#Metoo for unborn girls?

Today at Church we celebrated the birth of a little girl. The parents gave thanks to God for her, and we as a congregation prayed for them. It was a joyous occasion, because life is so precious and wonderful, and every new life is beautiful.

As I was preparing for the infant dedication service earlier this morning, I came across this upsetting article in today’s The Age,

“A phenomenon of “missing girls” could be afflicting Victoria, as a study of more than a million births suggests some parents could be aborting unborn female babies or undergoing embryo selection overseas in order to have a son.

If nature was left to take its course, it is expected that for every 100 girls born, about 105 boys will be brought into the world.

But in findings researchers say indicate “systematic discrimination against females starts in the womb”, mothers within some key migrant communities are recording sons at rates of 122 and 125 for every 100 daughters in later pregnancies.

Lead researcher Dr Kristina Edvardsson from Melbourne’s La Trobe University said it showed gender bias persisted in Victoria, despite laws banning people from choosing the sex of their child, other than for medical reasons.

“We believe that some women may be terminating pregnancies after discovering they are expecting a girl and in other cases are travelling overseas to access non-medical sex selection services through assisted reproduction,” she said.

Analysing almost 1.2 million births between 1999 and 2015, the study found while the overall ratio of male and female babies born across Victoria was as expected (at close to 105 to 100), there were notable exceptions.

There is now widespread global access to ultrasound technology to determine the sex of a baby, and Australian parents can find out their baby’s gender from within 10 weeks with a newly-available blood test.

“The Indian government has estimated that two million girls go “missing” from its population each year due to sex selective abortion and other forms of discrimination that lead to premature death.”

kelly-sikkema-692353-unsplash.jpg

unsplash.com

The report is disturbing; it’s more than disturbing, it is utterly evil. Let’s be clear, we are talking about the conscious decision to kill little girls because they are girls.

One wonders, how quick will our fourth wave feminists be to speak against this phenomenon? The only children who are more likely to face abortion are children diagnosed with mental and physical disabilities, such as Down Syndrome. Even this year, we have seen that their right to live has been drowned out by placards and tweets about the ‘right to choose’, as though the value of human life depends on what we want it to be.

Why should killing on the basis of gender matter more than choosing an abortion for other biological or sociological reasons? It shouldn’t, but this article nonetheless reveals a terrible trend in our society that needs addressing.

I appreciate that sometimes, some of the people crying “pro life” are obnoxious, and even crass and hurtful, but these are few and hardly representative of the average Australian who does not support abortion. Surely it is possible, and indeed desirable to view every human being with dignity and inherent worth, but sadly the evidence suggests that we believe otherwise.

For example, #metoo has captured the fury and passion of millions of women and men all over the world. The outrage has much justification, for women are often mistreated, abused, or simply undervalued. However, like other agitations for social change, #metoo is selective in the injustices that they wish to advocate. I’m not talking about fighting any and every cause of injustice in the world, but one that is surely consonant with the fight for women’s equality. Where are the #metoo for unborn girls and unborn children with disabilities? Where is the wave of feminists marching the streets for the millions of girls who will never grow up and go to school and finds careers, and experience love and joy?

Perhaps, this is one reason why the rhetoric of these hashtag movements lack cogency and long-term positive change. They are not fighting for all women, but only some women.

The birth of Christianity contested the Roman practice of abortion and infanticide. Christians welcomed and loved little ones who were neglected and left on the hills to die from exposure; by far, the majority of these children were girls. They did this against the grain of popular culture, and often at great personal cost, and yet over time the good could not be denied. Aisha Dow’s article is simply unveiling another grotesque step in the dehumanising project that is becoming all too common in Australian culture.

Is there a correlation between a society that leaves Christianity behind, and a society that dehumanises others? There will be historians and sociologists better equipped than me to answer that question. But to me, evidence suggests that there is a connection. Even as science reveals more and more wonder about human life in the earliest stages of pregnancy,  many couples are using this modern technology to determine the sex of the child and therefore to abort those who don’t match their expectations. “Although they claimed to be wise, they became fools” (Romans 1:22).

