This weekend, I am having a mini break, which means it’s an opportunity to visit another church.
I love the church where I am a member and belong, but annual leave is an opportunity to visit other churches and be encouraged by what God is doing elsewhere.
We had originally thought that we would visit one of the churches in Melbourne CBD, but knowing police are overstretched and multiple protests were being organised, we thought it best not to go. Why add to the business? And who knows how long we’d be stuck in the city while protesters blocked intersections around the CBD.
So we visited Mentone’s daughter church, Regeneration Church in Clayton. It was lovely to catch up with old friends and encouraging to meet around God’s word and see how the church has grown since I last visited. It was a beautiful sight: a room filled with mostly 25-year-olds and representing so many different ethnicities, from all over the world and yet with one voice praising God and enjoying a deep sense of unity in Christ. I said to the pastor afterwards, ‘here [the church] is the answer to all of the friction and suspicion and anger in our community’.
It’s true, if you want to see a glimpse of what God is doing around the world today, go to your local church. If you wish to have a little taste of what life in eternity will be like, drop into your local church next Sunday and see where disconnected men and women from all backgrounds, jobs, education, ethnicity are finding joy and peace and love and life together through Jesus Christ.
Sometimes the music is happening, sometimes it’s out of tune. Sometimes the coffee is proper Melbourne, most of the time it isn’t. Sometimes the kids are noisy; often they are. The building’s architecture may be plain or striking, the preacher a great storyteller or simple words explaining the Scriptures. In these many different settings, from Clayton to Camberwell, from Pakenham to Preston, and from Mentone to Melton, church is like a breath of fresh air compared to the anx and rage filling our streets.
What a contrast with the clashing protests in Melbourne city today, where protests met with counter-protests, one volume of insult matched with further insult and even assault. Yes, many are probably marching for a myriad reasons, concerns over housing and cost of living, and fear of the unknown. But with the surprise element of boiling water burning you, these protests were already marked with signs of what they were about. When a protest is arranged under the banner, ‘stop mass immigration’, and then days out it’s described as defending ‘white heritage’ and denouncing Chinese and Indians in our country, of course, the march was going to go off the rails. So when a known neo-nazi is given a microphone and addresses the crowd from the steps of Parliament House, to the cheers of people below, what were you expecting to see?
A few days ago, Victorian Police expressed concerns that to deal with these protests, they were forced to take away resources from their search to apprehend a man who murdered two of their own and seriously wounded another only 5 days ago. Why would we create further strain on our police after the shocking week they have endured? And then, at the protest in Adelaide, a poster appeared, supporting the alleged police murderer.
Melbourne’s new Lord Mayor wants to claim the title of the ‘optimistic city’, but Melbourne is anything but optimistic or happy. Melbourne has turned into the nation’s protest capital, with weekly interruptions by protests and marches, often promoting the most insidious of causes. Our city is experiencing tumultuous divisions and doubts and fears. One solution often produces another misstep and further erodes public confidence and our social cohesion is increasingly tenuous. We are no longer the city we once were.
Jesus once warned,
“There will be signs in the sun, moon and stars. On the earth, nations will be in anguish and perplexity at the roaring and tossing of the sea. People will faint from terror, apprehensive of what is coming on the world, for the heavenly bodies will be shaken.” (Luke 21)
Tired of bad news? Exhausted by the negativity and fear? There is someone to whom we can turn. I’ve said it before, and I will keep on saying it: there is good news. There is really good news, and it can already be seen and experienced in Melbourne. There is something beautiful and good and happy taking place across our city where people from all manner of backgrounds are finding not a feeling of optimism but a happy and certain hope. To be sure, it won’t make the newspapers of 6pm news; good news stories don’t sell. But boy, do we need a better story than the ones filling every breaking news. As Jesus explained, what we get to see in our churches is tasted and seen in a million different cities and towns around the world and in a thousand languages and on a billion faces,
“This is what is written: The Messiah will suffer and rise from the dead on the third day, and repentance for the forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name to all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.”
“For those who’ve come across the seas We’ve boundless plains to share”
Australia has a rich and wonderful history of immigration. It is not overstating the case to say that our great nation is largely built on the blood, sweat and tears of migrants. Australia also has a mixed and difficult history with immigration; from the treatment of Chinese settlers in the 19th Century, to the Irish and sectarianism, the arrival of Italians, the white Australia policy, to welcoming Cambodian and Vietnamese refugees and more.
Like in the United Kingdom and the United States, there are growing noises here demanding that Australia shut down mass immigration.
A march is being organised across Australian cities for next Sunday. I would never have known about it except for a couple of individuals plugging it on social media. The website claims,
“Australia is changing in ways most of us never agreed to. People are waking up to a country they barely recognise. Endless migration, weak leadership, and political cowardice have brought us here, and it’s time to put a stop to it.
Immigration poses exciting possibilities. Also, immigration always presents significant challenges. There are genuine questions to be asked of Islam, as there are of Christian Nationalism and other isms. Nations rightly have borders, laws, and citizenship that govern and give shape to a country. To be pro-immigration doesn’t mean zero borders and no caps on immigration. There are real and complex questions relating to social cohesion in Australia. Deciding on intake numbers and who comes into the country and under what conditions isn’t an easy task. If you have ever spoken with an immigration officer, you’ll understand that they take their work with utmost seriousness.
People are afraid, fearful of losing the known, fearful of losing identity, and fearful of the other. But is the answer to fear, demanding the end to large immigration? Is the answer to wrap ourselves around the Australian flag, close the borders and keep out those who look different from us?
There is a major problem with this ‘March for Australia’.
The problem lies both in its starting point and in its trajectory. In short, ‘March for Australia’ is grounded in fear, ethnocentrism, and at times racism. I’m sure many people who’ll be swept up in the march are not racists, they are Aussies concerned about their country, and they’re unduly jumping onto a movement who while willing to give them a voice, is promoting xenophobic and racist ideas.
