scottish-school
Kirktonholme Primary School, Glasgow

GLASGOW, UK (BNc) — The Daily Record newspaper called the Lord’s church an “extremist US religious cult” in an online article today after “a small number of parents at Kirktonholme Primary” school protested that creation books had been distributed during a school assembly in East Kilbride.

The article expressed shock that Kyle Butt’s books on creation and biblical teachings were given to the primary school children.

Christians are a part of the school chaplaincy team, but that membership is now being reviewed, school authorities said.

“The Church of Christ, based in the US Deep South, believe the Bible predicts the future and is 100 per cent accurate,” the reporter of the article wrote, incredulous.

The article is online at this link.

Randal and his wife Vicki have lived and worked in Brazil since Nov. 1984. They have three children, two daughters-in-law, and four grandchildren. He likes to read novels in his back-porch hammock. http://randal.us

14 thoughts on “Major Scottish newspaper freaks out over church’s distribution of creation material in school

  1. Wow, do they not understand the concept of autonomy.  I didn’t know we had an HQ down south.  Secondly, other than the return of our Lord, the destruction of earth and the saints going to heaven, I wasn’t aware we were using the Bible to predict the future.  Also percent is one word.  Three mistakes in one sentence alone.  The Daily Mail needs to do its homework.

     

  2. I wouldn’t be reporting on this brother if I were you…no need to throw gas on the fire…it will only spread…something we don’t need. Why give them more media attention?

  3. This is just the beginning of persecution I believe we will be facing in the near future. My heart breaks for the little boy whose dad took away his books. All I can do is pray he’ll remember it and one day seek the Lord when he’s older and find the truth. I can remember when I was in Kindergarten and wondering why the destruction of the dinosaurs didn’t seem to “fit” with God’s word. I was very confused by it all. And my parents weren’t Christians (they were believers who didn’t do much).

  4. Hi all. I just dropped by to put the other side of this story. Here in Scotland we have emerged as a largely secular society, tolerant of the beliefs of others but adamant in our assertion that religious education of children is a matter of choice for the parents not something to be instigated without their permission, especially in a state school. Remember, Scotland is no stranger to deeply held religious beliefs after hundreds of years of division between Protestants and Catholics. The assertion that any branch of religion should be considered the solely ‘true’ word and then seek to subjugate all others will always be resisted here. I would argue that the failure to respect the beliefs of the parents by the churches members in the school is indefensible. In addition, some of the beliefs held by the church are simply considered not compatible with the beliefs of the majority population. That is the choice of the populace and why we live in a democratic society. Conversion by subterfuge is not appropriate and I’m sure the Church of Christ wouldn’t welcome a similar attempt to convert their members. A persons beliefs are their own but lack of consideration for others is the main issue here. Thank you.

    1. Hi, George—

      Thank you for sharing the other side, I appreciate it. It’s difficult to hear the tone of one’s voice when writing in this way, so I ask you to please “hear” my tone as being sincere with a genuine desire to understand your side, explain my own, and to find the truth.

      Maybe I misunderstood the article. It gave the impression that the school was required to have a “chaplain.” Is that so? Or did I misread?

      If it’s true that the school has a chaplain, and if there were a Catholic chaplain, wouldn’t the Catholics also be guilty of subterfuge because they would be pushing their own doctrine? And same with the Protestants?

      The writer of the article was correct in saying churches of Christ believe the entire Bible is accurate and applies to us today (I would think all Christian religions believed that since the Bible is what they supposedly base their beliefs on). I did notice, however, that the writer was misinformed about the churches of Christ. We’re not US founded, by any means. The churches of Christ started in the times of the New Testament. Currently, we use the name “church of Christ” because it’s found in the Bible in Romans 16:16, but we also go by any other name found in the Bible, such as “the Way,” the “body of Christ,” the “church of God,” the “Lord’s church,” etc. I won’t inundate you with all the verses those are found under, I’m sure you can look them up.

      I have yet to find “Catholic” or “Protestant” in the Bible. I find it interesting then that these (and more) are considered “religious” groups, but their denomination’s name isn’t even located in scripture. Are you a believer, George? A Christian? If so, the fact that these names aren’t even found in scripture might be something to consider. Really, it should bother you and concern you, and cause you to think about Christ’s words when He warned against “traditions of men.” For your own sake and salvation, consider what your beliefs are based on. A man-made religious organization whose name isn’t even found in scripture, or God’s word, the Bible? This is all assuming you call yourself a Christian.

