No shining tinsel in the stall
No Christmas wreaths upon the wall
No lights nor tree, no singing stranger
Just a small babe in a manger
No decorations in the stable
No plump turkey on the table
No moist pudding or Christmas cake
But a babe who came for our sake
No ringing bells in church steeple
No celebration, nor laughing people
No stockings, no baubles on the tree
Just a babe who was from eternity
No pomp offered to the King
No rich palace for Him to live in
Just a manger and a stall
For the only Precious Gift of all
No religious leader came to Him;
But shepherds and some wise kings.
A lowly place of manger and stall
For the only Precious Gift of all
Saturday 31 October 2009
There is a Time
Christmas is a time for giving
A time for self-sacrifice
A time of fun and laughter
A joyous time for living
Christmas is a time for sharing
A time for songs
A time for eating and drinking
A time to start caring
Christmas is a time for family and friends
A time for peace
A time for lights
A time we wished there was no end
Christmas is a time we should remember
A time to reflect
A time to recall!
It's not just another day in December
In the fulness of time God sent
His only begotten Son
Who lived a life we could not
To Calvary He went
In the fulness of time He will come again
From the place beyond our comprehension
He will take His redeemed
To the place where there is no time
A time for self-sacrifice
A time of fun and laughter
A joyous time for living
Christmas is a time for sharing
A time for songs
A time for eating and drinking
A time to start caring
Christmas is a time for family and friends
A time for peace
A time for lights
A time we wished there was no end
Christmas is a time we should remember
A time to reflect
A time to recall!
It's not just another day in December
In the fulness of time God sent
His only begotten Son
Who lived a life we could not
To Calvary He went
In the fulness of time He will come again
From the place beyond our comprehension
He will take His redeemed
To the place where there is no time
The Night Before Christmas - Long
Twas the night before Christmas
And I think we can bet
That millions of people
Have gone into debt,
To buy special presents
Some big and some small
Some will be accepted
Some not at all
With excesses of food
Fridges, with beer
Other alcohol too.
Children, excited
Won’t go to bed late
They try to be good
And make everyone a mate
Nothing will change,
As they all grow –
Cos Christmas is about goodwill
As you know.
So if someone knocks over
Your drink in the bar
You brush it aside
Just for one day a year
Have you ever stopped and wondered
Why it’s not the same
As other celebrations
You could care to name?
Is it really about
A fat man in red coat,
Lights, decorations
And carnival floats?
Is it about getting yourself
Into debt,
Getting uptight
And starting to fret?
Have I bought this
And have I bought that?
I mustn’t forget
My dear pet cat?
There’s far more to Christmas
Than you could ever expect;
A man came to pay for
Your life full of debt.
He came to this earth
To live a life we could not,
He paid for our sins
When He went to the cross
He was born in a stable
A manger for a crib
He taught many people
How to love and forgive.
He even loves those
Who mock Him and tease
And try to destroy Him
By the lives that they lead!
For 2,000 years man has
Tried to destroy
Every man, every woman
Every girl, every boy
Who truly believes
That He is the One
Who is their Redeemer
And God’s only Son!
But for 2,000 years
The church still goes on,
No liberal, no commie
Can destroy God’s Son.
So whether you believe
He came to save YOU!
Have a merry CHRISTmas
And happy New Year too!
Written by me 17th December 2008
Friday 30 October 2009
The Shack
Young, William. P, The Shack, Hodder and Stoughton, 2007
A Synopsis of the Story:
Mackenzie (Mack), the main character, had a bad childhood where his father was externally religious but was an alcoholic, wife beater and strict disciplinarian. He left home at the age of 13 taking some of his mother's perfume with him. He went to church, but had a love/hate relationship with religion and suspected God of being a brooding, distant and aloof person. His wife, Nan had a deep relationship with God. They both had 5 children. When Mack's wife refers to God she calls Him Papa!
Mack took 3 of his children camping and on the last day the older 2 went canoeing (they were teenagers) while Missy, the youngest, stayed with Mack and coloured in her book. After a while Mack heard some commotion from the lake where his children were canoeing, they had capsized and his son was having difficulty coming to the surface, so Mack left Missie colouring while he went to rescue him. When he got back from the rescue, Missy was missing and on her colouring book, a pin with a ladybird on it had been left there. When the police were called they told Mack that there had been a child serial kidnapper/killer and the ladybird was his signature. Mack was weighed down by the disappearance of his daughter and called it The Great Sadness. When the police started searching for Missy they came to an old shack and found Missy's red dress and a blood stain near the fireplace, but there was no sign of the little girl!
Mack was alone in his house a while after the incident had occured. He went to the post box and found a note in there which asked him to go to The Shack for a particular weekend. It was signed Papa. As the story title implies, Mack decided to go to the shack - for this he borrowed his friend's 4 wheel drive as the shack was in a remote place. Mack decided not to tell Nan [his wife] about his trip! She was going to be away that particular weekend.
He drove to the shack that specific Friday evening and met the 'trinity' there and went through different experiences with them - much was revealed about his life as he spent time with each member of the 'trinity'. It was going to be a long journey of reconciliation with himself, God and his family.
In the final chapters we see Mack being reconciled with his father and also being taken to the place where Missy's body had been dumped! There was closure in his life (or so it seemed) until the final chapter where you find out that Mack had been involved in a car accident on the Friday night and never got to the shack. He wakes up in hospital. After recouperating he took the sheriff to the place where Missy's body was - it was actually there! Because of the discovery of Missy's body the authorities hunted down and caught the Ladybird Killer and also found the other little girls' bodies.
A Biblical View of the Book:
On the front cover of the book is this commendation by Eugene Peterson:
This book has the potential to do for our own generation what John Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress did for his. It's that good!
I would disagree with Peterson. John Bunyan's book showed the state of mankind and all that goes with being human - each sin is personified etc, but this book shows God in a distorted and unbiblical way, it lacks reverence towards a holy, righteous and all powerful God.
Young writes of a story Mack would tell Missy, one she particularly enjoyed hearing. Basically the story was about a young Indian girl who sacrificed her own life for the life of her love. Missy likened it to the story of Jesus who redeemed His people - it centred on a father who loved his only child and a sacrifice foretold by a prophet.
Mack talking to Missy after she had asked if God was being mean: Sweetheart, Jesus didn't think his daddy was mean, He thought his daddy was full of love and loved him very much. His daddy didn't make him die. Jesus chose to die because he and his daddy love you and me and everyone in the world, he saved us from our sickness, just like the princess.
