Adventure summoned like a morning trumpet,
The clarion sound sang brilliant and brittle,
Commanding snap attention,
With vibrato that bent uncertain.
Flying away,
To pursue the future.
Pushing away the cloud and smoke,
As though swimming freestyle through the pool.
The disappearing dot,
Motions eagerly across the horizon,
And beyond both eye and ear.
He has gone.
A camouflaged uniform deceives,
Like the wallaby hiding among the rocks.
In that assumption found and grasping hope,
A long wait begins and motions without sound
Believing and wondering,
Drowning anticipation of tomorrow’s sky,
Screaming at the Ecclesiastes dot that is no longer there,
And inhaling the nightmare prayer.
The drone of technology is a vicious servant,
Punching holes in the earth and exposing all who claim safety,
Calculated and precise, sniffing out its prey,
Those found are obliterated into an early grave.
Never found,
Nothing to hold or see,
Absent,
Missing.
Terror insists control,
Only to dump the soul in Hades anger,
Who but Orpheus can enter that realm,
And row my son home?
The willow leans upon the corridor wall,
Lonely and observing passers by.
His cap protrudes from on top the stand,
Without a head to shape its home.
Grabbing at the thinning air,
And wielding a deadened heart,
Throw it at the Ypres salient,
To where his body somewhere lays.
The blue sky mocks those who are fallen,
And those who remain glare at its endless cheerful derision.
It is forever stained with red,
A graffiti fit for a missing tomb.
Can mortal men be consoled by immortal God?
A Father to the lost and missing?
Our hands emptied, no grasp is felt,
Might a gracious Father welcome them home?
‘For this son of mine was dead and is alive again; he was lost and is found.’
Ashes to Ashes,
Dust to dust,
Step out of the crease,
The Aussie eye says yes please.
But fairness the English cry.
‘It’s not cricket’, they sigh.
Piers Morgan short circuits.
The MCC turn to outrage,
And Rishi Sunak jumps on the diplomatic stage.
Bairstow is still standing at Lord’s,
Stunned that the Aussies know his tricks.
Broad screams rude words at this wicket,
As Stokes looks to Woakes for a speeding ticket.
What more can the Aussies do?
Other than look away from this English zoo.
We helped as much as we could,
Smith dropped a catch
And Starc tried he best too.
Maybe draw a bigger line?
What about putting up a sign?
“Here’s the crease,
Don’t leave if you want your innings to decease?”
But I get it, I really do.
If the English wore our shoe,
Their keeper wouldn’t throw the ball,
And stump us out to enthral,
The barmy army in their latest pub crawl.
So much blood and spilled tea,
Over that single delivery.
Carey, Cummins, and Albanese,
May be we should turn down the rivalry.
At Headingly,
Let us ask the English team,
When they’d like to stay or leave.
Did they like this ball or that shot?
We can replay that for you, Sir Lancelot.
If there's a moral to this sorry tale,
It’s hide your hypocrisy,
Under veils of angry memes and sad faces,
Or trip over at Borough Market your shoelaces.
There is still time dear England,
You have 3 more tests to contest,
The burning coals on the headrest.
Just maybe, letting this go through to the keeper is best!
The plunge into the world of sexual fantasy and the normalisation of all manner of sexual proclivities continues, and probably will so for time to come. There is little left that remains a no-go zone, so long it’s prefaced by the word ‘consent’. I’m glad we are now having a national conversation around consent. It’s 50 years too late, but at least society and schools are now talking about it. Hopefully, consent becomes one of several essential components that are required for building a healthy sexual ethic. Indeed, consent is a Bible idea, showing us both the evil of when it’s not given and the beauty of biblically framed consent.
Like most people, I don’t enjoy dipping my feet into these conversations, because they are less conversant and more spitting anger, insult, and worse. It’s always easier to let things be. We’re damned if we do and if we don’t.
The latest episode of ‘what happens in America Comes to Australia’, is Drag Queens performing for children.
Councils across Melbourne are deciding that what children really need is exposure to men dressing up as hyper-sexualised parodic women. While this seems to be relatively new, like previous iterations of our sexular age, what is possible soon becomes normal and then it’s defined as a moral imperative and any dissenters are deemed to be the worst of bigots. It’s not that men dressing in drag is new to society, but hosting such events for young children is new.
