is important to note that the erosion of parental rights that has occurred in recent decades is strongly related to the decline of Christianity in the USA and in the other Western countries as well. This is reflected in American court decisions: "The older cases specifically noted that they were relying on Christian principles. However, the modern phobia over the separation of church and state prevents any reference to the Christian principles in terms of them being truth." Parental rights were historically based on Christian ideals. As the Christian basis of the West has deteriorated, the foundation for parental rights has weakened as a result. There is still some support for parental rights in the USA and other countries like Canada. But Whitehead thinks that continuing support is best explained as being part of “the cultural memory” of the past “when the Christian idea that children are gifts from God was an assumed principle.” Conclusion Whitehead suggests that there are two key commitments Christians must make if they are to secure parental rights. “The first is, of course, the commitment to be good parents.” Parents must raise their children in accordance with God’s loving commands and expectations. In other words, parents must take their responsibilities and obligations seriously if they want their parental rights to be recognized. “Second, as Christians, we must be committed to stand strong for the truth.” Parental rights are ultimately rooted in Christianity, so it is especially incumbent upon Christians to advocate for them. The purpose and rationale for parental rights need to be explained. In the end, parental rights are not primarily for the benefit of parents, but for the benefit of children. Children need the loving care of their parents. No institution can take the place of the family in the lives of children. As Whitehead puts it, “The state is simply, and will always be, a poor and ineffective parental substitute.” This first appeared in the June 2015 issue....

Christian education

What the Charter says about private schooling

This first appeared in the September 2014 issue. **** Parents who don’t want to send their children to public schools can be thankful for the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. Although there are aspects of the Charter that have clearly worked against the influence of Christianity in Canada, it does contain provisions that protect the rights of private Christian schools. These provisions may very well be put to the test over the next few years as the media and political elite increasingly see conservative Christianity as a negative influence. Near miss in Alberta In 2012, Alberta adopted a new Education Act. The first version of the Act debated in March of that year contained controversial provisions that appeared to make curriculum in home schools and private schools subject to Alberta’s human rights legislation. This was a problem because most homeschoolers and private school supporters are Christians whose morality conflicts with modern notions of “human rights,” notably the so-called “human right” to homosexual activity. Many Christians choose private alternatives to public education so that their children can avoid being taught the religious distinctives of secular humanism, including the supposed virtues of homosexuality. So, if the government required even homeschoolers and private schools to teach such anti-Christian beliefs, it would clearly defeat the purpose of choosing distinctively Christian education. Thankfully, substantial grassroots activism by homeschoolers and other Christians convinced the government to drop the harmful sections. The new Act was therefore not problematic after all.  A privilege granted by the government? Nevertheless, during the debate over the Act, there was extensive discussion about parental rights in education, especially regarding homeschooling and private schooling. Some supporters of private education asserted that parents have a constitutional right to choose homeschooling or private schooling. However, one of the Liberal Members of the Legislative Assembly (MLA) objected strongly to that idea. She was adamant that there was no such right. As the Alberta Hansard records, she claimed to have read the Constitution and then said: "Nowhere in the Constitution or the Charter is there a right to distance learning or to homeschooling or to private schools. Those are accommodations that the province has seen in its authority to be able to say: 'We will allow this. We will offer it.'” According to her, the ability of parents to homeschool or send their children to a private school was simply a “privilege” that the government allows from the goodness of its heart. And she also thought that this privilege should be revoked. This MLA asserted that Alberta’s public education system is wonderful, and argued that people should not be allowed to choose to opt out of that system for private alternatives. Haranguing her fellow legislators she asked, “Why? Why are they allowed to be getting out? Why are we allowing them choice? What’s wrong with the system we have?” She then went on to demand that the government “quit allowing this very good public system to be opted out of by anyone who wants to get out. Defend the system that we have and insist that people adhere to it.” In her view, the government should “insist” that all children attend public schools. She couldn’t understand why the Alberta government would allow parents the “privilege” to choose private alternatives to the public schools. Clearly, there are still politicians in Canada today who think the government has ultimate authority over the education of all children. That’s scary.  The truth about parental rights in the Constitution Thankfully, we are not at the mercy of power-hungry politicians. In 2009, retired law professor Dale Gibson presented a paper entitled “Towers, Bridges and Basements: The Constitutional and Legal Architecture of Independent Schooling” at the twentieth annual conference of the Canadian Association for the Practical Study of Law in Education. His paper was subsequently published along with other conference proceedings in a volume entitled The Law in Education: A Tower or Bridge? Gibson was a professor of law at the University of Manitoba from 1959-1991, and a professor of law at the University of Alberta from 1991-2001. During his long academic career, he won numerous awards and wrote a multitude of articles, including articles about Canada’s Constitution. In other words, he is an expert on Canadian constitutional law. In Gibson’s learned view, Canadian parents “have the constitutional right to determine the shape of their children’s education." According to him, there are three distinct provisions of the Charter of Rights establishing that parental right. Parental rights provisions First of all, section 2(a) of the Charter guarantees every Canadian the “freedom of conscience and religion.” Parents have the right to teach their own children in accordance with their religious beliefs. This has already been recognized in Canadian jurisprudence. Gibson quotes a 1986 Supreme Court ruling as stating: "Those who administer province's educational requirements may not do so in a manner that unreasonably infringes the right of parents to teach their children in accordance with their religious convictions." Secondly, section 2(b) of the Charter guarantees every Canadian the “freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression.” This section also supports parental rights in education. Although it has not been used to defend educational rights, Gibson states, "I believe the general principles underlying freedom of expression, as explained by the courts in other contexts, are capable of supporting the parental right to educate children in independent schools." Thirdly, section 7 of the Charter guarantees every Canadian “the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.” Gibson argues that Canadian jurisprudence supports the notion that the right to liberty includes the right of parents to educate their own children. In particular, one Supreme Court judge has actually written that, “the liberty interest under s. 7 includes the right of a parent to bring up and educate one’s children.”  Conclusion In sum, then, contrary to the view of the Liberal MLA mentioned above, Canadian parents do have a constitutional right to choose to send their children to a private school or to homeschool them. This right is rooted in three sections of the Charter of Rights: freedom of religion, freedom of expression, and the right to liberty. It is generally recognized that the government has an interest in the education of children, so there are some limits to parental rights in this context. But Christians need not fear that the government could compel all children into the public schools. Such a move should be decisively thwarted by the Charter of Rights. This first appeared in the September 2014 issue under the title "Educational rights in Canada: What the Charter says about private schooling."...