Protests and social media outrage may win momentary ‘likes’, but it’s not enough, and to often these movements are hijacked by unhelpful groups. We need a better vision, a more beautiful and glorious vision to capture the minds and hearts of Australians.

Jesus once said, ‘Greater love has no one than this: to lay down one’s life for one’s friends’. What an incredible way to consider people around us. Imagine, the betterment of society if we took Jesus’ words to heart! Indeed, how great is the love that sacrifices our hopes and plans for children who enter our lives unplanned. The very nature of a loving community is that it requires the unexpected and difficult, and rather than eliminating those surprises, we alter our life expectations in order to see their lives flourish. Perhaps instead of #metoo, we should be suggesting, #themtoo. 

Justin Bieber and The Meaning of Marriage

There have been many helpful (and unhelpful) books written by Christians about marriage. Tim and Kathy Keller’s, The Meaning of Marriage: Facing the Complexities of Commitment with the Wisdom of God, is among the best.

When I woke up this morning to see social media splashed with photos of Justin Bieber holding a copy of the Keller marriage book, I made the unusual step and took a second look at Justin Bieber. I would choose the music of Bach and Mozart over the sound of Bieber any day, but Justin Bieber has chosen a great on marriage

Apparently, the paparazzi have been doing their stalking thing again this week. Justin Bieber’s and Hailey’s Brooklyn’s private life is none of my business, so let’s leave those photos and speculations where they belong, in a bin on a New York City sidewalk.

Justine Bieber did, however, offer a comment to the media, and it was about this marriage book. As photographers asked him about why he and his fiancé had “been looking so emotional”, Bieber held up The Meaning of Marriage.

IMG_0479

my somewhat used copy

 

Great choice Justin and Hailey!

At Mentone Baptist we regularly use The Meaning of Marriage for both pre-marriage and marriage counselling.

The Daily Mail refers to the book as containing “controversial subject matter.” I guess it is controversial, in that Tim and Kathy Keller paint a view of marriage that differs from many of the relationship ideas that are trending.

Even in the way the Daily Mail tries to sum up the book’s teaching, it’s clear how fragmented our understanding of marriage has become. The cultural scene has become so weird that it seems as though journalists are now required (by some unstated code of ethics) to trigger warn readers whenever mentioning Christians and marriage in the same sentence. The now obligatory criticism toward classical marriage was presented in this way,

“it is unclear whether he [Bieber] is following all of the advice in the tome, which also tells men and women to abstain from sex before marriage, suggests that wives should submit to their husbands, and depicts the Bible’s view of marriage as being monogamous and heterosexual.”

Yes, all of these things are unpopular today, but none of these concepts are controversial, in that they are shared by Christians all over the world and have so for millennia. These are aspects of a marriage that are taught and encouraged in the Bible. However what the Kellers achieve (as does the Bible) is to frame marriage relationships in a consistent and attractive way, that helps makes sense of why marriage should be monogamous and why there are gender complementary roles in a marriage. 

Too often we parody and caricature ideas that we don’t like or comprehend, rather than taking the harder and more honest approach, which is to understand concepts on their own terms.

In reading the book, we discover that the Kellers are only too aware of how marriage is being reframed in Western cultures, and while critiquing these trends, they are not sending readers back to the conservative 1950s either.

That’s why it’s worth reading the book; it will surprise. Tim and Kathy Keller are neither mirroring the less than satisfying views of sex and relationships that we find on Netflix and Amazon, neither are they reproducing unhelpful marital myths from previous generations.

