Religious Freedom in Australian Schools

 With any talk of religious freedom, sexuality and racial discrimination, the tensions can run high. Can a religious school uphold a particular value system that may be at odds with someone else’s view? And to what extent? When do the school’s freedom to express their long-held beliefs impinge on the freedom that one has to be express their own sexuality or agnostic values or atheistic views? When has a Christian school overstepped the line?

 The conversation hit the airwaves when the Principal of Citipointe Christian College in Queensland, had amended their school contract asking students to formally reject homosexuality and transgenderism. As the ABC report says, “Brisbane's Citipointe Christian College withdraws sexuality contract after backlash”. The Principal has since stepped aside amid an onslaught of angry and deeply disappointed teachers and parents.

This is the extreme case of a contentious and divisive discussion. The Christian schools I know of are welcoming of all people, irrespective of their gender, their sexuality, their race and religion. All are welcome. And all are welcome to be curious learners, to be stretched in their education, to develop their learning toolkit that would prepare them for the life they have ahead of them.

Though, at some point, there will always be a clash of cultures and beliefs; there’s no getting around that. Some believe the earth was formed in 6 large periods of time. Some believe it was six literal days. Some believe in theistic evolution, others remain agnostic and hold to the view that it’s impossible to know whether a deity was actually involved. Some are supporters of the big bang, without a deity in the picture. You get the point. There are numerous viewpoints and this is just one issue: creation.

 A myriad of views

There are a number of viewpoints on any such topic as human sexuality, race relations, the political direction of the country, refugees and global migration and even whether you should drink Pepsi or Coke (or stay away from sugary drinks!).

 I believe we all should have freedom to believe what we want. Though even that has limits. If you believe in the right to not be vaccinated, does that mean you can still galivant the countryside during a pandemic without any consequences?

While I believe in the freedom to believe what you want, there is still boundaries around that freedom. When your value system impinges on the safety and security of another person, then one has the right to question that belief system.

In a 21^st century, pluralist society, you and I walk around the earth with differing views on many issues. Though I hope that when I wander around, the inherent thrust of what I believe might rub off on another person. I make a difference in the world through my presence in this world. I don’t therefore have to impose my beliefs on another person.

I can tell you what I believe if you want to hear. I believe all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God. I believe Jesus died for our sins and those who believe in him will receive forgiveness of sins. I believe that too much alcohol ruins your brain cells. I believe that too much social media isn’t good for your mental health. I believe the church has had a complex history of loving people some days and then excommunicating people on other days.

 You and I need to learn to live in peace with one another (see Romans chapter 12, verse 18). Let your light shine in such a way that, instead of imposing your values on another, people inherently want to live the way you do because of who you are and how you behave.

That’s the crux for Christian schools. They should be watering holes of grace and peace, that seek to raise up resilient, intelligent and active students that want to bring restoration to the world we live in. When we abuse the religious freedom we have by dictating what someone must believe, we look outdated to the world around us, we hurt people and we put barriers up to the very Christ that we seek to emulate.

* First published here: https://christiantoday.com.au/news/religious-freedom-in-australian-schools.html 

Getting Our Hands Dirty - Guest Blogger - Captain Scott Strissel

“While we have been standing UPON OUR DIGNITY- WHOLE GENERATIONS HAVE GONE TO HELL- if the Bible is true, how much longer shall we stand there” - Catherine Booth


Dear Salvationists,
 
Our hearts need to be broken once more for those we serve and love.   It can be easy to become jaded by this work.  It is dirty work.  It is hard work. 

Service and love should always walk side by side.  We don’t simply hand a homeless man a cup of warm soup because it is “our responsibility and obligation”, no, instead we do it because we care for that man.  It is not just a duty to perform and then we are on our way, it MUST go deeper!  God’s prevenient grace came to us even when we did not deserve such a gift.  He came to our level and poured out upon us such a lavishing love – His One and only Son Jesus Christ.  This is why we serve.  This is why we put on our uniforms and go out into the streets of our communities. 

Secondly, we serve a Mighty God for the purpose of bringing others to Him!  The Salvation Army Mission Statement says this:  “The Salvation Army, an international movement, is an evangelical part of the universal Christian church. Its message is based on the Bible. Its ministry is motivated by the love of God. Its mission is to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ and to meet human needs in His name without discrimination.”