News, RPTV

RPTV: the 1 Million March 4 Children

TRANSCRIPT: Welcome to Reformed Perspective, I’m Alexandra Ellison. In the midst of a swiftly shifting cultural landscape, a significant event has emerged that gathers people from diverse backgrounds under a common cause. The 1 Million March 4 Children, a Canada-wide demonstration, has drawn attention across Canada, uniting them in a shared mission: To protect our children from indoctrination and sexualization. In today's video, we delve into the heart of the 1 Million March 4 Children, seeking to understand the motivations and voices that fuel this mobilization across different backgrounds and beliefs. On September 20, thousands of people gathered outside Parliament Hill to protest against Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity policies within the education system. Wellington St. was shut down for hours as parents, educators and children gathered to have their voices heard. Christians, Muslims, and people of various faith backgrounds attended the event. The demonstration, titled “1 Million March 4 Children,” expanded across Canada with protests happening in most provinces. This protest comes just months after Premier of New Brunswick, Blaine Higgs amended policy 713, making it so that LGBTQ-identifying students under 16 would have to inform parents before changing their name or pronouns within the classroom. Since this policy amendment took place in June, the conversation about parental rights has only expanded across Canada. Police were on the scene and LGBTQ activists also protested in opposition. The 1 Million March 4 Children was started by a Muslim man, who started speaking out on social media after discovering what was being taught in the education system. Kamel El-Cheikh: “But Canada's parents are the engineers, the restorators, they're the average blue-collar workers that care about their kids.” During the event, a father spoke out about how he got involved in the gender-critical movement after his daughter announced she would begin testosterone for gender transition after her 18th birthday. Shannon Boschy: "Unsafe means somebody might question them. A rational loving parent might say, ' Are you sure, sweetie? It's okay to be confused. We're going to get you some help that you need.' But no, this affirmation leads to the medicalization. These kids are ending up in the gender clinic." The leader of the Christian Heritage Party came all the way from Smithers, BC for the march. Rod Taylor: “We all have the responsibility as parents to raise our children. I think these parents, and Kamel El-Cheikh, who was the Muslim organizer of this event, he reached out to people of other faiths and said, 'Let's come together for something that we all agree on, something we all believe in, for the freedom to raise our children according to our own beliefs.' And that's something we all can agree with.” Taylor hopes that people can find their identity in Christ, rather than their gender. Taylor: "Parents are the first educators of their children. They have the responsibility from God to be the educators and trainers, and to raise their children not only physically, but in a moral perspective so that their kids know who they are. And this whole thing about identity, yes, children need to know who they are in God. He's the one who made us, He made us male and female, created us in His image, and puts us here for a purpose. And so we want to see that purpose fulfilled.” As we conclude our journey through the 1 Million March 4 Children, one resounding truth becomes abundantly clear: As Christians, we are entrusted with the sacred duty to share God's truth and be vocal in the public sphere. Our faith calls us to stand firm in believing that every child is a precious creation, molded in His image. May this march serve as a testament to our unwavering commitment to God's intended design and our collective responsibility to ensure that truth prevails in the lives of future generations....

