Richard III
DNA tests have now confirmed that the body found under a car park in Leicester is almost certainly that of Richard III, king of England, killed at the Battle of Bosworth in 1485. The location of the body, hastily buried in the choir of the Franciscan friary; the curvature of the spine; the apparent battle wounds on the skeleton; and the DNA match with living relatives of Richard III together seem conclusive proof.
It is gratifying that the account of Richard’s death by the contemporary chronicler John Rous has been vindicated, because there is a tendency to dismiss early writings (the Bible included) as unhistorical. Rous wrote, “If I might speak the truth to his honour as a noble soldier, though he was slight in body and weak in strength, to his last breath he held himself nobly in a defending manner, often crying that he was betrayed and saying, ‘Treason, treason, treason’. And so, tasting what he had more often served to others, he ended his life miserably, and finally was buried among the Friars Minor [Franciscans] of Leicester in the choir.”
The plans for reburying Richard’s body illustrate the range of false religious opinions current in Britain. Materialism is represented by some of the scientists, who refer to the body as “Richard”, as if the soul (if such even exists for them) were like the soul of an animal, a mere emanation from the complexity of the body, which goes out of existence as soon as the physical life ceases. Superstition is represented by the intention of taking the body on a tour of Leicestershire villages including the battlefield of Bosworth, and all this to be done on the Sabbath day. The following day Cardinal Archbishop Vincent Nichols of Westminster is due to say mass for the repose of Richard’s soul at the local Roman Catholic church. The futility and blasphemy of that rigmarole goes without saying. A witchdoctor’s charm would be as effective. On the Thursday the body is to be reburied, with the Archbishop of Canterbury present and also “representatives of other faiths”. Leicester is a strongly Muslim area and one wonders how much interest the local people are taking in this aspect of their country’s history.
True religion will probably not be represented at the reburial. In Richard III’s day, true religion was upheld in Britain by the Lollards, the followers of John Wycliffe. Curiously, among the 13 surviving books from Richard’s library is an English Bible translated by John Wycliffe. To what extent Richard sympathised with Lollardy is unknown. His other known religious activities were along the lines of the conventional Romanism of his time. If he had a Bible, however, it could be that the true light shone in his soul sometime before his death. The Bible is a mighty instrument in the hand of the Spirit of God. Richard was king of England for two years but has been dead now for 500 years. Which is better, to have an earthly kingdom for a short time, or to have a heavenly kingdom for ever? DWBS
Educational Issues
Earlier this year a report suggested that events in Birmingham non-faith schools required investigation. In March an anonymous letter was sent to Birmingham City Council alleging the existence of a “Trojan Horse” conspir-
acy to take over governing bodies and create a school ethos more sympathetic to hardline Muslim activists. The Department of Education subsequently commissioned former counter-terrorist chief Peter Clarke to investigate.
Mr Clarke reported his findings to Nicky Morgan, the Education Secretary, who stated that there is “disturbing” evidence that people with a “shared ideology” were trying to gain control of governing bodies in Birmingham. Apparently there was evidence of an “aggressive Islamism agenda” on the part of these who were seeking to establish control over teachers. Mr Clarke highlighted a “disconcerting pattern”, including nepotism in staff appointments, bullying of senior teachers, a “strategy of harassment to oust the head teacher” and the “reinforcement of Muslim identity to the exclusion or disparagement of others”. He added, “There are a number of people in a position of influence who either espouse, or sympathise with, or fail to challenge extremist views”. Birmingham City Council appeared to have known about this infiltration for some time but had done little to curb it.
Sir Michael Wilshaw, head of Ofsted, the English schools inspectorate, drew similar conclusions, declaring that there had been a “culture of fear and intimidation”, where head teachers were bullied by governors intervening in the day-to-day running of the city’s schools. He found evidence of an organised campaign to target certain schools and that “some governors had attempted to impose and promote a narrow faith-based ideology on state schools with the intention of a hard line Muslim takeover”. Inspectors had carried out a wave of inspections resulting in five schools being put into special measures. Here we see the pernicious power of Islam in its determination to dominate every sector of society and especially in seeking to influence young minds.
In the wake of these revelations, the Government has introduced new guidelines seeking to counteract such activity but, ironically, in our liberal society the guidelines have caused problems for at least one Christian school in England. Inspectors have come in and demanded that this school actively promote understanding of other faiths. In spite of its clear Christian ethos, it was told that it must bring in representatives of other faiths, such as imams (Muslim prayer leaders) to lead lessons and collective worship. Taking trips to visit different places of “worship” would not do.
So the guidelines placed to protect a state school from being “radicalised” can now be used against a Christian school. If the school did not comply, it was warned it would be downgraded from “good” to “adequate”. Indeed, the warning went even further, indicating that, if changes were not made, it could face another inspection and possible closure as it breached new rules which require the promotion of inclusive “British values”. As one Christian
organisation put it, “We want Islamic extremism dealt with . . . but this assaults the integrity of the Christian identity and is a challenge to freedom of belief . . . there is a deep irony here that Christianity – the faith which gave rise to many treasured British values such as individual freedoms, tolerance and respect for others – is being portrayed as unBritish”.
As well as the intolerant religion of Islam, our schools are faced with the equally intolerant “religion” of secularism. A recent report in the Press and Journal newspaper reveals that the Scottish Secular Society (SSS) will not tolerate Scottish schools teaching creationism in science classes, stating it is “a problem that could no longer be ignored”. It is putting pressure on the Scottish Government to issue guidance to state schools and colleges to “prevent the teaching of creationism and related doctrines” in these classes. SSS chairman, Spencer Fildes, complains, “It is no longer credible to ignore the fact that there are organisations attempting, and with some success, to penetrate our schools, in order to present creationism as a valid alternative to established science”. He boldly claims that “creationism is incompatible with science”. Professor Paul Braterman, a scientific advisor to SSS, protests, “If you tell children untruths at a stage when they are going to believe you, that is going to affect their outlook on life indefinitely”. How true! And that is exactly what these secularists are attempting to do.
Christians have enemies on every side and, when we as a nation are departing more and more from God, they are gaining strength, led by the great deceiver, of whom Peter warns, “Your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour” (1 Pet 5:8). He desires to hold captive the hearts and lives of young and old. We need to heed the voice of the inspired psalmist: “Come, ye children, hearken unto me: I will teach you the fear of the Lord” (Ps 34:11). KHM
Women Bishops in the Church of England
It is more than 20 years since the Church of England allowed women to become ministers, but until now they have not been able to become bishops. However, in November, the General Synod of the Church of England formally adopted legislation allowing women to be bishops in spite of opposition from both Evangelicals and High Church “Anglo-Catholics”. The legislation had previously passed through Parliament in October 2014. This is one more indication of the continuing failure to implement biblical standards in the national Churches. It is believed that the first women bishops may be appointed very soon, as a number of dioceses are shortly to receive new bishops.
The main problem, of course, is not whether women should be able to
become diocesan bishops in the Anglican hierarchy – the hierarchy is blatantly unbiblical in any case – but that women should be allowed into the Church’s ministry at all. The Apostle Paul, speaking authoritatively under divine inspiration, exhorted Timothy: “Let the women learn in silence with all subjection. But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man but to be in silence” (1 Tim 2:11-12). AWM