Later on in Chapter 7 the doctrine of sin is mentioned again when it was stated by one of the godhead in the story: I don't need to punish people for sin. Sin is its own punishment, devouring you from the inside. It's not my purpose to punish it; it's my joy to cure it. The problem with this line of thinking is - it is implied hell does not exist but according t0 Scripture hell does exist and it exists as a punishment for our sin - The wages of sin is death says Paul in Romans 6:23. Jesus became sin to punish sin in our place. Sin is more than a sickness which affects us all - it deserves the death penalty. There is a subtlety here in the fact that 'god' said it. If we want a true picture of God we should go to the Bible and not take it from a mere man who has his own view of the Trinity.
2 Timothy 3:16, 17
All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.
The Trinity described in The Shack
Mack does go to the Shack and is greeted by:
Papa - an African-American woman who smelled of his mother's perfume [the Father]
Sarayu - a small asian woman whose hair blew as if in a wind. At first meeting she was collecting tears in a bottle. [the Holy Spirit] (Sarayu is in fact a river which flows through the Indian State of Uttar Pradesh. Sarayu is considered sacred in Hinduism!!
Jesus - Middle Eastern and dressed as a workman with a tool belt and gloves - he was covered in sawdust. [the Son]
Later on Sophia appears she is a personification of God's wisdom.
The problem with this picture is - in the Bible, God is never portrayed as a woman, He is always seen as a male, Father or Son. Although there are verses in Scripture, for example - in Matthew 23:37b Jesus says: How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing! Jesus isn't saying that God is a mother but is using a simile for His Father. We have to be careful not to make God someone He isn't - or else we are committing idolatry. The Bible tells us who God in His Three Persons is and how He deals with humanity.
God is holy and throughout this book in many places, the author is showing God as being vulgar and crass - in many of his descriptions and the way the characters interact with themselves and with Mack shows a lack of reverence and understanding of who he is before a holy, righteous and just God. Some examples are as follows:
Jesus and Papa were cooking in the kitchen of the Shack in one of the chapters and Jesus drops a bowl of batter then on p. 105 Papa says "You just can't get good help around here." Although it was meant to be an ice breaker for the situation - a) Jesus is perfect and wouldn't have dropped a bowl of batter unless He was trying to use it as a pointer to something more godly and b) God in all His holiness would not have said this about His Son, whom He loved with a love we cannot understand. Hebrews 1:8,9 shows us the love God has for His Son:
But to the Son He says:
“ Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;
A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.
You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness;
Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You
With the oil of gladness more than Your companions.”
Later on p 121 after Mack had been telling Papa something he [Papa] says "...Frankly I haven't a clue what this man is talking about." God is omniscient and knows all things - because He created all things.
On p122 - "Hierachy makes no sense among us." This contradicts 1 Corinthians 11:3 where the apostle Paul writes -
But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.
How can this be? - we don't know! If we could fathom an Almighty Creating God, then we would be gods ourselves, but God is infintely above us, we cannot understand Him fully.
The author is trying to explain the Trinity in such a way that people can understand Him, but in doing so, has lost sight of who God really is!
The author may have had good intentions in writing this book, but unfortunately you will not find the God of the Bible in here. Young has tried to make God human and in that he has succeeded, but he seems to have forgotten that God is holy, righteous, just and commands us to be reverent to Him (when the word Fear God is used in the Bible - it's not a trembling fear, but we come to God in reverence). In this book the god figures are so human that they are not God. Even the Jesus character is human in a sinful way, not in a divine way.
On p191 Mack asks - "... What exactly did Jesus accomplish by dying?" [Papa answers] ..."Oh," she waved her hand. "Nothing much. Just the substance of everything that love purposed from before the foundations of Creation," Papa stated matter of factly, then turned and smiled. Nothing much?? Jesus came to redeem a people for Himself - that they may have eternal life. He came from glory to an earth which hated and despised Him!
p192 - Papa says - "Honey, you asked me what Jesus accomplished on the cross; so now listen to me carefully: through his death and resurrection, I am now fully reconciled to the world." Does that imply that all will be saved? That's not what the Bible tells us! Papa goes on explaining then as he/she is going away mutters, "Men! such idiots sometimes." Psalm 103:14 For He knows our frame;He remembers that we are dust.
After spending time with Sarayu Mack asks if he will see her again to which she replies - "Of course you might see me in a piece of art, or music, or silence, or through people, or in Creation, or in your joy and sorrow." Sounds like pantheism! The heavens declare the glory of God says the Psalmist but they aren't God, so perhaps Young is referring to this concept in his book, if not then is he pantheistic? We may argue against using semantics, but words can subtley change the meaning or doctrine of something - we can see God through things, but this is different to seeing Him in things.
There is no respect for God in this book - in one part Mack uses the word cr*p on p175 while talking to Jesus, if he was in the presence of the Risen Saviour - he would fall on his face in reverence as the apostle John did at the beginning of Revelation, or Daniel did in his book, or Isaiah in Isaiah 6. All three Persons of the Trinity are ONE God so each commands reverence and respect from humans.
On p176 after walking on water, Mack and Jesus saw a fish. Jesus said that he had been trying to catch the fish for weeks. Mack watched, amazed, as Jesus started to dodge this way and that. Jesus is portrayed as a clumsy idiot - almost like the youngest child in a family - one to be pushed around. He is the Risen Saviour who is seated at the right hand of the Father in glory, not some little kid who behaves in a silly manner.
Eventually Papa changes into a male after Mack had been reconciled with his father, but Sarayu stayed female.
If people want to read this book, then the advice I was given - to read it with my Bible open - is good . I wouldn't recommend a new Christian to read it as it is full of a lot of doctrinal/Biblical error.
A Synopsis of the Story:
Mackenzie (Mack), the main character, had a bad childhood where his father was externally religious but was an alcoholic, wife beater and strict disciplinarian. He left home at the age of 13 taking some of his mother's perfume with him. He went to church, but had a love/hate relationship with religion and suspected God of being a brooding, distant and aloof person. His wife, Nan had a deep relationship with God. They both had 5 children. When Mack's wife refers to God she calls Him Papa!
Mack took 3 of his children camping and on the last day the older 2 went canoeing (they were teenagers) while Missy, the youngest, stayed with Mack and coloured in her book. After a while Mack heard some commotion from the lake where his children were canoeing, they had capsized and his son was having difficulty coming to the surface, so Mack left Missie colouring while he went to rescue him. When he got back from the rescue, Missy was missing and on her colouring book, a pin with a ladybird on it had been left there. When the police were called they told Mack that there had been a child serial kidnapper/killer and the ladybird was his signature. Mack was weighed down by the disappearance of his daughter and called it The Great Sadness. When the police started searching for Missy they came to an old shack and found Missy's red dress and a blood stain near the fireplace, but there was no sign of the little girl!