Never discount the work of the Holy Spirit in this vital salvation mission!  He can and will transform the worst of sinners.  He will change lives!  What He requires from us is to get our hands dirty.  He longs to have “dirty Salvationists.” 

What do I mean by “Dirty Salvationists” you ask?  What I mean is that we have to go to the places where the lost are located.  We were once lost until we came to the saving knowledge of Jesus Christ.  Since we accepted that saving, we should be willing to go to those places where the lost and dying are still chained to their sin!  It might not look like a church, where are must go and reach those who are hurting, but the places that Jesus went didn’t look like a church either! 

Didn’t someone, long ago seek YOU out?  Did they not take the time to come to your level, to roll up their sleeves and get dirty so that we might be cleaned?  I recall countless of godly examples of Salvationists who embodied Christ to me while I was still ignorant in my old ways of living.  Their kindness and love showed me what it meant to be like Christ.
With that being said, we cannot be afraid of those “dirty” places.  Those places where the “unclean” or unsaved reside.   We cannot cower within our corps buildings and expect people to come to us.  We have to get our hands dirty by accepting this important work that the Master calls us to.   This work first begins within our hearts.  Are we prepared to say to Christ, “Use all there is of me for Thy purpose”?   This statement can be deeply impactful on our lives.  It places God’s priority over ours.  It clears the various barriers of “self” away so that we might be Holy and then do Holiness in our lives. 

Catherine Booth once said these very profound and I believe prophetic words, “It is a bad sign for the Christianity of this day that it provokes so little opposition. If there were no other evidence of it being wrong, I could tell from just that. When the Church and the world can jog comfortably along together, you can be sure there is something wrong”.

Today, it is very easy for the Church to simply ignore sin and its effects on people.  I don’t wish to meddle or prod here, but the easy road is often taken because we don’t want to point out immorality in our world for fear of criticism and loss of popularity.  The sad thing is that many within the Church are more afraid of what the world will say rather than what God will ultimately say. 

Salvationists, if we aren’t willing to get our hands dirty…if we aren’t willing to stand up for those without a voice in our communities…if we aren’t willing to be sent out by God anymore because we are fearful of critics and hatred, then we have truly lost what it means to be a Salvationist. 

So let us roll up our sleeves.  Let us become dirty Salvationists who are willing to get on our knees in prayer for the drunk who loiters on “Army property”.  Let us throw off the fears of public condemnation and worries of how it may be perceived – and live out our calling within this Mission as Salvationists and as Christ-followers!   Jesus went to people where they were…shouldn’t we as well?

______________________

Find more from Captain Scott Strissel at Pastor's Ponderings

Racism in Australia Today: The Ugly Truth

‘When it comes to racial inequality, even as much has changed, much remains the same’

(Kwane Anthony Appiah)

Racism in Australia Today

Captain Pete Brookshaw (2015)

Introduction

You could liken racism in Australia to soup in a pot boiling away on the stove and occasionally someone turns up the heat and the pot overflows. Right from the settlement of white immigrants in the late 18^th Century there has been racial tension, and discrimination has been bubbling away, coming to the surface on occasions. Racism in the past has informed racism today. Before exploring such matters, a definition of racial discrimination is helpful.

The United Nations General Assembly (21^st December, 1965) defined ‘racial discrimination’ as:

Any distinction, exclusion, restriction or preference based on race, colour, descent, or national or ethnic origin which has the purpose or effect of nullifying or impairing the recognition, enjoyment or exercise, on an equal footing, or human rights and fundamental freedoms in the political, economic, social, cultural or any other field of public life. (Yarwood, Yarwood, & Knowling, 1982, p. 257)

The racial tensions in Australia’s history and contemporary society can be better understood by looking at the foundational aspects of both the biblical writings and subsequently the work of the United Nations in the mid-20^th Century with the establishment of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR). The inequality between races in Australia has caused disadvantage in employment, education, Government social service benefits, other economic disadvantages and even verbal and physical abuse of the powerless. What is the way forward for the Australian community, when we have such a checkered past and fickle present?  

A Brief History of Race-Relations in Australia

The underlying issues of racism that exist within the Australian population today have evolved from the paradigms of thinking and behaviour from generations past[1]. The way Australians speak of others, how we treat each other and the upholding or otherwise of the human rights of others, stems from deeply rooted historical places.