When your slogan is, ‘Stop Mass Immigration’, you are in fact acting in an anti-Australian way, because Australia is a nation made up from the nations, and we have always been. Who among us isn’t a descendant of migrants? Who among us hasn’t brought our culture into our cities, both good and bad? Have we forgotten sectarianism? It’s more than that, it is this Christian notion of the dignity of every human being, loving your neighbour and welcoming the poor and oppressed, that gave moral impetus to welcoming people to our shores. We do not welcome them because they are like us, but because we are ‘the lucky country’, and, to quote our National Anthem, “For those who’ve come across the seas, We’ve boundless plains to share”.
If your starting place is ‘immigration is bad and we must stop it’, then what follows will almost certainly be unhelpful. If, however, we begin by affirming the goodness of immigration, then we can have a conversation.
The trajectory is already being shown. When I hear a promoter say that ‘Australia has too many Chinese and too many Indians’, that is racism. And that way of thinking is gross and an affront to huge numbers of Aussies of Chinese and Indian descent, and I take it personally on behalf of my family and friends.
As one friend pointed out, this march is essentially calling for a return to the White Australia policy.
Another person alleged that anti-semitism is the reason why we must clamp down on immigration. I have said more about anti-semitism than most Christian leaders over the last couple of years, and while there is an evil anti-semitic undertone among some Muslim people, most of the anti-semitism I see is from university students and old socialists of white European heritage.
To allege immigration must stop is to say something about our character and how we view the other. It is building a society based on fear, not grace, on protectionism, not generosity, on self-actualisation, not sacrifice. In that sense, it’s all law and zero gospel. Now, that may not bother the average unbelieving Aussie, but it should surely concern the Christian. What casts out fear? Not hate, it’s love.
The wonder of the Christian message is that God includes the outsider. God’s only Son gave his life to welcome into God’s Kingdom the very people who do not belong and do not deserve citizenship. God’s Gospel is about grace, kindness, love of neighbour and for the nations.
While the Gospel and the Parable of the Good Samaritan do not outline an immigration policy, they are doing something deeper and broader. If Jesus died to save people from Morocco and Mexico, and from China and Chad, surely this changes the way we will view these image bearers of God.
Yesterday I posted a comment about immigration as a blessing, not a curse. One of the problems with my interlocutors yesterday is that as soon as I said, ‘immigration is a blessing’, they read it as saying I’m advocating for open immigration, even though my very next sentence stated that immigration brings challenges. They can’t seem to distinguish between no borders and generous immigration. But this march isn’t calling for generous immigration, according to many comments I’ve read; they want Muslims, Chinese, and Indians kept out of our country.
We are a nation of plenty. We are a nation of extraordinary wealth and prosperity. We are also a society wrapped up in red tape and layers of bureaucracy that make even simple decisions near impossible (ie solving housing). I find it interesting how Jesus didn’t say, ‘Let me come and help out so long as it doesn’t cost me anything’.
What especially stood out to me was the fact that a couple of Christians think that this march is a good idea. First of all, this protest would require you to skip church. Sure, it begins at midday, but for most people, that means missing church. If a movement or march requires you to miss church, do you think its origins are of God? Second, do they really believe that changing government policy will save our nation? That’s not a Christian answer.
Several years ago, Russell Moore was asked a question about Muslims moving into the community and wanting to build a mosque. Moore not only espoused a Baptist view of religious freedom and toleration, he also said this,
“That doesn’t turn people into Christians, that turns people into pretend Christians and sends them straight to hell. The answer to Islam isn’t Government it is the Gospel of Jesus Christ and the new birth that comes from that”.
Russell Moore is right.
Ephesians ch. 2 makes it clear that God’s reconciliation plan isn’t accomplished through Government or political means, but through the Gospel of Jesus Christ. This kind of Jesus reconciling brings disparate people together; it unites the great divide between Jew and Gentile.
“remember that at that time you were separate from Christ, excluded from citizenship in Israel and foreigners to the covenants of the promise, without hope and without God in the world. But now in Christ Jesus you who once were far away have been brought near by the blood of Christ.
For he himself is our peace, who has made the two groups one and has destroyed the barrier, the dividing wall of hostility, by setting aside in his flesh the law with its commands and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new humanity out of the two, thus making peace, and in one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility. He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit.
Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and strangers, but fellow citizens with God’s people and also members of his household”
If you think Australia will be saved through less immigration, you have missed the gospel, you probably won’t enjoy heaven, and you’re behaving more like the Levite than the Samaritan.
Jesus didn’t side with the Sadducees (who might be described as Roman conformists) nor with the Zealots. Modern-day Australian religious zealots may be feeling and seeing social discord, but rather than bringing reconciliation, they add to the discord.
Next week’s march is no more Christian than many of the protests that belong to the left-edge side of culture. Those already caffeinated on rage and scribbling out their placards for the march, will probably not like what I have written. If anything, the rage temperature will increase; perhaps it is a self-fulfilling prophecy!
However, if you’re one of those followers of Jesus who are troubled by social divisions and the fracturing we are witnessing in our streets and suburbs, press closer to the gospel of Jesus and believe God’s purposes through his son.
If you have issues with Islam, as I certainly do, love your Muslim neighbours, don’t hate on them; invite them over to your home for a meal with the family, don’t ostracise them. Invite them to Church and make them feel welcome, because they are.
Our Church is hoping to begin a ministry next year to migrant families in our community. Why? Because we want to serve them and we want them to know the good news of Jesus, just as someone once shared with us.
I love how yesterday in Western Sydney, a Sydney Anglican Church hosted a conference. It was given the name, ONE FOR ALL, and Archbishop Kanishka Raffel preached on the gospel that crosses cultures. Australia needs more of that.
If you hear people saying that there are too many Chinese or Indians or whoever in our country, call them out.
On Sunday, 31 August, go to Church as you ought, worship God with his people from among the nations, love each other, and hear again how the gospel of grace is our answer.
Update: the Melbourne march was attended by people from many different persuasions. However, the march was led by a group of self-identifying neo-Nazis, and a prominent neo-Nazi spoke from the platform to address the crowd.