      Finally then, why are these man-made denominations welcome in the school (assuming they require a chaplain), but the true church of God isn’t because it doesn’t meet the requirements of the majority? If the church did meet the requirements of the majority in biblical times, then they all would have been required to worship several gods and Caesar along with the Creator. And we all know God won’t allow that. I also wonder if the majority are actually unbelievers. What should be done if that were the case (and likely is)?

      I’m familiar with the books they gave to the children. One of them was about Dinosaurs and how they became extinct. It explains why their fossils are found on mountaintops, etc. Which of course, explains/proves the flood that occurred during the time of Noah. Don’t both Protestants and Catholics believe in the flood, even if they don’t follow the entire Bible with their doctrinal teachings?

      Again, I hope you can hear my tone and know that I’m not out for a debate, just trying to understand and explain our side. This of course is assuming the school is required to have a chaplain. If I’ve somehow misunderstood that, then forgive me.

  5. Hi Sandi

    Thanks for taking the time to respond to my post.

    I couldn’t agree more with your point that a Catholic or Protestant chaplain would be just as guilty of “pushing doctrine” That may be why, after hundreds of years of being subjected to religious intolerance between them, we have transformed to an increasingly secular society which rejects any attempts to be dictated to by any single branch of faith regardless of how vehemently they believe they should be dominant and all pervasive.

    We do, of course, still have single faith schools but these are clearly denoted as such. Where state schools have a chaplaincy programme it should adhere to a code of guidance based on tolerance and exploring religion from a multi-faith perspective. Not one that condemns individuals as ‘sinners’ or presents mythology as scientific fact.

    This is from the COS guidelines: “Chaplains need to be very clearly aware of the difference
    between their function in school and their functions in church”; “The chaplain has no function in ensuring that Religious and Moral Education is being carried out but may contribute to aspects of the curriculum through conversation and agreement with staff”; “The more traditional role of the chaplain may not prove desirable given the nature of school education, the curriculum today and the wishes of parents and staff.”; “Where team chaplaincies are in place they should be both ecumenical and interfaith. It is recognised however, that this may
    not be possible in many contexts.Where circumstances dictate that the chaplain(cy team) is from one denomination within a Christian community, that should not be a sign that other denominations or faiths are to be excluded,or that the school is expressing a preference for one denomination or faith group over others. The support of school chaplaincy remains available to people of all faiths and none”

    This programme clearly failed to adhere to these guidelines and the head teachers are rightly being held to account for these failings. Should the Church of Christ wish to open a school with teachings based on their religious beliefs they are, of course, free to do so and anyone who wished to send there children there could. But this would be their choice, a choice which was denied to them in this case.

    As you’ve asked, my personal beliefs are not based in religion just a simple notion of respect and tolerance for others and I reject any attempt to condemn or consider inferior, anyone based on doctrine derived from ancient religious stories. Where there a god that required me to be so judgemental of others for the short time I am alive to secure an afterlife, I would not consider that a god worthy of worship.

    Respectfully,
    George

    1. George,

      Thank you for your response! You’re a kind man. I can tell by the way you write. Thank you for that and for helping me understand.

      It’s very interesting to hear the “rules” for chaplains in your country. I find it especially interesting because I lived in Holland for thirteen years (my husband is Dutch) and my kids attended Dutch schools. There are three types: Catholic, Protestant, and Public. My children attended a Protestant school. They didn’t have chaplains of any kind, but they did celebrate the typical Christian holidays, etc. Also, my great-grandpa was a Pringle, he was from Dublin, Ireland and was a bobby in London before he came to the US. So to learn anything about Great Britain is intriguing.