Prior to 1788, the first Australians, the Aboriginal people, enjoyed the nomadic lifestyle and rugged terrain of the Australian landscape. The indigenous people lived off the land, and expressed their culture through a hunter-gatherer mindset, with their own cultural practices unique to such a way of living. From 1788 circumstances changed dramatically. The white people had arrived. Captain Cook and the First Fleet arrived on the shores of Botany Bay and before long, there was tension between British immigrants and long-standing Indigenous people who had been working the land for many, many years previous.

The tensions of race-relations between the white Anglo-Saxons and indigenous people has been prevalent in Australian culture since the First Fleet.  After the Federation of Australia in 1901, the government passed the Immigration Restriction Act 1901, which declared all varying types of reasons why immigrants could not enter into Australia (e.g. mental illness, having an infectious disease, an inability to pass a dictation test), yet seemed to show favour to the British. Could it be, that policies were enacted by the Australian government that discriminated against particular people because of their race, but was done so in a way appearing not to be overtly racist? During the days of the Second World War, Australian Prime Minister John Curtin said, 'This country shall remain forever the home of the descendants of those people who came here in peace in order to establish in the South Seas an outpost of the British race'[2]. The racist tone of the Australian people was clearly evident, as spoken by an Australian Prime Minister. The articles of the UDHR were not produced until following the atrocities of World War II, and in its 30 articles, we have content that challenges words just mentioned. Article one is foundational: ‘All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights…’ Arguably a mildly racist tone amongst white Anglo-Saxons had existed for years amongst the Australian rhetoric, where people were not treated as being equal in dignity and rights. The inherent racism within the Australian culture, especially towards indigenous people was contrary to those newly developed human rights standards.

Racism in Australia Today

Does racism still exist in Australia today? One would have surely thought, that in today’s culture of political correctness and tolerance that racism in Australia would be a distant memory of a bygone era. Not true. Within the multicultural diverse demographic of people that make up the Australian population there is still an underlying racism that permeates the rhetoric of many Australians. We find ourselves in the tea-room at work, and someone relays a denigrating joke about an aboriginal. Then we hear about the racial-tensions between Muslims wanting to build a Mosque directly adjacent to an Assyrian Christian Church. Furthermore we could speak of the current Federal Government’s policies around the treatment of refugees and what that says about what we think about race. Read social media for more than five minutes, and you read of everyday Australians holding to some very vocal, down-right bigoted views of other nationalities.

Let me suggest that Anglo-Saxon Australians today still have reverberations of racist overtones permeating their words and actions that can be fundamentally attributed to cultural alliances with racist ideologies from years past. Only recently we saw Pauline Hanson (famous for not understanding the question, ‘Are you xenophobic?’) put her hand up again to contest a seat in the next Australian Federal election. She is known as someone with a philosophical leaning that verges on outright racist. Interestingly though, she has her own particular following. In the UDHR, article 15, we read that everyone has the right to a nationality and that no one should be deprived of his nationality nor denied the right to change his nationality. Pauline Hanson and others with similar outlooks would do well to consider what it means for someone to have the right to their own nationality. Not only that, they have the right to seek asylum when persecuted (Article 14), and in those circumstances, they are no doubt hoping for a welcoming, inclusive community; not a racist one. There are parts of ‘White Australia’ that are absolutely committed to people conforming to their standards and to their culture. The problem is, Australians cannot articulate what that culture is!

We have confused patriotism with religious and cultural conformity.  In recent months Australia saw ‘Reclaim Australia’ rallies right around the country, protesting for a reclaiming of Australia. Australians want to reclaim Australia, yet the people protesting are not even indigenous? People who have had the freedom to immigrate to Australia (over the last two hundred plus years), and have had afforded to them the privileges of everything that makes Australia great, are now protesting about others wanting to have the same freedom afforded to them?! The classic is the picture of an indigenous Australian holding a banner that said, ‘Australia is not yours to reclaim.’

Tensions exist between the Australian Muslim community and Anglo-Saxon Australians. Complex societal factors contribute to the tensions, but fundamentally the issues are about race and religion. Abu-Rayya and White (Ata, 2014, p. 22) say that:

Muslims in Australia endure problematic portrayals, stereotyping and negative perceptions within Australian society, and that these perceptions are linked to real-world impacts including exclusion, racist violence, arson and various forms of unfair treatment.