I love the footy. AFL is part of Melbourne’s DNA, and it’s one of our most successful exports to the rest of the country. But I don’t love AFL that much that I want to sell my soul. Our streets are awash with domestic abuse, where women (and children) live in fear and where indescribable things take place. As a society, we are meant to be learning and improving, even with the likes of Andrew Tate and Doug Wilson espousing their grotesque language and imagery. And then the AFL announces with pride,
‘I know what we need: let’s display our sport to the world and entertain the masses with a man who raps about demeaning women.’
Last month, the Carlton Football Club wore orange on their match-day jumper to promote gender equality and the prevention of violence against women. Well done, Navy Blues, our season may be a failure but this one was a win. Two weeks later, AFL CEO Andrew Dillon announced that Snoop Dogg would headline the AFL Grand Final entertainment.
How does the AFL square their stance on violence against women while inviting Snoop ‘let me find another vile word to say about women’ Dogg, to be the headline act on Grand Final day?
Bewildering is one word. If the rapper has genuinely repented and changed his life around, that’s one thing. We should and do believe in forgiveness. However, Snoop Dogg is on the record saying that while his attitudes towards women have changed, he doesn’t regret the songs he once wrote (and which continue to be played millions of times every month).
Calvin Cordozar Broadus Jr. is one of the biggest names in the music industry, and the sporting world seems to love him, from the Super Bowl to the Olympics, and to the world of Menulog!
He certainly has charisma and a thing for wearing sunglasses, but I doubt these are the reasons why the AFL is paying Snoop Dogg a truckload of cash to perform at this year’s Grand Final.
The dude is a singing misogynist, with lyrics so explicit in their sexism and degradation of women, if the AFL paid me what their paying the Dogg, I still wouldn’t share the words here. Those who know his songs know exactly what I mean, and those who don’t are better off. The issues don’t end with his songs, but with a litany of allegations and cases that have been brought against Snoop Dogg since the mid-1990s.
What kind of artist could we promote for families on Grand Final Day? What kind of music will help younger men think well of women? What kinds of songs tell us better stories? Is there no one available in our big big world who can sing, dance and perform? Even silent Snoopy the Dog would be a better choice.
Andrew Dillon, we’re not pooping on the party; we just don’t need Snoop Dogg, or a 100 other hip hop gold wearing, pyjama wearing artists who make Pablo Picasso look like a PG rated artist.
This is yet another example of our sex confused culture. It’s kiss cam all over again, with Coldplay singing, ‘I used to rule the world’. Condemn the CEO…but love is love…The poor wife…but he’s embracing his inner self…such betrayal….but this is a consensual relationship…
We don’t want to give up on the sex hype and yet it is leaving behind a very long trial of harm.
By the way, if you’re wondering how men should relate to women, it wouldn’t hurt to pay more attention to the old book. The old book isn’t so old. Its relevance is just what we need in our age of utter confusion about gender, sex and relationships. Take ,for instance, this advice that the Apostle Paul gave to a young bloke named Timothy, “Treat younger men as brothers, older women as mothers, and younger women as sisters, with absolute purity.”
Or these age words written to a man named Titus,
“encourage the young men to be self-controlled. In everything set them an example by doing what is good. In your teaching show integrity, seriousness and soundness of speech that cannot be condemned.”
I guess it’s not sexy enough, not enough risk and hormones letting fly.
Or take the story from the book of Judges, when Israel responded to the horrific incident of a woman being raped and murdered: they went to war against the offending tribe.
Will wise heads prevail? Will the allure of profit win the day? Or will we pay and praise a misognist in front of our daughters, mums and wives?
The reporter’s focus is on US Defence Secretary Peter Hegseth and his association with CREC (a new church association in the United States headed up by Doug Wilson). If it were not for Mr Hegseth reposting a video on X about Doug Wilson, Wilson and his Moscow movement might have remained in the cold, as far as Australian media is concerned.
The word is now out, and no doubt a large number of Australians are scratching their heads and wondering, what on earth is going on here? Is Doug Wilson a legit Christian voice? Do his views reflect what Australian Churches are teaching and practising?
Let me bring assurance and a note of caution. First up, no, Melbourne isn’t Moscow, but like a cold Russian winter, the chill can cross borders.
Doug Wilson and Christian Nationalism are not anonymous in the Aussie Christian scene. Thankfully, they are only a tiny voice, and yet it is more prominent than it was 5 years ago. There are now conferences and websites and some churches that regularly appeal to Wilson and Moscow, and invite speakers from their broad tribe to Australia.
As a quick aside, the Doug Wilson who was preaching and teaching some useful and valuable ideas a decade ago is quite different from the problematic man and his movement today. Whether he always held the positions he is now propagating and kept them quiet, or whether he’s shifted over the decade, I don’t know which is the case. Either way, the Moscow vibe, as I call it (Wilson lives in Moscow, Idaho) brings a chill that we do not need in our churches or country.
The presenting story that led to the AP piece is a view promoted by Wilson’s church, whereby women should lose the right to vote. I wasn’t shocked to read this, as it fits into their view of men and family life. In the last week, I have also heard the scenario where some (a tiny, tiny number) of Christians now advocate that women should not have voting privileges in a church! The idea is preposterous as it conflicts with one of the Bible’s wonderful teachings: the priesthood of all believers, and therefore the value of all members of the church and their contributions. And what of single women? In the world of Moscow, single women are frowned upon and offered and often derided. More of this in a moment.
It doesn’t need saying (although perhaps it does) that Christianity never fits neatly into any culture; for the Christian message is transcultural. This is one of the stunning truths of Christianity, that whether Korean or Ugandan or Bolivian, the Bible and the Christ of Scripture cross time and place and ethnicity. Part of that means, though, that there will always be some element of pushback, disagreement, and confusion as to how people understand and respond to Christianity. After all, if Christianity was nothing more than a mirror to Australia 2025, there would be little incentive and reason for anyone to become a follower of Jesus Christ and join a local church. And yet, not every idea preached by every religious leader is an accurate reflection of the Christian Gospel, and hence, when the unbelieving public are perplexed by and even finds a view repellent, they are right to do so.