Let’s be clear, there are people in the community who are responding in inappropriate and even dreadful ways. One doesn’t correct one wrong by making another. There is no place for making threats against individuals or organisations, or screaming and shouting obscenities and slanderous name calling. If that is you, please shut up, stay home and take this Proverb’s warning to heart, “An angry person stirs up conflict, and a hot-tempered person commits many sins.” (Proverbs 29:22)
Having said that, is the only alternative to that kind of unsociable behaviour, acceptance and affirmation? Of course not.
University of Melbourne Theatre teachers, Sarah Austin and Jonathan Graffam O’Meara, have written a defence of Drag Story Time for The Conversation. In ‘Won’t somebody please think of the children? Their agency is ignored in the moral panic around drag storytime’, they rightly call out uncouth protestors, although they also suggest that anyone concerned by sex performers must be phobic and bigoted. The trope, while now common usage, is both lazy and false.
Their main thesis is that parents should let their children decide. They argue that children have moral agency and therefore the best thing to do is expose them to queer theory. There is of course a tiny little flaw in their contention: Parents have both a moral and legal responsibility to their children, which includes raising them according to what they believe is right and best. Should we let a 5-year-old look at porn, just because they ask? Should we invite our children to watch Game of Thrones or other highly sexed-up shows because we’re giving them agency?
Leaving aside this weird and yes, dangerous, proposition, the authors admit the very thing that’s not meant to be said about children’s drag story time: there is an agenda.
“Drag pokes fun at the gender binary and, in doing so, it aims to blur the boundaries and expose the artificiality of gender roles.”
Austin and Graffam O’Meara have confessed that these drag performers have an agenda and it is to dismantle and even destroy male/female distinctions.
The admission continues,
“the way drag asks us to question the socially constructed nature of gender offers children a vision of self-determination. You can do what you want to do, you can be who you want to be.”
By this self-determination, the authors mean ‘queerness’.
This is nothing short of education for young children, teaching them to reject biological realities about sex and rejecting gender differences (as though these are inherently bad for you) and instead adopt a queer view of the self.
It is somewhat ironic that Premier Daniel Andrews, among others, will defend Drag story times for kids as though this is a moral good. And yet, if a religious person prays with or talks to another individual about sex or gender, they can face criminal charges and imprisonment. Alice has jumped down the rabbit hole and we haven’t hit rock bottom yet!
Indeed, Victoria’s sex agenda may have more to offer. Victorian Legislative Council member, David Limbrick, today tweeted,
“In Victoria, we will soon have new censorship legislation. We already suspect that the Greens will happily support criminalising the expression of the definition of a woman as “adult human female”. The real question is, will the Labor Government go this far? Will the Opposition even resist?”
The legislation hasn’t been released yet and so we don’t know what it will contain, but at least one MP is asking the question.
This isn’t about hating on anyone, this is about loving our kids and believing that young children shouldn’t be exposed to sexualised behaviour and agendas.
If there was ever a sexual revolutionary that we should be following, it’s the one started by Jesus. Jesus didn’t accept the sexual norms of First Century Judea and Rome. He stood up against men who treated women as property and objects of sexual gratification. He affirmed the Biblical pattern for marriage: 1 man and 1 woman for life. He also showed great compassion toward those who were sexually broken and struggling, and he loved and forgave those whose sexual lifestyle transgressed God’s good ways.
The problem today is that just about every issue is hijacked by the loud and mean and crude and the most militant of adherents. This is true for opposing sides in many of these debates. The ability to partner disagreement with love is anathema to many today, although as people we are in desperate need of this combination. A parent who only ever agrees or affirms their children is travelling down a very unsettling and selfish path. How much more should this be said of God, if he only ever affirms every whim and thought and desire we want.
When the next Melbourne Council proposed a children’s drag queen story time, let’s not pretend there are no sexual connotations attached. Also, don’t follow the lead of the hyper right and reach for the boiling point of outrage. If we’re serious about navigating a better way for having important conversations and to present a better sexual ethic, we need to return to one man who can truly claim to be a Saviour.