Mack was alone in his house a while after the incident had occured. He went to the post box and found a note in there which asked him to go to The Shack for a particular weekend. It was signed Papa. As the story title implies, Mack decided to go to the shack - for this he borrowed his friend's 4 wheel drive as the shack was in a remote place. Mack decided not to tell Nan [his wife] about his trip! She was going to be away that particular weekend.
He drove to the shack that specific Friday evening and met the 'trinity' there and went through different experiences with them - much was revealed about his life as he spent time with each member of the 'trinity'. It was going to be a long journey of reconciliation with himself, God and his family.
In the final chapters we see Mack being reconciled with his father and also being taken to the place where Missy's body had been dumped! There was closure in his life (or so it seemed) until the final chapter where you find out that Mack had been involved in a car accident on the Friday night and never got to the shack. He wakes up in hospital. After recouperating he took the sheriff to the place where Missy's body was - it was actually there! Because of the discovery of Missy's body the authorities hunted down and caught the Ladybird Killer and also found the other little girls' bodies.
A Biblical View of the Book:
On the front cover of the book is this commendation by Eugene Peterson:
This book has the potential to do for our own generation what John Bunyan's Pilgrim's Progress did for his. It's that good!
I would disagree with Peterson. John Bunyan's book showed the state of mankind and all that goes with being human - each sin is personified etc, but this book shows God in a distorted and unbiblical way, it lacks reverence towards a holy, righteous and all powerful God.
Young writes of a story Mack would tell Missy, one she particularly enjoyed hearing. Basically the story was about a young Indian girl who sacrificed her own life for the life of her love. Missy likened it to the story of Jesus who redeemed His people - it centred on a father who loved his only child and a sacrifice foretold by a prophet.
Mack talking to Missy after she had asked if God was being mean: Sweetheart, Jesus didn't think his daddy was mean, He thought his daddy was full of love and loved him very much. His daddy didn't make him die. Jesus chose to die because he and his daddy love you and me and everyone in the world, he saved us from our sickness, just like the princess.
Later on in Chapter 7 the doctrine of sin is mentioned again when it was stated by one of the godhead in the story: I don't need to punish people for sin. Sin is its own punishment, devouring you from the inside. It's not my purpose to punish it; it's my joy to cure it. The problem with this line of thinking is - it is implied hell does not exist but according t0 Scripture hell does exist and it exists as a punishment for our sin - The wages of sin is death says Paul in Romans 6:23. Jesus became sin to punish sin in our place. Sin is more than a sickness which affects us all - it deserves the death penalty. There is a subtlety here in the fact that 'god' said it. If we want a true picture of God we should go to the Bible and not take it from a mere man who has his own view of the Trinity.
2 Timothy 3:16, 17
All Scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness, that the man of God may be complete, thoroughly equipped for every good work.
The Trinity described in The Shack
Mack does go to the Shack and is greeted by:
Papa - an African-American woman who smelled of his mother's perfume [the Father]
Sarayu - a small asian woman whose hair blew as if in a wind. At first meeting she was collecting tears in a bottle. [the Holy Spirit] (Sarayu is in fact a river which flows through the Indian State of Uttar Pradesh. Sarayu is considered sacred in Hinduism!!
Jesus - Middle Eastern and dressed as a workman with a tool belt and gloves - he was covered in sawdust. [the Son]
Later on Sophia appears she is a personification of God's wisdom.
The problem with this picture is - in the Bible, God is never portrayed as a woman, He is always seen as a male, Father or Son. Although there are verses in Scripture, for example - in Matthew 23:37b Jesus says: How often I wanted to gather your children together, as a hen gathers her chicks under her wings, but you were not willing! Jesus isn't saying that God is a mother but is using a simile for His Father. We have to be careful not to make God someone He isn't - or else we are committing idolatry. The Bible tells us who God in His Three Persons is and how He deals with humanity.
God is holy and throughout this book in many places, the author is showing God as being vulgar and crass - in many of his descriptions and the way the characters interact with themselves and with Mack shows a lack of reverence and understanding of who he is before a holy, righteous and just God. Some examples are as follows:
Jesus and Papa were cooking in the kitchen of the Shack in one of the chapters and Jesus drops a bowl of batter then on p. 105 Papa says "You just can't get good help around here." Although it was meant to be an ice breaker for the situation - a) Jesus is perfect and wouldn't have dropped a bowl of batter unless He was trying to use it as a pointer to something more godly and b) God in all His holiness would not have said this about His Son, whom He loved with a love we cannot understand. Hebrews 1:8,9 shows us the love God has for His Son:
But to the Son He says:
“ Your throne, O God, is forever and ever;
A scepter of righteousness is the scepter of Your kingdom.
You have loved righteousness and hated lawlessness;
Therefore God, Your God, has anointed You
With the oil of gladness more than Your companions.”
Later on p 121 after Mack had been telling Papa something he [Papa] says "...Frankly I haven't a clue what this man is talking about." God is omniscient and knows all things - because He created all things.
On p122 - "Hierachy makes no sense among us." This contradicts 1 Corinthians 11:3 where the apostle Paul writes -
But I want you to know that the head of every man is Christ, the head of woman is man, and the head of Christ is God.
How can this be? - we don't know! If we could fathom an Almighty Creating God, then we would be gods ourselves, but God is infintely above us, we cannot understand Him fully.
The author is trying to explain the Trinity in such a way that people can understand Him, but in doing so, has lost sight of who God really is!
The author may have had good intentions in writing this book, but unfortunately you will not find the God of the Bible in here. Young has tried to make God human and in that he has succeeded, but he seems to have forgotten that God is holy, righteous, just and commands us to be reverent to Him (when the word Fear God is used in the Bible - it's not a trembling fear, but we come to God in reverence). In this book the god figures are so human that they are not God. Even the Jesus character is human in a sinful way, not in a divine way.
On p191 Mack asks - "... What exactly did Jesus accomplish by dying?" [Papa answers] ..."Oh," she waved her hand. "Nothing much. Just the substance of everything that love purposed from before the foundations of Creation," Papa stated matter of factly, then turned and smiled. Nothing much?? Jesus came to redeem a people for Himself - that they may have eternal life. He came from glory to an earth which hated and despised Him!
p192 - Papa says - "Honey, you asked me what Jesus accomplished on the cross; so now listen to me carefully: through his death and resurrection, I am now fully reconciled to the world." Does that imply that all will be saved? That's not what the Bible tells us! Papa goes on explaining then as he/she is going away mutters, "Men! such idiots sometimes." Psalm 103:14 For He knows our frame;He remembers that we are dust.