There are evangelical leaders in the United States expressing concern over the normalisation of ‘Christian nationalism’ in some circles. Similarly, in Australia, there are voices raising concerns about Doug Wilson and his Moscow crowd.
Stephen McAlpine and myself are among a number of Australian pastors who have been sending up flares to warn Aussie Christians about the rise of Christian Nationalism. Again, while their influence is small, the Moscow flu is catching on in some more conservative churches in Australia, and it’s an ailment that inevitably makes people sick. Symptoms include public rage, thinking ‘normal’ evangelical churches and leaders have lost the gospel, one-sided politically, anti-authority, and demeaning toward various minority groups.
Let me observe 2 examples here, one in relation to how women are viewed and one that articulates concerns about Christian Nationalism.
Christian Nationalists love to talk tough love. Their men are vocal and grow long beards and know how to skin a beaver with their bare hands. These blokey males also have a way of using their strength to demean women.
A few years ago, Sydney theologian, Dani Treweek challenged Doug Wilson and another American pastor, Michael Foster, for how they speak about single women in churches.
Treweek said,
“Wilson and Foster embark on a shared lament about the impending crisis facing churches whose pews are soon to be filled with lonely, unlikeable, tubby spinsters who have nothing in their lives and so spend their days endlessly seeking the benevolent attention of their ever-patient but extremely busy and very important senior pastor.”
She sums up Foster and Wilson’s views on single women as:
the reason women are single is because “Baby […] You can do better than this. You’re not likeable” or because they are too “tubby” to be considered of marital value to the men around them (at least the ones they haven’t driven into the arms of Islam);
single women are derogatorily dismissed as a “bunch of old spinsters”
anyone not married by the time they are 40 are issued the dire warning that they ‘will be lonely’
elderly widowed women are depicted as a tiresome burden upon the senior pastor’s time and energy
the only valuable and valid expression of love in action is if it is directed towards someone’s own offspring and then their offspring
single women are the harbingers of “chaos”
unmarried women don’t “have anything” in their lives”
With the surprise of an AFL team beating the local u12 boys team, they responded with a tirade of personal attacks on Dani Treweek’s singleness and theological credentials!.
Then there is this issue with ‘Christian Nationalism’, which readers of The Age may be wondering about. At this point, allow me to repeat a few paragraphs from an article I wrote on the subject in 2023, following up a series of pieces written by Stephen McAlpine as he reviewed Stephen Wolfe’s ‘The Case For Christian Nationalism’. McAlpine eventually gave up reading Wolfe after several bouts of diarrhoea!
“The tectonic plates of belief and hope are moving and causing major disruptions to every sphere of life. One of the answers being proposed by Christians (in some circles) is one gaining some traction in some areas of American and European Christianity, and it’s finding its way onto Australian shores as well: Christian Nationalism.
It’s not as though Christian Nationalism is brand new; iterations have existed at different points in history, often with long-term disappointment, bloodshed, and Gospel compromise.
I understand why Christians across the United States are concerned and even angry at some of the values and views that have captured hearts. I appreciate why Aussie believers are troubled by various moral agendas that have been normalised in our political and educational institutions. However, frustration and concern with politicians and the political process is not a reason for reactionary theology and poor exegesis.
We don’t fix one problem by adding another one; that way, we end up with a bigger mess!
Christian Nationalism ends up making the State into the church and the church into a political party and turning the Gospel of grace into a weapon to beat down political opponents. Instead of being God’s message of reconciliation, it distorts the gospel into a message of social conservatism and one that sees political progressivism as the great Satan. Social and moral conservatism can be as dangerous to spiritual health in its intentions to create new forms of legalism and allegiances.
I’m not saying that Christians in Australia walk away from the public square and sit tight on uncomfortable pews behind stained glass windows. It’s not that Christians shouldn’t participate in the political process. It’s not that we should ignore social issues and cultural debates. Such things are part of common grace and ways we can love our neighbours. Christianity influencing the public square isn’t Christian Nationalism, it is a wonderful byproduct of the goodness and sensibility of Christianity.”
Australia is one of numerous countries where governments are getting bigger, and the people are looking increasingly to government to be the saviour of all their issues and hopes and fears. This has the unfortunate effect of giving more authority and responsibility to the State and, negatively, it diminishes the role of the community to take responsibility. That critique aside, in the eyes of Scripture, the State is not the main game, but it is the church. In this sense, Christian Nationalism makes a similar error to other heresies, like the prosperity gospel and social justice gospel. They all aim at changing society (and controlling society) through policy and behaviour.
The problem with that mindset is that it contradicts the nature of the Gospel and the purpose of the church (aka Ephesians ch.2). The halls of Parliament and legislative offices are not the places where God is working out his redemptive plans. It is in the church and by the Gospel of Christ that God is achieving his purposes.
Christian Nationalists may well identify some sins of America (or Australia), and yet the answer according to Scripture isn’t to make America great again or Australia, but to present the Gospel of Christ and make disciples of all nations. Christianity is international and multi ethnic, and any attempt to contract the gospel to a particular nation-state is enormously problematic.
Make Christianity weird again, not make Christianity skewed again! The message of Jesus Christ has this remarkable ability to weave and connect through every fabric of society. Christianity eventually revolutionised how the Roman Empire viewed women, babies, slaves, and more. Our modern equality sensibilities didn’t arrive by chance, but through Christianity. And yet it wasn’t through some militant takeover bid fueled with rage and demeaning the downtrodden, but with sacrifice and through persuasion, and the God of grace bringing forgiveness and newness of life.