Grounding their ideas in the Bible, Tim and Kathy Keller present a compelling portrait of complementary love in marriage. Here are a few examples,

“In sharp contrast with our culture, the Bible teaches that the essence of marriage is a sacrificial commitment to the good of the other. That means that love is more than fundamentally action emotion”

“In any relationship, there will be frightening spells in which your feelings of love dry up. And when that happens you must remember that the essence of marriage is that it is a covenant, a commitment, a promise of future love. So what do you do? You do the acts of love, despite your lack of feeling. You may not feel tender, sympathetic, and eager to please, but in your actions you must BE tender, understanding, forgiving and helpful. And, if you do that, as time goes on you will not only get through the dry spells, but they will become less frequent and deep, and you will become more constant in your feelings. This is what can happen if you decide to love.” 

“Love without truth is sentimentality; it supports and affirms us but keeps us in denial about our flaws. Truth without love is harshness; it gives us information but in such a way that we cannot really hear it. God’s saving love in Christ, however, is marked by both radical truthfulness about who we are and yet also radical, unconditional commitment to us. The merciful commitment strengthens us to see the truth about ourselves and repent. The conviction and repentance moves us to cling to and rest in God’s mercy and grace.” 

Am I milking these Justin Bieber photos in order to promote a book that I really like? Yep, and unashamedly so, because The Meaning of Marriage really is a great book for marriage. It certainly seems as though this young engaged couple also believe it’s worth reading. Whether you are a Christian or a skeptic, I think you’ll find its pages intriguing and challenging, useful and surprising.

BTW, I wish Justin Bieber and Hailey Brooklyn all the very best as they prepare for marriage. May God in his grace and love bless your future together.

25 Million Today

Australia

 

 

Happy Birthday,

Happy Birthday to you,

Our 25th Million Australian.

We welcome you.

 

Celebrations are in order,

To commemorate your birth.

Champagne, cake, photos and news announcements,

Celebrating the national milestone that is your coming.

 

Will you grow to play footy,

Soccer, Rugby or League?

A plumber or teacher, inventor or doctor?

A child, a parent, friend and neighbour.

 

Life is not a number,

A statistic, figure or demograph.

But an individual, unique, and exquisitely made.

Image of God, bearing witness to all around.

 

We are excited that you are here,

And embrace you, our fellow Australian.

We yet glimpse at knowing,

This number long delayed.

It is not your fault.

The fault is ours,

That others were refused this gift given you.

 

Denied this birthday celebration,

On Islands not so far,

And the ocean’s dead,

And those torn from mothers wombs.

 

We Aussies are mercurial at length,

Like Melbourne, on a sunny, cold, windy, hot, stormy day.

A mordanting bush dance,

Leaving far too many aside.

 

But you remember,

Like those before you,

Those loved and those not,

Imago Dei,

Boy or girl, imprint of God,

Praise Him, for wonderful are His works.

Confusing Friends with Family

“How good and pleasant it is
    when God’s people live together in unity!

It is like precious oil poured on the head,
    running down on the beard,
running down on Aaron’s beard,
    down on the collar of his robe.

It is as if the dew of Hermon
    were falling on Mount Zion.
For there the Lord bestows his blessing,
    even life forevermore.” (Psalm 133)

The Ecumenical and Interfaith Commission of the Catholic Archdiocese of Melbourne sent out this tweet this morning, following a service which saw Peter Commensoli installed as the new Catholic Archbishop of Melbourne:

“Behold, how good and pleasant it is when brothers dwell in unity!”  (Ps 133:1). @catholicmelb honoured by Anglican, Greek, Coptic, Antiochian, Lutheran, UCA, VCC, Jewish, Hindu, Buddhist, Muslim, Sikh guests @BishopComensoli Reception @ABFreier @BishopSuriel @MelbAnglican

 

Screen Shot 2018-08-02 at 8.23.09 am.png

For the sake of Gospel clarity, there are some important things that need saying.

First of all, we should enjoy friendship and mateship with people across the religious spectrum. We want to love these neighbours and to do good to them; they are valued fellow Australians. But pretending that we are somehow united to God together is appalling, for the simple reason, it’s not true.

I have no issue in inviting people from other religions to church, for special occasions, and for normal Sundays. While Church is for Christians, you don’t have to be Christian to visit church services. One of the things I love about my home church is how people are welcomed from all kinds of religious and nonreligious backgrounds; it’s fantastic.