Two factors contribute to a negative connection between Australian Muslims and other Australians; that of fear and ignorance. Only in the last couple of months, have there been examples of the radicalization of young Australians in local suburbs, with the online grooming by terrorists towards young people to fight with Islamic State. The fear is real, but the ignorance is such, that many Australians place the majority of peace-abiding, moderate Muslims in the same basket as Islamic State militants. Article 18 of the UDHR says that everyone has the right to freedom of thought, conscience and religion. It is a human right to express one’s religion without the consequences of dealing with racist actions of bigoted white Australians. Conversely, when the actions of a small number in Australian society begin to use indoctrinated beliefs with a foundation of violence that impinge on another’s human rights, then Australian law enforcement must act. The challenge is for the Australian public to understand that which relates to a minority group of individuals and to not make unfounded rash generalizations about a particular people group (Ata, 2014, p. 36).    

Racism at its Biblical Roots

What would Jesus think about all this racism? Or more broadly, how can the biblical Scriptures inform us about philosophical anthropology and its relation to racism? There is something within the essence of humanity, right from the beginnings of the stories of Genesis, where we see humanity’s desire for power, significance and control. Eve and then subsequently Adam, were tempted to take that which they had been asked not to consume. In the second generation, Cain murdered his younger brother Abel because of jealousy that God had favoured Abel’s offering over and above his own. In the story of Noah and the Ark, God brought judgment upon the people, yet showed mercy upon Noah and his family because they were righteous. The Old Testament biblical accounts of the Torah, not to mention the stories of the twelve kings of Israel, the Davidic Kingdom and the Minor Prophets, reveal the wrestle of humanity with dealing with the temptations and consequences of sinfulness. It is the quest for power that corrupts the human heart, stemming right back to the creation narratives. This power and control is what led British immigrants to kill Aborigines in a battle to secure land on the eastern sea-board in the late 18^th Century. This desire for control, is what seems to keep the current Australian Federal Government so resolutely committed to their inhumane border protection policies.  

One could mention with great detail the theological implications of biblical particularism and that the Jews are the ‘chosen people’. Christianity then, ‘claimed to universalize the Hebrew Bible’s supposedly parochial view of the divine covenant, making it available to all the nations of the earth.’ (Brett, 1996, p. 143) We can see within the ministry of Jesus Christ and the beginnings of the Christian church, a radical embracing of all people, not just Jews, but Gentiles too. The Apostle Paul sums up the universalist idea when he wrote, ‘There is neither Jew nor Greek, neither slave nor freeman, neither male nor female. You are all one in Christ Jesus’ (Galatians 3:28).[3] He was simply reaffirming the words and actions of Christ, like when Jesus offered prophetic words of healing to a Samaritan woman, in Samaria. The ministry of Jesus exemplified a life committed to upholding equality amongst people with a clear mandate that challenged racial prejudice and discrimination. One may argue then that the implementation of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights midway through the 20^th Century was heavily influenced by the teachings and life of Christ.
 

So, we see two important progressions in history; one is of the poor choices and sinfulness of a broken people and another is the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ. Racism is birthed in that place of sinfulness, where power and control take hold, but in the person of Jesus Christ, racism is challenged at the core.  

Racism and the Way Forward for Australian Culture Today

It is all well and good to speak of racism in Australian culture today, but the challenge comes on what can be done about it. Firstly, the presupposition is, that based on the discussion of a foundation of racial tension within the Australian population, that positive change against such views is needed. Confirming that, the next question is what can be done?

Colin Chapman in Cross and Crescent offers some thoughts about what Christians could do when facing the political challenges of the Islamic faith. These thoughts relate well to the Australian public at large, beyond Islam and to race in general, with assisting us with ideas that help us deal with racial inequality (Chapman, 2003, pp. 296-301)[4].

·         Obtain accurate information – This relates to ensuring that you know all the facts. Racial prejudice is quite often related to ignorance.

·         Be responsible with publicity – The media and individuals have a responsibility to communicate publicly only that which is fair and reasonable and true.

·         Conduct local, united protests – Interestingly, how many Australians would find the violation of human rights, in relation to racial inequality something they feel strongly about enough to protest?[5]

·         Appeal to international law – Article 18 of the UDHR appeals to the right that people have for the freedom of thought, conscience and religion. Pittaway[6] says, ‘All people should be treated the same—we should all be free’ (2015, p. 29).