After spending time with Sarayu Mack asks if he will see her again to which she replies - "Of course you might see me in a piece of art, or music, or silence, or through people, or in Creation, or in your joy and sorrow." Sounds like pantheism! The heavens declare the glory of God says the Psalmist but they aren't God, so perhaps Young is referring to this concept in his book, if not then is he pantheistic? We may argue against using semantics, but words can subtley change the meaning or doctrine of something - we can see God through things, but this is different to seeing Him in things.
There is no respect for God in this book - in one part Mack uses the word cr*p on p175 while talking to Jesus, if he was in the presence of the Risen Saviour - he would fall on his face in reverence as the apostle John did at the beginning of Revelation, or Daniel did in his book, or Isaiah in Isaiah 6. All three Persons of the Trinity are ONE God so each commands reverence and respect from humans.
On p176 after walking on water, Mack and Jesus saw a fish. Jesus said that he had been trying to catch the fish for weeks. Mack watched, amazed, as Jesus started to dodge this way and that. Jesus is portrayed as a clumsy idiot - almost like the youngest child in a family - one to be pushed around. He is the Risen Saviour who is seated at the right hand of the Father in glory, not some little kid who behaves in a silly manner.
Eventually Papa changes into a male after Mack had been reconciled with his father, but Sarayu stayed female.
If people want to read this book, then the advice I was given - to read it with my Bible open - is good . I wouldn't recommend a new Christian to read it as it is full of a lot of doctrinal/Biblical error.
Saturday 24 October 2009
American Chocolate Brownies
Ingredients:
Set oven @ Gas 4 (180C;350F)
Method:
DO NOT OVERBAKE!
- 2oz butter
- 1oz cocoa
- 2 eggs, well beaten
- 2oz walnuts, chopped
- 4oz butter
- 6oz caster sugar
- 2oz plain flour
Set oven @ Gas 4 (180C;350F)
Method:
- Melt the 2oz butter and add 1oz cocoa. mix welland put to one side
- Cream 4oz butter and 6oz caster sugar, add the 2 eggs gradually, beat well
- Add 2oz flour, 2oz walnuts and cocoa mixture.
- Put into a 7" greased square cake tin and bake until firm (approx 45 mins)
- Leave to cool in the tin, when cold turn out and cut into small squares
- Sprinkle with caster sugar and top with walnuts
- Store in an airtight tin
DO NOT OVERBAKE!
Friday 23 October 2009
Welsh Cakes
Recipe for Welsh Cakes [picau ar y maen]:
8oz flour
4oz butter
3oz caster sugar
2oz currants
1 teaspoon baking powder
1/4 teaspoon mixed spice
2 tablespoons milk
pinch salt
1 egg
Sift the flour, baking powder, spice and salt together. Rub in the butter until the mixture looks like breadcrumbs. Add the sugar and fruit. Beat the egg. Add with enough milk to make a firm paste. Roll out on a floured board to a thickness of 1/4 inch and cut into 2 inch rounds. Grease a griddle or electric hot plate or thick frying pan. Cook the cakes on the griddle over a gentle heat for about three minutes on each side or until golden brown. Cool and sprinkle with caster sugar. Serve alone or with butter.
8oz flour
4oz butter
3oz caster sugar
2oz currants
1 teaspoon baking powder
1/4 teaspoon mixed spice
2 tablespoons milk
pinch salt
1 egg
Sift the flour, baking powder, spice and salt together. Rub in the butter until the mixture looks like breadcrumbs. Add the sugar and fruit. Beat the egg. Add with enough milk to make a firm paste. Roll out on a floured board to a thickness of 1/4 inch and cut into 2 inch rounds. Grease a griddle or electric hot plate or thick frying pan. Cook the cakes on the griddle over a gentle heat for about three minutes on each side or until golden brown. Cool and sprinkle with caster sugar. Serve alone or with butter.
Tuesday 20 October 2009
CHOCOLATE BRANDY TRUFFLES
Ingredients:
125g (4oz) plain chocolate
30ml (2 tablespoons) brandy
40g (1.5oz) margarine
50g (2oz) icing sugar, sieved
50g (2oz) ground almonds
30ml (2 tablespoons) chocolate vermicelli
30ml (2 tablespoons) cocoa powder
Method:
125g (4oz) plain chocolate
30ml (2 tablespoons) brandy
40g (1.5oz) margarine
50g (2oz) icing sugar, sieved
50g (2oz) ground almonds
30ml (2 tablespoons) chocolate vermicelli
30ml (2 tablespoons) cocoa powder
Method:
- Break the chocolate into a bowl, place over a pan of hot water and leave to melt (do not let any water get into the chocolate!)
- Add the brandy and mix well into the melted chocolate
- Take off heat and stir in the margarine, icing sugar and almonds until well blended
- Leave the mixture in a cool place until it is firm enough to handle
- Divide the mixture into 16 equal pieces and roll into balls with your hands
- Roll half of the truffles in chocolate vermicelli and half in cocoa powder
- Place in paper cases
CHOCOLATE TRUFFLES
Ingredients:
100g digestive biscuits
2 tablespoons coconut
2 tablespoons drinking chocolate
50g margarine
small tin condensed milk
chocolate vermicelli
Method:
100g digestive biscuits
2 tablespoons coconut
2 tablespoons drinking chocolate
50g margarine
small tin condensed milk
chocolate vermicelli
Method:
- Crush biscuits finely and mix with chocolate and coconut
- Melt margarine over low heat; add condensed milk and stir together until completely melted (do not let milk turn brown.
- Mix in the dry ingredients, leave until slightly cold, then roll into balls or logs and toss in chocolate vermicelli.
Monday 19 October 2009
MARZIPAN
Ingredients:
1 egg
1 egg white
200g/7oz icing sugar, sifted
200g/7oz ground almonds
5ml/1 teaspoon lemon juice
few drops almond essence
Method:
Whisk the egg, egg white and icing sugar in a heat proof bowl over hot water until thick and creamy. Add the ground almonds with the lemon juice and almond essence and mix well. Work in more lemon juice if necessary. When cool enough to handle, knead lightly until smooth.
Can be used in the Stollen -
http://homeeducatingmumof2.blogspot.com/2009/10/christmas-stollen-recipe.html
1 egg
1 egg white
200g/7oz icing sugar, sifted
200g/7oz ground almonds
5ml/1 teaspoon lemon juice
few drops almond essence
Method:
Whisk the egg, egg white and icing sugar in a heat proof bowl over hot water until thick and creamy. Add the ground almonds with the lemon juice and almond essence and mix well. Work in more lemon juice if necessary. When cool enough to handle, knead lightly until smooth.