News

Saturday Selections – Sept. 30, 2023

Click on the titles below to go to the linked articles. Everything has to be working just right, right from the start (2 min) For a baby to grow, all sorts of systems have to be working just right, and have to have been developed all at the same time. So how could evolution ever get over such a "hurdle"? Overcome your enemies by dying Peter Krol has a rather unexpected strategy for effective Christian engagement – he wants us to "overcome enemies by dying." "God does not ask his people to live as idiotic simpletons or punching bags. God wants his people to overcome strife and evil (Rom. 12:21). But the way you overcome it matters. To win the fight in the wrong way is to lose." Just as you can win badly, there is also a way to lose gloriously. Krol's point is that the outcomes are up to God, and the methods are up to us, so, win or lose, do so with His glory in mind. Krol also lays out five strategies on how best to do so. How to lose your pastor in 365 days There always seems to be a pastor shortage. Might it be worth asking ourselves, how do we in the pews make their job attractive or unattractive? Here are 11 ways to show some appreciation. Why we can't trust the science journals - a climate scientist explains "...a climate scientist has written that he pulled his punches in a climate-change article in order to be published by the prestigious journal Nature." Samuel Sey: Why I am not a "Christian Nationalist" If you support a Christian think tank or lobby like ARPA Canada or the Colson Center that advocates for laws that abide with God's commandments, then by the way some define the term, you are a "Christian Nationalist." But as Samuel Sey notes here, there are a lot of folks fighting for this term, bringing different definitions to it, and the way some others define it, you most certainly aren't a "Christian Nationalist." Unmasking "Christian nationalism" (90 minutes) John Stonestreet, Rusty Reno, and Hunter Baker debate the usefulness of the term "Christian nationalism" and debate also whether Christians should even be trying to bring in Christian laws. Isn't that top-down "Christianization"? That's a good point, and a reason why, in our efforts to bring in laws that align with God's commandments, we should do so as Christians, seeing the public square as just one more opportunity to glorify God. Then, when a Christian law is adopted, it won't be forced from the top down but will have been adopted because we've convinced the country that God's ways are best. This is a long listen – an hour and a half – but worth the time for the sort of discourse happening here: some disagreement but done in the spirit of digging down to the truth together. More on Christian nationalism: legislating morality (2 min) While there's reason to question the usefulness of the term "Christian nationalism," all Christians should want and pray for their nations to be governed by God's Word. While apologist Frank Turek is Arminian, in the video above he makes a good, concise point that all legislation is moral in nature. If it isn't justified as being about right and wrong, then it is simply capricious, based on the whims of whoever happens to be in charge. Is that what anyone is after? No, we want our laws based on the only real standard: God's. Where Turek gets it wrong is that he thinks this law is self-evident. There is a sense in which that is true: God tells us His law is written on our hearts (Romans 2:15). But we also know that with work and effort, we are quite capable of blinding ourselves to what is true. Shucks, we have people who believe it is all right to murder a baby so long as one foot is still inside its mother's body, or that the government should fund the mutilation of children who are confused about their gender. So, the law isn't always self-evident; it is often very much in need of proclamation. Thankfully, God has given the world His Church to do that!...

News

SK Premier to use “notwithstanding clause” to uphold parental authority

If a public school student under 16 wants to be referred to by his own “preferred pronouns,” does the school need to go to his parents? Does the school need to get parental consent? In Saskatchewan, the provincial government has said yes. But then, yesterday, Regina judge Michael Megaw decided no. At the request of an LGBT lobby group, the judge granted an injunction – a stop-for-now order – against the government’s parental consent policy. Then, in a very rare move, Saskatchewan’s Premier Scott Moe announced he is recalling the province’s legislative assembly on October 10, to use Section 33 of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms, to override the judge’s ruling. Section 33 is better known as the “notwithstanding clause,” which gives legislatures and Parliament the power to override sections of the Charter, though only for 5 years at a time. Any legislation invoking the clause has an automatic five-year expiration date, at which time the legislation will either lapse or have to be renewed again. The clause was included in the Charter to keep the judiciary from becoming too powerful, “interpreting” the Charter to fit their own preferences. It was included as a tool for reining in activist judges. Premier Moe minced no words in defending the move, even though it is extremely unusual. "Our government is extremely dismayed by the judicial overreach of the court blocking implementation of the Parental Inclusion and Consent policy – a policy which has the strong support of a majority of Saskatchewan residents, in particular, Saskatchewan parents. The default position should never be to keep a child's information from their parents.” He went on to explain that: "It is in the best interest of children to ensure parents are included in their children's education, in their classrooms and in all important decisions involving their children.” The announcement came a week after the “1 Million March 4 Children” rallies, held in towns and cities across Canada, to speak up for children in the face of Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (SOGI) curriculum and activism. The move also comes after work by supporters of WeNeedaLAW.ca and the Saskatchewan Pro-Life Association to promote parental rights, albeit to a different end. Their efforts were in defense of the unborn, promoting a law that would require parental consent before minors can have an abortion. But have their years of effort borne fruit in this other direction? Saskatchewan isn’t on its own in taking a stand. In June, the New Brunswick government revised its educational policy to require parental consent for children under 16 before schools used their “preferred pronouns.” Mainstream media bias and opposition were on full display in the coverage of the March, and the New Brunswick decision, making Moe’s decision all the more laudable. While we aren’t always happy with our elected leaders, we can be thankful for Section 33 of the Charter. Without it, a lone judge would be able to overturn the decisions of our legislatures and Parliament. Photo is adapted from a Sept 22, 2023 photo by Alberta Newsroom (flickr.com) and used under a CC BY-NC-ND 2.0 DEED license....

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16