If there is a ‘sin of empathy’ (yes, Moscow is also responsible for the ‘sin of empathy’ vibe), it is to show empathy with this movement blowing its cold weather in a westerly direction over the Pacific Ocean. My advice I, avoid it like the plague. Instead, be captured by the Apostle Paul’s vision for the Christian Church in Ephesus. In that ancient metropolis of commercial and religious influence, Paul reminds the local church of God’s message of peace and being God’s people of peace. I’m convinced, we (churches) will do well to keep working hard at this:
He came and preached peace to you who were far away and peace to those who were near. 18 For through him we both have access to the Father by one Spirit.
19 Consequently, you are no longer foreigners and strangers, but fellow citizens with God’s people and also members of his household, 20 built on the foundation of the apostles and prophets, with Christ Jesus himself as the chief cornerstone. 21 In him the whole building is joined together and rises to become a holy temple in the Lord. 22 And in him you too are being built together to become a dwelling in which God lives by his Spirit. (Ephesians 2:17-22)
Mike Bird has written a series of helpful articles about Christian Nationalism, including reviewing Wiliam Wolfe’s book, ‘The Case for Christian Nationalism
As Zoomers try out church, many are looking toward older and more traditional churches. What is behind the growing interest in liturgical and classical churches? What are some helpful tips for choosing an authentic and legitimate church? In this episode, I explore 2 ways to assess the ‘real thing’: learning history and going back to first principles, namely the Bible.
A challenge if you live in Melbourne. A challenge no matter your age, and especially if you’re part of Generatoin Z
Be radical and read the Bible!
Check out the latest on ‘Tomorrow’s Melbourne’ and how an upsurge of Bible reading in the UK could help us take the Bible more seriously here in Melbourne
There seem to be 3 misnomers circulating regarding Baptist belief and practice, in light of the decision to remove 2 churches from the NSW/ACT Baptist Association:
Freedom of conscience
Freedom of association.
It’s a matter of interpretation
I have written about these topics at length on other occasions, so I won’t repeat everything here. Nonetheless, it is worthwhile pointing out that while these 3 points are being used to criticise the Baptists’ decision, these very points in fact support the decisions that were made.
Of course, freedom of conscience, and its cousin, freedom of association, are important Baptist principles. These are ideals for which I am thankful. They do not exist however without context, form or boundary.
Speaking to the ABC, Belinda Groves (Senior Minister Canberra Baptist), suggested,
‘Baptist churches are not like the Anglicans or the Catholics – it’s not very hierarchical. We have what’s called local, you know, congregational autonomy. And when we gather together as an association, it’s recognising that our real governance happens in our local churches and that that association is really just a recognition of connection between us and a common commitment to do things together that take a bit more than just a small individual church.’
That’s mostly true. Groves doesn’t explain what this Baptist connection is and means (I sense she’s downplaying it), which is fine given it’s a short television interview, but when we begin asking the question, what is the glue that makes us baptists together, the answer given is often that being Baptist is primarily about freedom: freedom of conscience and freedom of association. Again, while these are cherished ideals, they can’t exist without definition and boundaries, otherwise, they become meaningless terms.
When I hear some voices declare that Saturday’s decisions cut against our Baptist distinctive (some of these voices are by non baptists), I want to respond by saying, you’re being historically myopic and theologically incorrect.
Baptists can rightly defend a person’s right to believe and practice their religion freely AND believe that freedom of association requires common agreement among those desiring to associate together. The fact that we have doctrinal bases demonstrates that there are commonly aligned theological convictions: the Trinity, penal substitution, faith in Christ, the bodily resurrection of Jesus and more. When it comes to contemporary issues surrounding sexual practices, these were not disputed in former days, but now through what Carl Trueman describes as ‘expressive individualism’, matters like same-sex marriage have come about and therefore churches are required to form a view.
In 2009, theologian Hefin Jones wrote a paper for NSW Baptists where he offered an important historical survey of different strands of Baptist thought. While he is surveying NSW Baptists, the same groupings are found among Baptists worldwide. Jones demonstrates that when it comes to confessions and statements of association, there are broadly 3 Baptist groups: Anti-Creedalism, Non-Creedal Confessionalism, and Confessionalism.
That’s important for understanding those who are decrying the decision made by 2/3s of Baptist delegates last Saturday. When they argue that NSW is becoming anti-baptist and authoritarian, they are representing one line of historic Baptist thought, not the entirety.
Of NSW, Jones notes,
“Were Anti- or Non-Creedalism intrinsic to Baptist identity then NSW Baptists as a denomination have never been true to it…from the beginning of the NSW Baptist Union in 1868 it has been Confessional, the real question being, how Confessional? Unlike the associational rules of 1858 the 1868 constitution included a doctrinal basis.”
It’s interesting to discover that both freedom of conscience and freedom of association are linked historically to Baptists speaking against Governmental intrusion in religious matters or controlling the local church. More recently these have become an argument for Baptists to promote all kinds of ideas and practices. This, in my view, can lead to misrepresenting Baptist ideals.
It’s also the case that Baptists have always had mechanisms for removing pastors and churches. That our Unions have rarely resorted to these is a good thing but sadly sometimes it is necessary for the sake of Gospel clarity, unity and mission.
As much as some Baptists are crying ‘freedom’, we understand that the conscience isn’t infallible, nor is it the Lord of the Church. And Christian association, for it to be truly Christian, requires common ascent to the Gospel, and indeed to things like the Apostles Creed and Nicaea Creed. Baptists get along and disagree on many tertiary matters, but same-sex marriage isn’t one of them, and when we’re told that it is, I suspect progressives are ignoring their own clarion calls for justice and what they understand the gospel to be about.
This leads to the biggest misnomer of all, namely that same-sex marriage is merely a matter of interpretation and therefore not one that’s serious enough for breaking fellowship.
Bible interpretation is indeed a factor and there’s a whole discussion that can be had about hermeneutics, but is the Bible’s teaching on sexuality vague and contestable? The argument, ‘it’s just about interpretation’ serves more like a poor cover version of today’s sexual milieu. It’s an effective tool for muddying the waters, but little more. I suspect when progressive churches are transparent about their convictions (as I’ve heard some pastors argue behind the scenes), they believe sexuality issues are a love of God issue and a justice issue. Far from speaking about same-sex marriage as a second-tier belief, they often frame their position as crucial to understanding the Gospel and the character of Christ. If they are to be consistent, surely they appreciate and agree that the issue at hand isn’t one where we can all agree to disagree. It’s either a primary justice and love of God matter or it isn’t.