·         Turn the other cheek and follow the Golden Rule – Chapman highlights the importance of following the ways of Jesus. This is critical if we truly want to be a racially-tolerant, loving and compassionate society that upholds a strong morality with foundations in the Word of God.

·         Learn the lessons from history – Australians would do well to learn from the racial prejudice of days gone by; the way politicians treated the first peoples of Australia, and the way Anglo-Saxons treated their ethnic brothers and sisters.

The ugly truth of racism in Australia, is that it was rife right from British settlement, and still bubbles away under the surface of political and societal discourse, rearing its unpleasant head regularly. Each Australian resident has a responsibility to uphold the human rights of others and subsequently establish a culture where Australians are respected, equal, empowered and free. Anything less is an abuse of human rights.

Bibliography

Ata, A. W. (2014). Education Integration Challenges: The Case of Australian Muslims. Victoria: David Lovell Publishing.

Australian Immigration. (2015, May 10). Retrieved from http://www.immi.gov.au/media/fact-sheets/08abolition.htm

Brett, M. G. (1996). Ethnicity and the Bible. Leiden, The Netherlands: E. J. Brill.

Chapman, C. (2003). Cross and Crescent: Responding to the Challenge of Islam. Illinois: InterVarsity Press.

Drehle, D. V. (April 20, 2015). TIME: Black Lives Matter. Time Magazine.

Mackay, H. (2007). Advance Australia Where? Sydney: Hachette Livre Australia.

Moreton-Robinson, A. (2004). Whitening Race: Essays in Social and Cultural Criticism. Canberra: Aboriginal Studies Press.

Nations, U. (2015, April 24). Articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Retrieved from http://www.un.org/en/documents/udhr/index.shtml#a3

Pittaway, T. (2015). Freedom Unleashed. Maryborough: McPherson's Printing.

Rose, G. (March/April 2015). The Trouble with Race. Foreign Affairs.

Yarwood, A. T., Yarwood, A. T., & Knowling, M. J. (1982). Race Relations in Australia: A History. New South Wales: Methuen Australia.

---

[1] Racism is inherent within some cultures, like the U.S.A, where on April 4^th of this year, one clear Saturday morning, a white police officer, Michael Thomas Slager, shot an unarmed black man in the back 8 times. The chilling video depicts the situation, where one would say, race was again at the forefront of American culture. Time magazine run with the heading on April 20^th, 2015 with Black Lives Matter, though the content of the journalism did very little to address the issue of racism within the American culture, but rather the journalists touched on slightly less provocative angles, like the culture that exists within law enforcement in America.

[2] http://www.immi.gov.au/media/fact-sheets/08abolition.htm

[3] Galatians 3:26-29 – ‘²⁶ So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, ²⁷ for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. ²⁸ There is neither Jew nor Gentile, neither slave nor free, nor is there male and female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus. ²⁹ If you belong to Christ, then you are Abraham’s seed, and heirs according to the promise.

[4] I have used Chapman’s writing and added my own thoughts as it relates to the more general topic of racism in Australia, not just amongst Muslims, but other ethnic minorities in Australian society.

[5] Voltaire famously said, ‘I do not agree with what you have to say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.’ 

[6] Captain Troy Pittaway - The Salvation Army

You'll be Amazed at What the Australian Labor Party and Christianity Have in Common

"We are investing in an education revolution."

"The good news of Jesus can transform your life."

"Disability Care will be a welcome addition to disability reform."

"God loves you and has a plan for your life"

*****

Do any of these statements have anything in common? Well not at first glance.

But it's not the comments themselves that I want to concentrate on. It is not even the validity or otherwise of the statements being made.

Let us take a step back from passionate, and even somewhat aggressive discussion on politics and religion for a moment so I can say one thing. Not everything the Labor Party communicates with the general public is nonsensical and not every bit of rhetoric communicated is laden with 'smear and fear'. The same with Christianity: Not everything a Christian says in mainstream media is off-the-wall conservative and worthy of harsh critique.

Though, any Australian knows that the ALP are heading for demolition in the upcoming 2013 Federal Election. Any Australian also knows, that the popularity of the 'Christian Church' is not quite up there with Bruno Mars and Master Chef.

So what am I saying?

I am wanting to come to a significant point in what I believe the Australian Labor Party and Christianity have in common; a common thread that I believe is paramount in distinguishing why there is bad public perception of these two groups within the Australian people...

People are not listening.