      In regards to Chaplains, from what I understand, a chaplain (who supposedly is there as an ambassador of Christ?) isn’t allowed to teach creation or any type of morals. I can’t help but wonder then, why the schools have chaplains? I mean, the Bible is all about religion and morals, and if they are there as representatives of Christ, but aren’t allowed to represent Him and His teachings, then why are they there? The definition of this person’s job is, in my opinion, very precarious. It would be an incredible balancing act, simply because it would be impossible to please everyone with all their differing beliefs/opinions. No matter how careful this person is, someone is bound to get offended (as they did in this particular case). So, in order to keep this balancing act of “peace” (which isn’t peace at all), these chaplains aren’t allowed to practice Christianity? I can’t help but wonder what the chaplains are even for? What is the point of their presence?
      It seems to me they’re just taking up space. I’m assuming they get paid. I would think the money they receive could be put into something more productive, like educating the children in science, preferably the law of science and how it’s based on “cause and effect” (which completely dismantles the “traditional teaching” that we’ve all come from “nothing” and somehow out of the blue managed to evolve into “something” from one tiny cell). Forgive me, and I hope I’m not coming across as insensitive here, but the very definition of chaplain is laughable. Why in the world are they there, taking up space and money in your schools if they’re not allowed to do exactly what a chaplain (by the very definition of the word “Christian”) is supposed to do? George, do you not see the absurdity in that? Just because a government sets up a system of rules, doesn’t mean they’re perfect (and just so you know I’m not knocking Scotland, America’s government has plenty of these types of absurdities). These requirements are downright contradictory, and I think if they’re going to have such rules, then they should save your hard-earned money and get rid of the chaplains. What are they there for? Really?

      I totally agree with rejecting dictatorship of a single branch of faith. It would be interesting to know if you believed Christians aren’t being dictated on what they may or may not say in any given situation (although, I understand the concern that parents have of protecting their children from teachings that they don’t agree with; but that just goes back to my question on what chaplains are for). Please know, the churches of Christ are not dictators. Nor are we here to judge. That’s not our job. Only the good Lord can do that. Have you ever experienced judgments and vehement dictatorship from a Christian who is a member of the church of Christ? I can imagine you’ve “observed” it during the crusades, and the history of the churches, but keep in mind which groups were involved in burning people at the stake, etc. Was it not the Catholic denomination? (On a side note: the word “denomination” means “part of the whole.” Any denomination not found in the Bible is not from the body of Christ. The churches of Christ are not a denomination as outsiders would like to claim.) Nor do we consider anyone “inferior” to us. The entire reason we’re Christians is because we desperately need a Savior, and we’re willing to acknowledge the fact that we’re FAR from perfect. It’s the whole reason we need Christ. So why in the world would we judge? Perhaps you’ve experienced that kind of attitude from denominational believers, but I’d be shocked if you experienced it from a true member of the Lord’s body (Christ’s church).

      Our job is simply to spread the Good News that (yes, we are sinners, and) Christ came to save us from our sins by dying on the cross in our place. In order to be saved and have our sins washed away, we are to die with Christ through baptism, so that when we come up out of the water, we can have a new life and be set free from the shackles of sin and a dictating Satan who rules this world.

      You’re right. We’re only here for a short time. Where do you believe you will go when you’ve finished your time here on this planet? If you saw someone walking along a train track and you saw a train coming, but the person on the track didn’t hear or see the train that was about to run them over, wouldn’t you shout with vehemence, “Get off the track!” Why would you do that? Why would you be adamant about it? Could it be because you saw that they were going to die? If you’ve experienced any kind of vehemence from a Christian, perhaps that is the reason. They were afraid for your soul. And my long-winded letters here are because I care for your soul. George, do you know where you will go when this life is over? I nearly died of cancer, and I finally beat it with a vitamin (believe it or not, but it’s true). Now, I tell everyone about this vitamin B17 (a.k.a. Laetrile) because I don’t want people to die. Without Christ, we are going to die, and it’s our choice. We have to choose whether or not we’re going get off the track with the oncoming train.