Same-sex marriage is a primary Baptist issue for 2 clear reasons: Jesus says sex outside heterosexual marriage is a sin and the Apostle Paul refers to exclusion from God’s Kingdom and what contradicts sound doctrine and the gospel. How can we embrace that which God says excludes? That’s not God’s hate language, this is God’s loving word who desires people to have life in His name.
The ABC presenter noted the banner that was positioned behind where Belinda Groves was speaking. It says, ‘Everyone’s welcome here’.
Yes, we want our churches to be welcoming and loving and kind. Please God, may they be a community where people from any background can come and be welcomed and hear the gospel. For the most part, our churches are. However, welcoming everyone into our churches, as Baptists do, does not mean embracing every belief and practice that walks in the door. No Christian Church can function that way; indeed no sporting club, school, or political party can function according to that principle. It’s the very fact that God’s love yet profoundly disagrees with us that shook the world and led to the cross and gives hope. I sinned, and yet he loved me. I rebuffed God’s ways, and yet he leads us to repentance and new life by his Son.
If Baptists choose to say no to the orthodox view of marriage, they are free to do so, but in doing so they have made a choice to tear themselves from this Baptist fabric. It’s not what anyone wishes, but God’s gospel of love and forgiveness and reconciliation matters so much that it’s incumbent upon churches to guard the faith once for all delivered.
The process undertaken by the New South Wales/ACT Association took longer than many of the key Church Councils throughout church history. I can’t think of how many meetings and conversations and Assemblies were held over the past 10 years that finally led to Saturday’s decision. People may or may not like the process, but one thing is certain, it was pretty exhaustive and exhausting, and rightly followed Baptist principles of the churches making decisions together for the sake of the gospel and gospel unity, health and mission.
I don’t know of anyone rejoicing over Saturday’s decision to remove the 2 churches. It was a sad day. It’s appropriate to grieve the loss of these churches and be thankful that a clear majority of churches chose to stick with Scripture and the good of future Christian witness. As the media take hold of the issue, it’s pretty obvious how the game will be played and who will be painted as the bad guys. So I reckon the Apostle Peter offers a timely word, ‘don’t be afraid’.
“Live such good lives among the pagans that, though they accuse you of doing wrong, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day he visits us…Who is going to harm you if you are eager to do good? But even if you should suffer for what is right, you are blessed. “Do not fear their threats; do not be frightened.” But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. (1 Peter 2:12; 3:13-15)
This is the question posed by Bari Weiss. We can certainly ask the question of Australia. It’s not as though what happens in America will necessarily follow here in Australia, but their weather conditions often blow across the Pacific Ocean.
It comes to mind that there was the prophet from Crete quoted in Titus 1:12 and Epimenides gets a mention by the Apostle in his famed Areopagus speech. And let’s not to forget the Aussie band Crowded House who are getting a mention in this week’s sermon at church. There are moments when an unbeliever says something that is true either about God or about the world or Christianity, and their commentary is worth reflecting upon.
My mate Stephen McAlpine has been talking up Bari Weiss’ podcast, Honestly. Another friend drew my attention to one recent episode which I watched with interest yesterday.
For those who are unaware, Bari Weiss isn’t a Christian. She is a former New York Times journalist who famously resigned and now writes for other publications. Weiss is agnostic (former atheist?) and Jewish and a woman who’s married to another woman. There are obviously some things here out of sync with the message of Jesus Christ, especially the New York Times! (that’s a joke, sort of). Bari Weiss is among a growing throng of intellectuals who are dissatisfied with the cultural zeitgeist and who despite their unbelief, are warming to Christianity, or at least becoming positively disposed toward some of Christianity’s historical, ethical and sociological strengths. It’s as though they recognise that when a society dismantles Christianity, it’s like removing the steel frame from a building; it loses its sturdiness and begins to succumb to the environment and weather conditions surrounding it.
I have now listened to several of Weiss’ interviews, including a recent one with Jonathan Rauch. And it’s this interview that I wish to shine a light on.
Jonathan Rauch is an American journalist and Senior Fellow with the Brookings Institute. He has a pedigree from Yale University and writing for The Economist and The Atlantic. Like Weiss, Jonathan Rauch is not a Christian. He makes that clear in this podcast episode. Indeed, Weiss introduces him as an atheist Jewish gay man. As Rauch admits during the interview, he was no friend of Christianity and Christians and yet something is changing. He says,
“20 years ago I was in the camp that said America was secularising and isn’t that great. Religion is divisive and dogmatic and we’re going to have less of it and we’re going to be like Sweden or Denmark and Scandinavia, and we’ll be happier.
I was completely wrong about that. It has been the biggest mistake of my intellectual career.”
It is worth watching the full one-hour interview, both to hear Raunch’s interesting insights, and also just to hear how two thoughtful unbelievers are now engaging with Christianity.
During the conversation with Bari Weiss, Rauch wants to argue for Christianity in the sense that it provides the necessary pillars for liberal democracy. Rauch identifies 3 key pillars of Christianity and therefore of liberal democracy:
Don’t be afraid
Be like Jesus
Forgive each other.
He explains how these ideas were and remain radical and derive from the Christian faith. I would quibble about what are the pillars of Christianity and we can talk about this another time. But these 3 ideas are nonetheless revolutionary and were introduced into the world by Christianity. They have been so successful that we often take them for granted today without realising that dismantling Christianity will create significant problems for social and civil flourishing.
My interest in this interview centres on Rauch’s explanation of thin Christianity and sharp Christianity. It’s how Rauch attempts to call out and even plead with Christians to be more Christian, not less.