Can be used in the Stollen -
http://homeeducatingmumof2.blogspot.com/2009/10/christmas-stollen-recipe.html
STOLLEN
Ingredients:
375g (12oz) strong white bread flour
1/4 level teaspoon of salt
2 level teaspoons easy blend yeast
150ml (1/4 pint) milk
75g (3oz) softened butter
50g (2oz) caster sugar
1 egg, size 3
50g (2oz) currants
50g (2oz) raisins
125g (4oz) sultanas
25g (1oz) mixed peel
25g (1oz) glace cherries, rinsed, dried and quartered
25g (1oz) chopped walnuts
175g (6oz) marzipan
125g (4oz) icing sugar
1 tablespoon fresh lemon juice
To decorate: Candied peel or mixed candied fruit
Method:
1. Sift the flour and salt into a bowl and place it in a warm oven for 10 minutes to warm slightly, then stir in the yeast and mix well.
2. Warm the milk and butter together, add the caster sugar, stir to dissolve, whisk the egg into the liquid, check it is not too warm then pour it onto the flour.
3. Mix until the mixture leaves the sides of the bowl cleanly. Now add the fruits, cherries and walnuts.
4. Turn the dough out onto a board and knead it for 4-5 minutes until the fruits are evenly distributed. Return it to the bowl, cover with clingfilm and leave it in a warm place until doubled in size.
5. When it is ready turn it out onto the board once more and knead it for another minute then lightly roll it into an oblong about 35cm x 20cm (14 x 8 inches)
6. Roll the marzipan into a sausage shape approx. 32cm (13 inches) long and lay it in the middle of the dough, then roll the dough around it, squeeze the ends to neaten the shape and place it on a lightly oiled baking sheet until it has doubled in size.
7. Lay a damp clean tea cloth over the dough to prevent it forming a skin and when it is well risen bake it in a pre-heated oven 190C, 375F, Gas Mark 5 for 35 minutes.
8. Allow it to cool on the baking sheet for 5 minutes before lifting onto a cooling rack. Meanwhile make the icing by sifting the sugar into a bowl and mix with just enough lemon juice to form a stiff icing. Spread this along the top of the stollen while it is still warm. Decorate with candied peel or mixed candied fruit.
Why not make your own marzipan for the middle
http://homeeducatingmumof2.blogspot.com/2009/10/marzipan.html
375g (12oz) strong white bread flour
1/4 level teaspoon of salt
2 level teaspoons easy blend yeast
150ml (1/4 pint) milk
75g (3oz) softened butter
50g (2oz) caster sugar
1 egg, size 3
50g (2oz) currants
50g (2oz) raisins
125g (4oz) sultanas
25g (1oz) mixed peel
25g (1oz) glace cherries, rinsed, dried and quartered
25g (1oz) chopped walnuts
175g (6oz) marzipan
125g (4oz) icing sugar
1 tablespoon fresh lemon juice
To decorate: Candied peel or mixed candied fruit
Method:
1. Sift the flour and salt into a bowl and place it in a warm oven for 10 minutes to warm slightly, then stir in the yeast and mix well.
2. Warm the milk and butter together, add the caster sugar, stir to dissolve, whisk the egg into the liquid, check it is not too warm then pour it onto the flour.
3. Mix until the mixture leaves the sides of the bowl cleanly. Now add the fruits, cherries and walnuts.
4. Turn the dough out onto a board and knead it for 4-5 minutes until the fruits are evenly distributed. Return it to the bowl, cover with clingfilm and leave it in a warm place until doubled in size.
5. When it is ready turn it out onto the board once more and knead it for another minute then lightly roll it into an oblong about 35cm x 20cm (14 x 8 inches)
6. Roll the marzipan into a sausage shape approx. 32cm (13 inches) long and lay it in the middle of the dough, then roll the dough around it, squeeze the ends to neaten the shape and place it on a lightly oiled baking sheet until it has doubled in size.
7. Lay a damp clean tea cloth over the dough to prevent it forming a skin and when it is well risen bake it in a pre-heated oven 190C, 375F, Gas Mark 5 for 35 minutes.
8. Allow it to cool on the baking sheet for 5 minutes before lifting onto a cooling rack. Meanwhile make the icing by sifting the sugar into a bowl and mix with just enough lemon juice to form a stiff icing. Spread this along the top of the stollen while it is still warm. Decorate with candied peel or mixed candied fruit.
Why not make your own marzipan for the middle
http://homeeducatingmumof2.blogspot.com/2009/10/marzipan.html
Saturday 17 October 2009
10 Bible verses promoting Christ-centred Education
1. Deuteronomy 6:4-7 - teaching your children is the parents' responsibility and the education process is continuous throughout the day. Each subject can be taught with Christ being at the heart of it
2. Psalm 1:1 - want to be blessed? Want your children to be blessed - this verse shows you how it is possible. School smock God and scorn Him and Christ.
3. Jeremiah 10:2 - the KJV says heathens rather than gentiles. The meaning is the same - all of us are not to take our lead from the gentiles/heathens/pagans, but rather from God alone
4. Romans 12:2 - we are to be transformed by the renewing of our minds- this is done by meditating upon Christ and His word
5. Colossians 1:16 - ALL things were created by Him and for Him so all subjects promote this verse by teaching all subjects from a Christ centred perspective!
6. Ephesians 6:12 - we are in a battle so through teaching every subject from a Christ-centred perspective our children learn how to use their weapons effectively from the word of God.
7. 1 Thessalonians 5: 22 - by having a Christ-centred education a child does not need to worry about compromise or coming across anything evil within the curriculum.
8. Exodus 20:3 [Ephesians 4:6; Acts 4:12] - A child doesn't have to worry about their education saying that all paths lead to God and therefore breaking the first commandment.
9. Ephesians 5:6 - do we really want our children to be deceived by vain words from the NC?
10. 2 Corinthians 6:17 - says it all - we have to be seperate from the world. Yes we're in it but we're not of it and the state system teaches children how to think and behave like a secular humanist who sets up man as a god and mocks Jehovah and Yeshua!
I've just picked out 10 but there are many more...
2. Psalm 1:1 - want to be blessed? Want your children to be blessed - this verse shows you how it is possible. School smock God and scorn Him and Christ.
3. Jeremiah 10:2 - the KJV says heathens rather than gentiles. The meaning is the same - all of us are not to take our lead from the gentiles/heathens/pagans, but rather from God alone
4. Romans 12:2 - we are to be transformed by the renewing of our minds- this is done by meditating upon Christ and His word
5. Colossians 1:16 - ALL things were created by Him and for Him so all subjects promote this verse by teaching all subjects from a Christ centred perspective!
6. Ephesians 6:12 - we are in a battle so through teaching every subject from a Christ-centred perspective our children learn how to use their weapons effectively from the word of God.