      I’d much rather be free and live under a kind and loving God who loves ALL mankind, so much so, he was willing to sacrifice His only son to save them (I wouldn’t sacrifice my children for even the greatest of individuals; and yet God did this while we were messed up creeps). Do you have children, George? Do you know someone who does? Would you sacrifice them, or even just one of them, for an idiot who could care less? Or would you be willing to sacrifice one, just one, for the Queen of England? It would be a lot easier to say, “Take me and not my child.” (I’m a mother of four, and after becoming a mother, I understand the depth of His sacrifice better than I ever did before.) But God didn’t do that. Instead, He sacrificed His child for all of mankind. For you, and for me, and He did it for everyone who is wiling to come to Him in obedience. That obedience is not about judging others or being dictators. It’s about telling everyone the Good News and the joy they can have if they simply take God up on His offer. I don’t know how anyone can live without that hope and promise of a better life when this life is over. I’m a cancer survivor, and it was by His promises that I had the courage to stand on death’s door more than once without fear. We’re all one day going to die, every stinkin’ one of us. The question is, do you want to come back out of that grave or stay there for eternity? It’s your choice. And what an amazing freedom we’ve been granted. God allows us all to make that “choice.” It’s not dictatorship at all. When we choose for Him, He is the ultimate Father of mercies, a Father who cares enough to reach down into the pits of hell to snatch us out of the fire so we can be with Him in His eternal glory. I don’t deserve that kind of love anymore than the next guy. But God is offering it. It’s up to us to take it.

      That’s what the church is all about, George. That’s what it’s all about.

      Blessings,

      Sandi

  6. Hi Sandi
    I’m not an expert on the chaplaincy program in schools by any means. I may be wrong but I suspect they are unpaid but see it as a way for the church to stay visible in an increasingly secular school system.

    As I am a “non-believer” I’m afraid I might have to disappoint you but I reject all notions of ‘sin’ especially any requiring a lifetime of atonement in the vain hope of a mythical afterlife. I think once we’re gone, we’re gone and that’s why I sometimes get frustrated seeing so much time and energy being wasted worrying about ‘absentee sky wizards’ when there is so much the human spirit is capable of achieving right here, right now if we just took time out from excluding each other based on race, gender, creed or sexual orientation.

    Apologies again if I my comments offend. These are my beliefs. You seem like a rational believer in Christ who takes solace from that belief and I am pleased they helped sustain you through your illness and I’m sure, you would never intentionally shun a person based on any of the previously mentioned divisions.

    Respectfully,
    George.

    1. George,

      Thank you for your honest and sincere reply. That’s one thing I miss about Europeans. They don’t tiptoe around feelings. They say it like it is. There’s a word in Dutch: brutaal. It means just what it looks like: brutal. They use that word in reference to how they speak. They’re very open and honest, and sometimes it feels “brutal.” It was difficult to get used to in the beginning, but I’ve come to greatly appreciate it. You always know where you stand, and you don’t have to play games trying to figure out what the person “really means.”

      As a Christian, I would never shun anyone based on race, gender, creed, or sexual orientation. I grew up with two moms, and my non-biological mom is more of a mother to me than my biological mom. I have several aunts who are married to the same sex. I didn’t grow up in the church, so I know there are a lot of sincere believers out there who just need to be taught “the Way” more accurately. Anyway, Jesus died for every one of us, so it’s not my place to walk around with my nose in the air.

      I also knew you were/are a non-believer, but I thought it wouldn’t hurt to try. My stepdad was a hardcore atheist, and he died in 2012 of the same cancer I had. He was also a non-believer, a stanch non-believer, and he said Christians were “Santa Clause believers.” So, you sound a lot like him, to be honest. All I can say is, he’s a believer now, and now it’s too late for him. It’s still not too late for you.

      Good chatting with you, George.

      Sandi

  7. What this issue – rightly or wrongly (rightly in my view) boiled down to were employment issues.
    The missionaries were being left to take whole classes for full days by the primary teachers. Actions that, no matter who had been voluntarily taking lessons in place of teachers, work to devalue the teacher role and meant that very little of the main curriculum was being taught.
    I am a union man, here in Scotand. I also consider myself to be very familiar and enacter of Jesus’ philosophy. In my socialist politics i always despised full blown Communism and knew that Jesus was, at heart a social egaliterian. Look what he did to moneylenders and how he shared his bread with the outcasts of society.
    The teachers in Scotland devalued theior own role and that can create rot when it comes time for negotiation with local government – why increase pay if volunteers can be got for free?
    Anti-religious commentators have seized this with relish, in fact there are people on both sides who have overreacted – but it was a work issue that saw the teachers lose their jobs and the missionaries removed from the school.

Reaction?