‘Thin Christianity’, as the adjective suggests, thins out Christian distinctive such that society finds the ideas palatable. It’s classic theological liberalism. Let’s thin out all those tricky Bible ideas that progressive society finds offensive. That kind of Christianity is still around in the United States and Australia, but it’s generally easy to spot as it’s lauded by social pundits and found in emptying churches.
Rauch also observes the rise of ‘sharp Christianity’. He looks back to the 1980s and the rise of the political evangelical but notes how this has escalated in the last 8-9 years. It is his view that among American Evangelicals there is a drift from the character of Jesus. To be clear, he’s not clumping all evangelicals under this ‘sharp’ umbrella and of course, as an unbeliever, Rauch isn’t defining these issues in a gospel and theological way. Nonetheless, his point has merit.
Rauch talks about sharp Christianity being ‘political and polarised’. He goes into some detail about how President Trump played for the conservative Christian vote and offered a seat at the White House. As Rauch notes, the promise of power is an ancient one. I’ve read enough over the years to see some evangelicals sacrificing gospel humility and clarity for an invitation to a White House prayer meeting or inside conversations with policymakers.
Interestingly Rauch differentiates between the older politicised evangelical, which was a top-down movement, and the more recent interaction which is bottom-up. I have certainly heard stories where people began attending and joining churches based on the church’s political stance.
Rauch goes on to make this rather chilling comment regarding young adults in America,
“They no longer believed that the church believed what it’s meant to believe.”
Where this is true, there’s a major problem.
The rhetoric Rauch is hearing among the ‘sharp Christians’ is,
’We don’t want to hear about turning the other cheek, we want to talk about taking back our country’.
Similar rhetoric is becoming more commonplace among some Australian Christian voices. It may not be the dominant voice, but it is certainly a noisy one and one vying for influence. Just yesterday one Christian pastor suggested I was the Devil for saying Christians should be more like Jesus instead of adding to the anger and fragmentation that’s perforating all around us.
This politicisation of Christianity has the habit of confusing the gospel, conflating Church and State, and misplacing eschatological hope by trying to drag the new creation into the present. I’ve been writing about this unseemly conjugality for several years now. It is not that Christians have nothing to say or contribute to civil society. A liberal democracy enables and needs people of faith to bring their ideas and convictions to the table. And as Jonathan Rauch recognises, a healthy liberal democracy is a fruitful branch born from Christian theism. And yet, as Jesus and the Apostles made clear distinctions between common grace and particular grace, and between the two ages in which we live, so must Christians today.
1 Peter is very much on my mind as we preach through the Petrine Epistle at church. Peter is pretty clear about where Christian hope lies, what Christian identity is, and therefore how we relate to different parts of society.
He says,
“ Dear friends, I urge you, as foreigners and exiles, to abstain from sinful desires, which wage war against your soul. 12 Live such good lives among the pagans that, though they accuse you of doing wrong, they may see your good deeds and glorify God on the day he visits us.
13 Submit yourselves for the Lord’s sake to every human authority: whether to the emperor, as the supreme authority, 14 or to governors, who are sent by him to punish those who do wrong and to commend those who do right. 15 For it is God’s will that by doing good you should silence the ignorant talk of foolish people. 16 Live as free people, but do not use your freedom as a cover-up for evil; live as God’s slaves. 17 Show proper respect to everyone, love the family of believers, fear God, honor the emperor.” (1 Peter 2:11-17)
If our language and speech toward others is frequently out of sync with the apostle’s instructions, there is a problem.
Both thin and sharp Christianity share a common goal even if their modus operandi differs. They both aim to win influence and people and to take the culture or country; the former does so by diluting Christian doctrine and life, and the other by using Christian ideas as a sledgehammer. Both may win approval in various quarters and even notch a few political wins, and we likely lose people’s souls and dishonour the Christ whom we claim to worship and follow.
I hope we can say that we want to avoid both thin Christianity and sharp Christianity. Instead, we need a Christianity that is both thick and grace-filled, deep and clear. And the only way to do that is to become more Gospel-centred, not less, more Bible not less, and more Spirit-filled not less. Christians can engage in the public square but don’t take your script from the culture. Public speech is to be conducted out of love for our neighbours, not about punching your opponents to the ground. Engagement in the culture should be about promoting the Gospel of Jesus Christ, not ensuring your favoured political party wins the next election. I’m not suggesting that public issues are unimportant to the Christian; but surely we have a bigger mandate and vision in mind.
Bari Weiss and Jonathan Rauch are not confessing the Lordship of Christ or believing in the atonement. But their tune has changed. Let’s pray that their appreciation of Christ becomes a genuine trust in Him. If Nicodemus the scholar could approach Jesus at night to ask questions and realise there is something true and good about Jesus, then those asking serious questions in the light of day may also find what Jesus alone can give.
Christianity isn’t a commodity, it’s about a person. Christianity is more than a political theory or ethical system, but is knowing the God of the cosmos, and being reconciled to Him because of the brutality God’s Son embraced for us. As Peter explained to the early churches,
“For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, to bring you to God”.
There is my Gospel call for today. Let’s return to Christians. The temptation to be a thin or sharp Christian isn’t new. How many times have I now heard someone wanting to be John Knox!
There is warrant to Rauch’s complaint, even if he falls short of where we need to be in following Jesus. Don’t be a thin Christian or a sharp Christian. Instead, be a Jesus Christian (as if there’s another kind!). For one final time, press closely to what Peter the Apostle instructs. Take a couple of minutes to read what Peter says and reflect upon our public voice in light of these verses. Sure, it’s unlikely to win an election or change society overnight, but it is better and it is desperately what the world needs of Christians today,
“Finally, all of you, be like-minded, be sympathetic, love one another, be compassionate and humble. 9 Do not repay evil with evil or insult with insult. On the contrary, repay evil with blessing, because to this you were called so that you may inherit a blessing. 10 For,
“Whoever would love life and see good days must keep their tongue from evil and their lips from deceitful speech.
They must turn from evil and do good; they must seek peace and pursue it.