7. 1 Thessalonians 5: 22 - by having a Christ-centred education a child does not need to worry about compromise or coming across anything evil within the curriculum.
8. Exodus 20:3 [Ephesians 4:6; Acts 4:12] - A child doesn't have to worry about their education saying that all paths lead to God and therefore breaking the first commandment.
9. Ephesians 5:6 - do we really want our children to be deceived by vain words from the NC?
10. 2 Corinthians 6:17 - says it all - we have to be seperate from the world. Yes we're in it but we're not of it and the state system teaches children how to think and behave like a secular humanist who sets up man as a god and mocks Jehovah and Yeshua!
I've just picked out 10 but there are many more...
Thursday 15 October 2009
My eldest son describing natural selection
This is my eldest son describing natural selection by using a simple genetics table. He loves science and reads a lot of things on the subject!
Registering home educated children...
Comments from a BBC article - http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8306730.stm (please see article to get the full context)
>Home education lobby groups told a committee of MPs that a register would lead to interference by officials. <>But the Association of Directors of Children's Services told the committee of MPs that a register was necessary to ensure children's safety.<>There is currently no way of measuring how many children are educated at home.<>A review of home education in England which was published in June suggests home educating families in England should have to register annually and demonstrate they are providing a suitable education.<> Children, Schools and Families Committee< style="font-weight: bold;">schools comes before families in the title - a deliberate attempt to make schools appear more important than families one must ask...?
>"It seems strange that we do not know how many home educated children there are and where they are." <>Mr Shearman said the issue of children who "disappear" was a very real and important matter and a register of home educated children could help in tackling this problem.<>David Chaytor, Labour MP for Bury North, told the home education representatives at the hearing that he could not understand their reluctance to accept a register of home educated children.
>Carole Rutherford, co-founder of Autism in Mind, said parents of children with special needs, who had taken their child out of school, often had a negative experience of the local authority officials.<>Peter Traves from the Association of Directors of Children's Services told the select committee that a register of home educators was essential for children's safety.<>"We do need to know where children are and we do need the power to require people to let us know," Mr Traves said.<>"If something happens to a child... we are held directly to account.<>"We have seen recently what happens recently to directors of children' services when things go seriously wrong - it is not only sacking, it is public humiliation and it is a very serious matter.
>"The registration system should only be a light tool, not overly elaborate," he said.<
Yes, well we don't believe that for one minute! The abortion law was passed an was only supposed to be for women who were too ill (mentally or otherwise) to have children and now look how abortion is used! Nope Labour Government we don't believe you - you are sly, conniving, underhand, liars, deceitful, unwise and undiscerning!
>Home education lobby groups told a committee of MPs that a register would lead to interference by officials. <>But the Association of Directors of Children's Services told the committee of MPs that a register was necessary to ensure children's safety.<>There is currently no way of measuring how many children are educated at home.<>A review of home education in England which was published in June suggests home educating families in England should have to register annually and demonstrate they are providing a suitable education.<> Children, Schools and Families Committee< style="font-weight: bold;">schools comes before families in the title - a deliberate attempt to make schools appear more important than families one must ask...?
>"It seems strange that we do not know how many home educated children there are and where they are." <>Mr Shearman said the issue of children who "disappear" was a very real and important matter and a register of home educated children could help in tackling this problem.<>David Chaytor, Labour MP for Bury North, told the home education representatives at the hearing that he could not understand their reluctance to accept a register of home educated children.
"If you're confident about the quality of what's being done, what's the objection to registration?"<
Schools have to be registered and look at the mess they're in - even with so-called inspectors going in every so often! So registration will help home educators how?>Carole Rutherford, co-founder of Autism in Mind, said parents of children with special needs, who had taken their child out of school, often had a negative experience of the local authority officials.<>Peter Traves from the Association of Directors of Children's Services told the select committee that a register of home educators was essential for children's safety.<>"We do need to know where children are and we do need the power to require people to let us know," Mr Traves said.<>"If something happens to a child... we are held directly to account.<>"We have seen recently what happens recently to directors of children' services when things go seriously wrong - it is not only sacking, it is public humiliation and it is a very serious matter.
"I'm held to account for children's welfare, and I think not to know there are children living and being educated in my area is actually unreasonable if I'm being held to that account."<
That was a totally different case (if he's talking about Baby P) the SS knew that child was being abused and yet did nothing to prevent it! Many cases have found SS to be irresponsible in their judgements and I don't know how registering children who are home educated will make them 'safer'! Safer from what one must ask...?>"The registration system should only be a light tool, not overly elaborate," he said.<
Yes, well we don't believe that for one minute! The abortion law was passed an was only supposed to be for women who were too ill (mentally or otherwise) to have children and now look how abortion is used! Nope Labour Government we don't believe you - you are sly, conniving, underhand, liars, deceitful, unwise and undiscerning!
Wednesday 14 October 2009
When the Lord Speaks and The Virtuous Woman
When the Lord Speaks
I wanted to have a career
I didn't want to be at home
I wanted to be like other women
So all I did was moan
I wanted to have a big house
I wanted my own car
I wanted lots of holidays
To countries, near and far
But the Lord in all His tenderness
One day, took me aside
And said - "My dear daughter!"
These I can provide
"But I didn't call you to go out to work
To have your own career
I wanted you at home so that
You'd have time to draw near
"My Son is building a house for you;
A mansion in the sky
You do not need these worldly things
You're the apple of my eye
"So come dear daughter, the one I saved,
Your life is fulfilled in Me.
I will love and provide for you
Throughout eternity!"
So now I see God's plan for me
Is to serve Him in my home
I have a peace all over me
And now I never moan
Written by me (6th June 2008)
the virtuous woman
Who is this wife
So rare and precious
Who has a worth above a gem?
Who is the man
Who safely trusts her?
He is above all other men.
Who is this wife
Who does him good
Who works hard with her hands?
Who cooks with love
She brings him food
From a myriad of lands.
Who is this wife
Rising at night
To feed those in her home?
She works with love
And tenderness
With joy, and not a moan.
Who is this wife?
She sees a field
She buys it for some vines
To grow fresh grapes
So she can make
Some rare and precious wines.
Who is this wife
Who works all day?
Her lamp is lit all night
She spins and weaves;
Makes fine clothes
Her heart just shines with light.
Who is this wife
Who sees the need
Of those so poorly fed?
She reaches out
Her eager hands
To give them living bread.
Who is this wife
Who has no fear
Of snow within her breast?
Her family are
Always clothed
With the finest and the best.
Who is this wife
Of wisdom rare
Kindness upon her tongue?
Glory, praise
And honour are hers
As a song of joy is sung!
Blessed is this wife
Who works
For the glory of her Lord
Strength and virtue
She shall wear
And honour is her word
Deceitful is all
Worldly charm;
Beauty passes away!