They have tuned out. They have changed the channel. They are not interested. They are over it.

The question that begs asking then is, 'Why have people stopped listening?'

They've failed to deliver on what was promised. They've misrepresented their organisation. They've honed in on issues that people didn't care about, at the expense of issues they did. They've spoken consistently negatively of the 'other party' and those on the 'other side'. They've struggled to find a leader or leaders who would be able to cast a vision and lead the organisation to fulfil its original mission. They've put people in upper-leadership levels that have undermined the effectiveness of the overall organisation. They've had people who have broken the moral code.

So people have stopped listening.

Do you hear what I'm saying?

Maybe the great challenge the Australian Labor Party and the Christian Church have to contend, is to convince people that still have something worth communicating; a message still worth following.

I have heard it said, that one thing people of the Christian faith must do, before they even expect anyone to be close to believing their message, is to build credibility. That may well be true for both Labor and the Christian Church.

Not all politics is laden with smear and incompetent politicians. Not all Christianity is run by bureaucrats and people who badly misrepresent the faith they profess.

The problem is, how do you regain the listening ear of a people who have tuned out?


*****

Receive Pete's Blog Posts via email (below):

Enter your email address:


Delivered by FeedBurner

A Modelling Agency has my Number

I know the modelling agencies will knock me back. I mean I haven't tried to apply, but I am confident my runway skills will not be up to scratch. Then of course, there's the lack of hair, which of course rules me out of ever helping to sell Palmolive to the masses. Some of you are thinking, 'What about the looks Pete, and the slim figure needed for such a job?' Well, like I said, I haven't applied, and I would not want to assume their answer...

I am not offended by this. I understand that modelling agencies have particular values and rules that govern its industry. Without some sort of framework to operate within, the whole industry would collapse.

Is this not similar to the Christian faith? Churches, that represent God's people on earth, have frameworks that are used to create a sense of stability and cohesion. Without a holiness code, would anything simply be acceptable? Without doctrinal statements, would any theological presupposition be adhered to? Without any rules governing the ordaining of people into Christian leadership, would anyone simply be suitable?

It's not that these frameworks are wrong. They are not. They are just open for abuse. They are at times overly-regulated by people. They are set up by broken people, who are in need of a Saviour.

I am not offended by these operational frameworks that for the most part are led by the Holy Spirit to help govern particular faith communities. Let it be sharpened by other people of faith and the wider community. Let the Word of God inform the necessary changes. Let it not become a beuracracy but merely a way to bring focus to the task at hand.

Modelling agencies do not offend me with their values and rules. Either does the church.

By the way...

A modelling agency has my number.  

Daily Devotional - 6th September, 2012

*****

Receive Pete's Daily Devotions via email (below):

Enter your email address:


Delivered by FeedBurner

Christianity is for Wimps?

What a Load of Christian Baloney!

I have a relative who is absolutely convinced, that if he becomes a ‘Christian’ then life would be terribly religious, rigid and unexciting. Let’s be honest, that’s what he believes. He’ll be stuck in church for the rest of his life, and then stuck in heaven with a bunch of bible bashers and people wearing light brown woollen sweaters for all of eternity. Wow. Sounds like something worth pursuing...

He assumes that he would have to give up the drink, sit in the church and sing hymns, offer too much of his pay-check to ‘religion’ and his life would be miserable. I bet you've thought this before.

Don't stop reading here, even though you know, what comes next may be a religious attempt to justify the church’s position on particular theological viewpoints and attempt to woo you from your current way of living. Let’s not beat around the bush – Jesus calls for a life of self-sacrifice. He calls people to live for God and others, more than they live for themselves. That goes against the grain of the individualistic, self-centred culture that is trumpeted by media advertising. They say, ‘It’s time to upgrade your TV to a bigger one’ ‘It’s time to be dissatisfied with what you wear – come and shop here...’ ‘Get all the options YOU need, when you get this insurance.’ That is what makes the whole Christian thing counter-cultural. It says, ‘Hey, stop living for yourself and live for others’.

If I’m brutally honest, I don’t like organised religion. I am uncomfortable living life under excessive rules and regulations, and Christianity is at times, a Western World construct that unknowingly burdens people into religiosity. BUT, the message behind the religion is not about rules and regulations, per se, but about a relationship. What are some words that are relevant here...? I am thinking, love God with all your heart, all your soul and all your strength and love your neighbour as yourself. This is, ultimately about relationship, not religiosity, and is about living for God, and living for others.

