From Separation to Integration
First Minister, Peter Robinson has called for an end to segregation in schools; he proposes a push towards an integrated education system. As a means to achieving such a goal, Mr Robinson has advocated the establishment of a commission, to look into ways in which this integration could be aided. The DUP leader went on to say that he objected to ‘the state providing and funding state schools’.
There are at least two main issues that arise here; firstly, Mr Robinson has broken from the historical position of Paisleyism, that had consistently argued against integration of Roman Catholics and Protestants and had insisted on separation. Does this now mean that the DUP have broken free from Paisleyism? This proposal also puts the chairman of the Education Committee, Mr Mervyn Storey, in a very difficult position; as an office bearer in a Free Presbyterian Church of Ulster, Mr Storey, will know that his Church insists on the Word of God being foundational to education, so how can he be in agreement with his party leader?
Secondly, Mr Robinson is clearly following a Secularist line of thought as he advances his proposal; what he is effectively doing, is, taking religion out of education while at the same time, separating religion from the state. To attempt either or both, is to destroy evangelical Protestantism by removing the principles and standards of The Word of God, which are vital to society in general and to education in particular; it is impossible for any Protestant society to stand if the foundation of Biblical truth and doctrine is compromised or removed.
Rev Mervyn Cotton (Heb13:6)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Rev. Cotton . .
ReplyDeleteMany years ago Ian Paisley left his post (his pulpit) against the express orders of his commander-in-chief, the Lord Jesus Christ to “fight the Lord's battles” (1 Sam. 18:17; II Tim. 2:3-4) in order to engage / confront the enemies of Christ and His Gospel on another front, namely politics, by employing carnal weapons of warfare, to wit, man's wisdom and the arm of flesh.
In the end, his bid to represent two kingdoms at variance with one another (James 4:4; 1 Jo. 4:5-6; Matt. 6:24b) has proven unsuccessful and triggered an avalanche of internal strife, turmoil, and confusion amongst the flock of “his church . . the FPC”. He has sown “division among the brethren”. (Prov. 6:19)
Because he has not kept diligent watch over his flock, they are left vulnerable and exposed to the ravening wolves that surround them on every side.
The political gospel sown by Ian Paisley has reaped a bitter harvest indeed. Outflanked, outmaneuvered, and outsmarted by their adversary, those in the Paisley camp are now found giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
It was Martin Luther who said:
“The world at the present time is sagaciously discussing how to quell the controversy and strife over doctrine and faith, and how to effect a compromise between the Church and the Papacy. Let the learned, the wise, it is said, bishops, emperor and princes, arbitrate. Each side can easily yield something, and it is better to concede some things which can be construed according to individual interpretation, than that so much persecution, bloodshed, war, and terrible, endless dissension and destruction be permitted.“
Here is lack of understanding, for understanding proves by the Word that such patchwork is not according to God’s will, but that doctrine, faith and worship must be preserved pure and unadulterated; there must be no mingling with human nonsense, human opinions or wisdom.“
It would appear that "home schooling" now affords the only safe alternative for those would obey God, rather than man.
In Christian solidarity,
June / aka Ask Dr. Paisley (II Cor. 6:17-18)