But the one who
Serves and obeys the Lord,
A crown will wear one day.
Both poems are from my book of poetry called Pools of Living Water
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Pools-Living-Water-Carolyn-Davison/dp/0956157319/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1255552214&sr=1-1
http://www.amazon.com/Pools-Living-Water-Carolyn-Davison/dp/0956157319/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1255552214&sr=1-1
Home is where the Start is...
When we talk about home what images are conjured up in your mind? If I think about my childhood home I think of the coal fire, baths in front of it, toasting bread over the fire, my cat curled up in front of the fire. Food on the table, Christmas decorations, home made Christmas cakes and mince pies. There were good times and there were bad times, but that's family life!
Before having any children I decided that I wanted to be a SAHM (Stay At Home Mum) while they were young then when they were in school I would go out to work and have a bit of freedom. Oh dear, what a fallacy - freedom? - going out to work when you have targets to reach, sell, sell, sell, rush, rush, rush. Dealing with rude people - also dealing with wonderful people (who were far more common TBH than the rude folk). Is work really freedom for a woman? Well, I would venture to say - No, I don't think it is! I think women deceive themselves into believing they are doing the correct thing - to the detriment of their families! Rushing to get children ready for school, rushing to work for that important meeting - Oh no one of the kids has gone down with chicken pox so I'm going to have to take the day off work and I had a deadline to make! I want to be with my friends in work - where all the action is! Do schools make us peer-centred? For over 1,000 hours a year school children spend that time with their peers, learning to behave like their peers, listen to the same music, think like them, act like them - it's all they know, so when they have a family, they are 'stuck' at home with a baby - Oh no what's to do - they're not my peers! OK I am being a bit radical and extreme here because some women HAVE to go out to work and others make fantastic mothers, but I do wonder if women should take a step back and look at their busy lives and see that their children are the most important person they could ever care for (well, of course if they're married their husbands would be as well).
I want my children to see home as a place for learning, a place of security, a place of love and care where they can express their feelings, talk through things which trouble them, not be dependent just on their peers for security and guidance.
When my children were young it was fun to get out their wooden blocks and sort them into shapes, colours, sizes then by the colours of the shapes, make new shapes out of the original ones e.g. a square can be made by putting 2 same size triangles base to base etc. Read them stories and point each word out to them, do jigsaw puzzles with them and watch them get to grips with larger puzzles. Reading to them and pointing out the words to them first of all, them helping them to read the words for themselves by using phonics etc. Home is where we can all learn together - I loathed history in school, thought it was really boring, but now I am so riveted by it and geography as well! Home is where there is security for learning - if a child makes a mistake then they are not ridiculed in front of their peers, but are gently encouraged and nurtured to develop their weaknesses and help fulfill their strengths. Teachers don't know everything and cannot be expected to know everything due to time constraints whereas a parent at home, while maybe also not knowing everything can learn alongside their child and they grow together and learn together!
Now my children are older they tend to do a lot of work on their own - we use a curriculum so they work from text books - sometimes though there are times when I still have to be involved! My eldect son will tell me about the history he's learned - he reads books outside of his curriculum. My youngest is good at the piano and will entertain anyone who calls around. We laugh together and cry together.
Families are the backbone of society - without family life society degenerates into a mess - there are no rules, nothing to be guided by. Children feel dejected, unloved and turn to their peers/pop stars etc for guidance. My sons will be in a family setting for years so they are being trained up to be part of a strong, stable family, guided by their parents.
Before having any children I decided that I wanted to be a SAHM (Stay At Home Mum) while they were young then when they were in school I would go out to work and have a bit of freedom. Oh dear, what a fallacy - freedom? - going out to work when you have targets to reach, sell, sell, sell, rush, rush, rush. Dealing with rude people - also dealing with wonderful people (who were far more common TBH than the rude folk). Is work really freedom for a woman? Well, I would venture to say - No, I don't think it is! I think women deceive themselves into believing they are doing the correct thing - to the detriment of their families! Rushing to get children ready for school, rushing to work for that important meeting - Oh no one of the kids has gone down with chicken pox so I'm going to have to take the day off work and I had a deadline to make! I want to be with my friends in work - where all the action is! Do schools make us peer-centred? For over 1,000 hours a year school children spend that time with their peers, learning to behave like their peers, listen to the same music, think like them, act like them - it's all they know, so when they have a family, they are 'stuck' at home with a baby - Oh no what's to do - they're not my peers! OK I am being a bit radical and extreme here because some women HAVE to go out to work and others make fantastic mothers, but I do wonder if women should take a step back and look at their busy lives and see that their children are the most important person they could ever care for (well, of course if they're married their husbands would be as well).
I want my children to see home as a place for learning, a place of security, a place of love and care where they can express their feelings, talk through things which trouble them, not be dependent just on their peers for security and guidance.
When my children were young it was fun to get out their wooden blocks and sort them into shapes, colours, sizes then by the colours of the shapes, make new shapes out of the original ones e.g. a square can be made by putting 2 same size triangles base to base etc. Read them stories and point each word out to them, do jigsaw puzzles with them and watch them get to grips with larger puzzles. Reading to them and pointing out the words to them first of all, them helping them to read the words for themselves by using phonics etc. Home is where we can all learn together - I loathed history in school, thought it was really boring, but now I am so riveted by it and geography as well! Home is where there is security for learning - if a child makes a mistake then they are not ridiculed in front of their peers, but are gently encouraged and nurtured to develop their weaknesses and help fulfill their strengths. Teachers don't know everything and cannot be expected to know everything due to time constraints whereas a parent at home, while maybe also not knowing everything can learn alongside their child and they grow together and learn together!
Now my children are older they tend to do a lot of work on their own - we use a curriculum so they work from text books - sometimes though there are times when I still have to be involved! My eldect son will tell me about the history he's learned - he reads books outside of his curriculum. My youngest is good at the piano and will entertain anyone who calls around. We laugh together and cry together.
Families are the backbone of society - without family life society degenerates into a mess - there are no rules, nothing to be guided by. Children feel dejected, unloved and turn to their peers/pop stars etc for guidance. My sons will be in a family setting for years so they are being trained up to be part of a strong, stable family, guided by their parents.
Tuesday 13 October 2009
Well here's yet another blog
I wondered if I could blog this blog often as I have quite a few blog type things!
BTW I home educate - yep I teach my children at home which, at the moment, is perfectly legal. Why not school? We (I say we but my husband works, so really it's me at home) home educate for various reasons.