I’m not going to sugar coat Christianity, by saying following the God who created you is going to make life all rosy and peachy. I’m also not saying, that following God still allows you to live as you please and hold onto this, ‘I’m gonna live the way I want to live’ kind of mantra. Though, I will say, that following Jesus, gives eternal purpose to your existence. It offers a counter-cultural way of living, that kicks the consumerist self-centred life where it hurts. It calls you to live for God and to focus on others more than yourself.

Maybe it’s time to re-evaluate pre-conceived ideas about religion, 'becoming a Christian' and church. A relationship is offered to you from God, through Christ, and all you have to do, is believe in him through faith. Why not consider offering up a prayer today, that says, ‘God, I want to know who you are, help me to know Jesus...’

It’s that easy.

Send me an email if you make that decision today. 

petebrookshaw@gmail.com

God bless!


Pete.

Book Review - Australian Soul - Gary Bouma

Australian Soul (Religion and Spirituality in the 21st Century) – Gary Bouma (2006)

As Bouma unpacks cultural particularities of varying Christian expressions (:86-95), his bias clearly shows towards following orthodox traditional churches (e.g. Catholic, Anglican, etc). While he refrains from overtly expressing his opinion, he has an element of sarcasm and distain to Pentecostalism and ‘mega-churches’ to which he frequently refers. While at one point he mentions the growth of churches such as Hillsong, and those of a charismatic/Pentecostal nature, he then mentions later (: 206), that Religion and spirituality, ‘will take forms that are quieter, less charismatic and more towards to the low-temperature end of the scale of religious intensity than elsewhere’. The quote and his mentioned statistics do not correlate. Maybe his bias against emotionally laden churches vs. rational based churches is being shown; the latter being his preferred religious context. When mentioning having a memorial service, possibly outside of an Anglican Cathedral and rather in a mega-church, Bouma sarcastically writes, ‘Of course their facilities hold more people than most cathedrals, they have better sound systems and, what is more, they are more likely to have parking’ (:117-118).

 The author expresses opinions that are controversial within Christian circles. He seemingly alludes to the idea that, issues like same-sex marriages and homosexuality only fail to be acceptable because of the fundamentalism of the Christian church, and that we should let diversity reign. Bouma’s thesis appears to be, ‘If Christians were just more open-minded, there would be more room for freedom of expression of spirituality’.  He believes in diversity and that spirituality should bring hope. He mentions, ‘Some see the spread of Pentecostal Christianity and the renewed energy of Islam as signs of hope’ (: 204). It is difficult to gauge whether the author is supportive of this statement or passionately opposed to it. Does a pendulum swing towards freedom of expression, diversity, and an encouragement towards a spiritual smorgasboard of whatever suits YOU, the right way to go?  

From a literary stance, Bouma presents sound statistics and a well studied exposition on spirituality in Australia, though at times he makes assumptions, for example, ‘Few protestant Clergy are respected for their ability to make real a sense of the presence of God’ (: 100).  

He describes the downward spiral of Christianity in Australia in relation to attendance, moral values, etc. Bouma’s thesis is seemingly one of embracing this decline for the sake of religious diversity and people’s freedom of expression. So at times you are left agreeing with Bouma and interested by statistical data and other times disappointed and frustrated by liberal approaches to religious diversity and spirituality. All that being said Gary Bouma's Australian Soul (Religion and Spirituality in the 21st Century), is worth a read and will get you engaged and thinking.
 

The New Atheism - Should Christians be concerned?

The New Athiesm - Should Christians be concerned? What is it?

Since 2004 there has apparently been a resurgence of Atheism; well that's according to David Steele writing in Philosophy Now - May 2010. This is what some would call, The New Atheism. The debates between Atheists and Christians have been around for years, but the discussions have hit the ears of many in the last few years, especially with the vocal advocacy and authorship of people like Christopher Hitchens (God is not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything) and Richard Dawkins (The God Delusion).