For the eyes of the Lord are on the righteous and his ears are attentive to their prayer, but the face of the Lord is against those who do evil.”
Who is going to harm you if you are eager to do good? But even if you should suffer for what is right, you are blessed. “Do not fear their threats; do not be frightened.” But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.’ (1 Peter 3:8-16)
If Peter’s exhortation grates on us, then take that as God’s alarm going off and seek his grace to work out how your heart might more align with His.
The NSW Parliament last week adopted a set of laws prohibiting the conversion of or suppression of peoples sexuality orientation and gender identity. The laws are not as extreme as those in the State of Victoria, nonetheless, there is clear government overreach.
Yes, these new laws in places are bad. They are bad because they introduce needless restrictions on normal Christian faith and practice. They are bad laws because they are defending against practices that are mostly mythical. The laws are bad because they take a smidgen of truth and a lot of illegitimate and aggressive sexology (to use Stephen Mcalpine’s word). The are bad laws because the give Government greater authority over religion (which is an odd position for anyone positing that we are a secular country).
Associate Professor Neil Foster has written a helpful explanation of what the laws do and do not mean and where is ambiguity. I would encourage people to read Foster’s article in light of some misinformation that is floating around and being circulated as fact.
However, Christians have begun to respond to these new laws. I’ve noticed more than a few turning to the Old Testament prophet, Daniel, and have begun quoting that famous incident that landed him in a lion’s den. I happen to think the story of Daniel is one of many helpful Bible places we can turn to as a guide and encouragement. But if we’re going to use Daniel ch.6 for our stump speech, there are a couple of details we need to first take into account.
Firstly, what kind of presence are we in society?
Notice how Babylon’s officials and powerbrokers describe Daniel,
“At this, the administrators and the satraps tried to find grounds for charges against Daniel in his conduct of government affairs, but they were unable to do so. They could find no corruption in him, because he was trustworthy and neither corrupt nor negligent. Finally these men said, “We will never find any basis for charges against this man Daniel unless it has something to do with the law of his God.” (Daniel 6:4-5)
Daniel is a wonderful example to Christians today. There is something that particularly resonates with us about the life and times of Daniel for he was an exile living away from his home, as are all Christians today. He is living and working in a context with foreign gods and ideas dominate the horizon and we’re worshipping God is part of a small minority. Part of the wisdom that we glean from the book of Daniel, and it is a book of wisdom, is how Daniel adapted to life in Babylon and worked hard and judiciously for the common good, and yes obeyed pagan Kings, yet without compromising faithfulness to the one true God.
There have been an inflation of open letters and public declarations of late, mostly from a particular quarter of the Christian faith. These are often highlighting genuine issues, but their content and tone often fall short of usefulness. As someone who has had moments in the past when I’ve employed too many strong adjectives, I’m more conscious these days about precision and not overblowing a situation. It is advisable to read and research before putting your name to a public statement.
As the enraged mood takes hold of so many quarters of society, a Christian voice should be different, but sometimes it is as angry and hyperbolic and therefore indistuishable from others. For example, if your public record is filled with distain for authorities and governments and making antiauthoritarian claims whenever you disagree with a policy or law, when a legitimate concern finally arises, why would those in positions of authority listen to you? It’s like the percussionist in a Symphony Orchestra who is always smashing the symbols as hard as she can strike and often out of time with the rest of the Orchestra. Soon enough the orchestra is going to send you down to the basement and lock you out!
Who wants to listen to the guy who is always shouting at everyone? Who takes seriously the voices who are decrying every issue as a threat to freedom and democracy and religion?
Defiance seems to be the default modus operandi for too many Christians today. However, this shouldn’t be our baseline approach to life in the world and it’s certainly not the way Daniel approached life in Babylon.
There will be some other Christians who have no issue with the new laws in NSW and who are trying to con us into thinking that anyone criticising the law is pulling a furphy. I suspect they’ll be among those who volunteer to be part of the firing squad.
Second, notice how Daniel responded to the unreasonable law.
“Now when Daniel learned that the decree had been published, he went home to his upstairs room where the windows opened toward Jerusalem. Three times a day he got down on his knees and prayed, giving thanks to his God, just as he had done before. Then these men went as a group and found Daniel praying and asking God for help. So they went to the king…”
Daniel continues with what was his normal practice. He didn’t make a song and dance out of it. He simply continued to faithfully pray to God three times a day.
Daniel’s praying wasn’t attention seeking, or brash, he wasn’t revving up the social temperature or resorting to hyperbolic claims or allegations. The window was always open and he carried on as he had always done, with humility and faithfulness.
The problem is, and I understand because I know the injustice of the Victorian laws, too many people are wanting to be David swinging a rock at Goliath’s head, rather than a humble Daniel who went about faithfully serving the Lord and serving the common good of the city where he lived.
In case we think, maybe Daniel is just a one off, I’m about to start a new sermon series at Mentone Baptist on 1 Peter. With little imagination required, I’ve given our series the title, ‘Living away from home’. Like Daniel, Christians are exiles and sojourners, and Peter helpfully explains how Christians ought to live as exiles. In one place he says this,
“Who is going to harm you if you are eager to do good? But even if you should suffer for what is right, you are blessed. “Do not fear their threats; do not be frightened.” But in your hearts revere Christ as Lord. Always be prepared to give an answer to everyone who asks you to give the reason for the hope that you have. But do this with gentleness and respect, keeping a clear conscience, so that those who speak maliciously against your good behavior in Christ may be ashamed of their slander.For it is better, if it is God’s will, to suffer for doing good than for doing evil. (1 Peter 3:13-17)
There is a sense in which we are to embrace suffering for the Lord’s sake. And the manner in which we do also matters according to Peter. Gentleness and respect…not resorting to malicious speech but with good behaviour. So like Daniel and Peter, choose faithfulness, and like Daniel and Peter (and Jesus), part of faithfulness is speaking and behaving with utmost integrity and with grace and refusing to be that clanging cymbal.
MurrayCampbell.net 