Withdrawing (two different withdrawings)
Originally we withdrew our youngest son out of school because he was moved to reception from nursery two terms too early and he couldn't cope. At the time we didn't realise he was autistic (we didn't know much about autism at the time). Looking back I can see now how he exhibited signs of it, but we were ignorant of such things. We met up with the head teacher who reassured us that every child is an individual - until we mentioned that we believed our son was moved up too early and couldn't cope with the work to which his response was - "Every other child is coping!" So much for each child being an individual. The head would also come up to me after school and say - "well your son is a bit weird isn't he?" Ummm very professional of him! The last straw came in May 2000 when we decided to withdraw him from school a week before half term - the response we got from the head? "That will be helpful because we have very important visitors coming to the school next week!" That guy sure needed a few lessons in tact and diplomacy! Well that was it - May 2000 we withdrew our youngest son from school and have never looked back! While our youngest was in school he wouldn't look at anybody, his speech and communication skills were poor and his behaviour was one of defiance. He was very withdrawn.
Changes
The changes were gradual, but they were noticable too! Our youngest started to give us eye contact and was less defiant. He began to be able to write his name and recognise words. One day while we were having lunch he turned to me and said - "Mummy I really love you!". Well, my heart could have melted - our little defiant boy who wouldn't talk to anyone, always looked at the floor could now look at me and say that! WOW progress - it was amazing! Over time he has become very sociable, he's 14 now and is trying out his 'wit' on everyone!
Objections
When we first said we were going to withdraw our son, a friend came up to us and said "I think you're doing the wrong thing!" After 6 months he had the humility to come up to me and say "I was wrong, it's the best thing you could have done!"
We still get objections and snide/poking comments off people but they are ignorant of what home education is!
Religion
A lot of people think that home educators are religious fundamentalists who want to brain-wash their children. Well, we originally withdrew our youngest son (and then our eldest after a year) not for religious reasons (although we are born again Christians), but really for practical reasons. As the years have passed I now believe that from a Biblical point of view Christ-centred Christian education is what God wants all of our children to have (if we're Christians I mean). I believe it is in obedience to His word and will that we home educate our children. If they choose to become Christians then that would be fab, if they don't - we have done our bit as parents and there comes a point where they have to choose their own paths in life! We leave it up to God!
Qualifications
We are following a curriculum which is in the process of being registered with the QCA - despite not being fully registered a wide range of universities accept the certificates for entry into their establishments.
Socialisation
I just had to comment on this because this is the first thing people say! When I was in college I studied sociology and in about 1976 Cotgrove wrote this (it is paraphrased a bit) "Socialisation is the way in which society builds itself into our thinking, acting and believing" Why do people mention socialisation as an attack on home educators? Well it's because communication and getting along with people are a huge part of life - you have to come across people in all walks of life! Just because a child is taught at home it doesn't mean they cannot communicate or build relationships with people. I wish I could hire a huge room and put 100 home educated children and 100 schooled children into it and see how they get along socially because I can guarantee that the home educated children will be as sociable if not have greater articulation verbally etc than their schooled counterparts. The socialisation argument is a fallacious one as schools only put their kids into peer groups whereas home educated children mix with diverse age ranges of people. When a home educated child leaves home they are far greater equipped to deal with people of all ages than those who have gone through a peer-centred system!
OK that's enough for now - watch this space for my thoughts etc in the future...
BTW I home educate - yep I teach my children at home which, at the moment, is perfectly legal. Why not school? We (I say we but my husband works, so really it's me at home) home educate for various reasons.
Withdrawing (two different withdrawings)
Originally we withdrew our youngest son out of school because he was moved to reception from nursery two terms too early and he couldn't cope. At the time we didn't realise he was autistic (we didn't know much about autism at the time). Looking back I can see now how he exhibited signs of it, but we were ignorant of such things. We met up with the head teacher who reassured us that every child is an individual - until we mentioned that we believed our son was moved up too early and couldn't cope with the work to which his response was - "Every other child is coping!" So much for each child being an individual. The head would also come up to me after school and say - "well your son is a bit weird isn't he?" Ummm very professional of him! The last straw came in May 2000 when we decided to withdraw him from school a week before half term - the response we got from the head? "That will be helpful because we have very important visitors coming to the school next week!" That guy sure needed a few lessons in tact and diplomacy! Well that was it - May 2000 we withdrew our youngest son from school and have never looked back! While our youngest was in school he wouldn't look at anybody, his speech and communication skills were poor and his behaviour was one of defiance. He was very withdrawn.
Changes
The changes were gradual, but they were noticable too! Our youngest started to give us eye contact and was less defiant. He began to be able to write his name and recognise words. One day while we were having lunch he turned to me and said - "Mummy I really love you!". Well, my heart could have melted - our little defiant boy who wouldn't talk to anyone, always looked at the floor could now look at me and say that! WOW progress - it was amazing! Over time he has become very sociable, he's 14 now and is trying out his 'wit' on everyone!
Objections
When we first said we were going to withdraw our son, a friend came up to us and said "I think you're doing the wrong thing!" After 6 months he had the humility to come up to me and say "I was wrong, it's the best thing you could have done!"
We still get objections and snide/poking comments off people but they are ignorant of what home education is!
Religion
A lot of people think that home educators are religious fundamentalists who want to brain-wash their children. Well, we originally withdrew our youngest son (and then our eldest after a year) not for religious reasons (although we are born again Christians), but really for practical reasons. As the years have passed I now believe that from a Biblical point of view Christ-centred Christian education is what God wants all of our children to have (if we're Christians I mean). I believe it is in obedience to His word and will that we home educate our children. If they choose to become Christians then that would be fab, if they don't - we have done our bit as parents and there comes a point where they have to choose their own paths in life! We leave it up to God!
Qualifications
We are following a curriculum which is in the process of being registered with the QCA - despite not being fully registered a wide range of universities accept the certificates for entry into their establishments.
Socialisation
I just had to comment on this because this is the first thing people say! When I was in college I studied sociology and in about 1976 Cotgrove wrote this (it is paraphrased a bit) "Socialisation is the way in which society builds itself into our thinking, acting and believing" Why do people mention socialisation as an attack on home educators? Well it's because communication and getting along with people are a huge part of life - you have to come across people in all walks of life! Just because a child is taught at home it doesn't mean they cannot communicate or build relationships with people. I wish I could hire a huge room and put 100 home educated children and 100 schooled children into it and see how they get along socially because I can guarantee that the home educated children will be as sociable if not have greater articulation verbally etc than their schooled counterparts. The socialisation argument is a fallacious one as schools only put their kids into peer groups whereas home educated children mix with diverse age ranges of people. When a home educated child leaves home they are far greater equipped to deal with people of all ages than those who have gone through a peer-centred system!
OK that's enough for now - watch this space for my thoughts etc in the future...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