So firstly what is an 'atheist'? Or what is atheism? Much seemingly pedantic discussion is made about what the true definitions of these terms are, but firstly the narrow view of atheism is this: a-theism (a - from the greek meaning  'without' and theism/theos from the greek meaning 'deity'). The narrow view is thus labelled as without a deity, or rather, a belief that there is no God. This definition is saying that Atheists do not believe there is one God; one who supremely cares for this creation. They do not believe in what is called monotheism. Ernest Nagel (1901 - 1985) says in relation to atheism, 'I shall understand by 'atheism' a critique and a denial of the major claims of all varieties of theism' (cited in Philosophy Now - May 2010, p.6). The reason this is labelled a narrow view of atheism, is because this labels those that are polytheists (many gods) as atheists. A hindu would be far from labelling him/herself an atheist! So the definition of atheism has broadened over the years. In the broad sense atheism, according to Michael Martin, standardly refers to the denial of the existence of any god or gods and this therefore encapsulates the Christian monotheism and also polytheism. This type of definition of atheism tends to be the one that the general public hold to.

Michael Martin says, 'In Western society the term atheism has most frequently been used to refer to the denial of theism, in particular Judeo-Christian theism. This [theism] is the position that a being that is all-powerful, all-knowing, and all-good exists who is the creator of the universe, and who takes an active interest in human concerns, and guides his creatures by revelation' - and all the Christians read this and say, 'Yep! Amen!'

Exhaustive empirical evidence does not exist to prove the existence of such a wonderful God - only faith. Faith that comes by hearing the Word of God, and a relationship that forms because of someone acting on that faith/trust and believing that Jesus is who he says he is, and does what he says he does.

Christians know there are questions that are unanswerable and discussions that are hard to 'win'. The fact is though, that failure to respond adequately to an intellectual argument about faith does not render the faith inadequate; it merely means someone is unable to respond with theological prowess that dumfounds the other! The questions exist, no Christian doubts that:
* If God knows the future, how can we have free will? (Cicero)
* What was God doing before He created the world? (Augustine)
* Must God, if he exists in the mind, also exist in reality? (Anselm)
* Can an omnipotent being be constrained by justice and goodness? (Al-Ghazali).
* Why does a loving God allow suffering to good people (the general public ask this one!)

So this new atheism, or the old, same atheism revamped in the eyes of some... Tim Madigan says this apparent resurgence in atheism is due to a variety of reasons and some of these being, the collapse of the Soviet Union, revulsion against religious fundamentalism, a concern over collusion between church and state, and the growth of the internet and the dissemination of ideas and 'free' thought that this enhances (Philosophy Now - May 2010, p. 4). Whatever the reasons, the good news about Jesus remains the same. God sent his one and only son [Jesus] into the world, not to condemn the world, but to save it, through him.

Turn to Jesus today. 

Follow me on Twitter:
www.twitter.com/petebrookshaw  

The Age: Australians not so sceptical about Jesus

Australians not so sceptical about Jesus, survey finds
Barney Zwartz - The Age - April 7, 2009

MORE than four in 10 Australians who don't consider themselves "born again" nevertheless believe Jesus rose from the dead, while one in 10 doesn't believe he even existed.
These are two of the surprising results from an independent survey of 2500 Australians, according to noted author and church historian John Dickson, co-director of the Centre for Public Christianity in Sydney.

The survey, to be released today, showed that 42 per cent of Australians believe Jesus had divine powers and 54 per cent believe he rose from the dead.

But even among those who do not identify as born again, 45 per cent believe in the resurrection. Dr Dickson said this certainly included agnostics and secularists because the total was far higher than the remaining Christians surveyed.

"We are staggered. We thought the survey would show the profound scepticism of Australians," he said.

"Instead it shows there is a base-level assumption among the Australian public that accepts the Jesus story even if it has no relevance to their lives."

He said the survey wanted to explore the understanding of non-churchgoers, so the results were produced from those who were non-religious, or from another religion, or who loosely identified with Christianity.

Other odd findings included that 31 per cent of Australians believe Jesus lived BC (that is, "before Christ", or before he was born) and that 57 per cent knew Easter was connected with the death of Jesus but a far higher 87 per cent of Australians knew it concerned the resurrection. What the missing 30 per cent thought the resurrection meant, if not rising from the dead, was not explored. Another 4 per cent confused Easter with Christmas (and Jesus' birth).

Reassuringly, 90 per cent of non-born-agains identified Jesus with Christianity rather than other religions, and 60 per cent knew his life was recorded in the New Testament.

Asked was Jesus a real figure, 11 per cent of non-born-agains said no, 39 per cent said yes but without divine powers, and 50 per cent said yes and he had divine powers.