To quote a friend of mine on twitter today,

“Muslim Friends: Are you sure it’s okay that we keep coming to church? We’re Muslims, but want to learn more about Jesus.

Us: (Internal voice) YES! THIS IS THE BEST! YOU HAVE NO IDEA HOW EXCITED WE ARE TO HAVE YOU!!! LOVE IT SO MUCH!

(Out-loud voice). Yes, you’re most welcome.”

I said a big ‘Amen’ to my friend’s comments. There is a difference, however, between inviting and welcoming leaders from other faiths to a Christian event and assuming some spiritual or theological unity between everyone.

Second, it’s important to note that while this tweet contradicts Christianity as found in the Bible, it does, however, fit with the theological revisioning that took place at the Second Vatican Council (1962-65). Karl Rahner’s term, anonymous Christian, was adopted by the Catholic Church, which is a signal for soft universalism. Anonymous Christian refers to people who are formally outside the Roman Catholic Church and yet are still be saved by Christ, whether they are from Protestant Churches and even from other faiths. The idea is that Baptists, Muslims, Hindus, and even atheists could find themselves in heaven with God. Apparently, they even know the Christian God, despite being unaware of the fact or viewing God with a different name and personality.

This tweet by the Catholic Archdiocese of Melbourne isn’t speaking out of sync with its own theological position, however, it was strange to see the Melbourne Anglican Archbishop, Philip Frier, retweeting the comment. I’m pretty sure he wouldn’t agree with the misuse of Psalm 133, and yet it does send an unhelpful message to Anglicans, Christians, and Melbournians in general.

Third, so what does Psalm 133 in fact mean?

Psalm 133 is a short and wonderful Psalm, lauding the beauty of unity among God’s people. God here is not undefined and does assume unity among gods. The context of his Psalm explains that this is a unity established in the God of Israel, who has made himself known and covenanted himself to his people. This is the same God who spoke at Mt Sinai saying,

 “I am the Lord your God, who brought you out of Egypt, out of the land of slavery.

 “You shall have no other gods before me.

 “You shall not make for yourself an image in the form of anything in heaven above or on the earth beneath or in the waters below.  You shall not bow down to them or worship them; for I, the Lord your God, am a jealous God, punishing the children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation of those who hate me,  but showing love to a thousand generations of those who love me and keep my commandments. (Exodus 20:2-6)

Imagine if I went home today and said to my wife, “babe, you know I love you and believe in you, but I now think our marriage should be broader and more accommodating of other women.”  Does anyone think that Susan would or should be happy with that attitude? Would any spouse welcome a third party into the marriage? Why then would we think that it’s ok to try and force onto God, religious polygamy?

We can learn how to respond to our multi-religious society by looking at examples like that of Paul in Athens (Acts 17:16:34). When the Apostle Paul visited Athens and noticed the religious pluralism that stretched across that culture, he didn’t respond by suggesting, ‘hey, look, I see we all worship the same god, but we just call him by different names and worship him in different ways’. He could have conformed to the zeitgeist of First Century Greece, but instead, Paul adopted a loving and honest approach.

Paul didn’t walk around Athens admiring their gods nor did he stop to graffiti their statues and temples. The alternative to religious pluralism isn’t strong-arming people or adopting uncouth tactics like we see in some other places around the world. Paul spoke. He explained. Paul began by acknowledging the Athenian worldview, and their hopes and noting their own acknowledged ignorance. Paul then proceeded to explain who God is, and to persuade with words and argument that Jesus is Lord. The outcome was that some people hated his message, some dismissed him, some were curious and others were convinced.

This is yet another sad and recent example of Churches muddying the waters, and confusing Australians about God and the Lord Jesus.  No wonder most Australians attache little relevance, truth, and beauty to the Gospel of Christ when they see churches walking down the aisle with adultery on the mind. This is not communicating unity, it is communicating conformity to a philosophic position that God heavily criticises in the Bible.