I’ve decided to dive into the conversation surrounding FINA’s decision on gender. I’m not jumping in because of some ‘culture war’, but I’m a dad with 3 children who each play sport. They have all played sport at a high level, including my daughter, and speaking up for girls in sport is the right thing to do.
I want to begin by saying what should be obvious, transgender people deserve our compassion. While many ideologues and activists require critique and even our condemnation. Learning to distinguish between these two groups isn’t always straightforward but is important.
FINA’s decision to ban biological men from competing in international swimming has caused a wave of criticism in some circles. One can get the impression that the divide is spread evenly across the lanes; I however suspect that is not the case, but as with many issues it is often the case that vociferous voices give the impression of greater numbers.
It wasn’t so long ago that everyone knew men were men and women were women. It didn’t require a university degree or a catalogue of carefully asked questions. Seeing and knowing the differences between men and women formed part of basic human knowledge. Apart from approximately 0.018%of people who are intersex (a properly defined medical condition), everyone falls neatly into either male or female. But of course, as the sexual revolution shifted from arguing for gender equality to removing distinctions between the genders, it is becoming near impossible to define what is a man and a woman. Indeed, school children are berated for suggesting this natural binary and one can find themselves hauled before the HR Department at at work for believing so.
Dr Carl Trueman is correct when he writes, “The expressive individual is now the sexually expressive individual. And education and socialization are to be marked not by the cultivation of traditional sexual interdicts and taboos but rather by the abolition of such and the enabling of pansexual expression even among children.”
Chip Le Grand has written what I think is a very interesting piece for Saturday’s The Age.
“FINA has also answered a thornier question that all sports bodies, in one way or another, must grapple with; can the biological advantage that comes from going through male puberty be entirely surrendered by someone who no longer identifies as male? The FINA position is that, in swimming, it can’t.”
Rugby League has quickly followed FINA and other sporting authorities may well follow. While the decisions are pretty definitive, they are unlikely to be the final and forever position. For anyone engaged in reading gender theory and watching their HR department and school curriculum, it’s pretty obvious that FINA’s decision will be overturned at some point. We are regularly reminded by gender theorists and political activists that they are rarely satisfied with the status quo . The pursuit to obliterate social structures and gender norms is their incessant agenda. It’s obvious by the fact that even the pedestrian Aussie is either unable or too scared to define men and women any longer. There is now an inbuilt nervousness and fear of backlash should we say what a woman is.
“Just give it time. With the explosion of gender identity issues, and the railroading of our culture towards affirm and celebrate “or else” there’s going to be a storm in a World Cup not just a tea cup at some stage. Someone’s rights are going to trump someone’s rights. That’s what you get in this zero-sum game Sexular Age.”
I wish to make a few comments here in light of Chip Le Grand’s article and some conversations I’ve had over the past week.
First, FINA’s decision is fair for women.
Le Grand explains how “the FINA guidelines are based on the cumulative research and wisdom of some of the world’s leading authorities on physiology, sports law and anti-discrimination.”
He cites Doriane Coleman, professor of law at Duke University,
“replacing biological sex with the more subjective, social construct of gender – something the Obama administration had already done in anti-discrimination law – would have potentially dire, unintended consequences for women’s sport…It doesn’t take a sea of them to obliterate the females’ competitive chances at every level of competition,” she warned. “If only a very small subset turn out to identify as women, we will be overwhelmed.””
Le Grand goes on to point out,
“There is no longer any serious argument about the sporting advantage derived from testosterone, which biological males produce from the onset of puberty at about 15 times the rate of women. As Joyner explained to the FINA extraordinary congress in Budapest, it is the reason that the current US national records for 50m, 100m and 200m freestyle events for 13 and 14-year-old boys are faster than the women’s open world records for the same events.
Hunter told the congress: “As a result of testosterone and possessing the Y chromosome, males build larger, stronger and faster muscles, they have larger lungs and airways, they have bigger hearts to pump more blood, and they have more oxygen carrying capacity within that blood. Males are taller. They have longer limbs – arms and legs – they have bigger feet to kick water, they have bigger hands to pull that water.”
While attention this week is focusing on elite sport, the disparity between boys and girls is apparent in community sport and even clear at junior sporting levels.
I think of a netball competition where a talented boy outshone even the best female players. I think of a football (AFL) competition where a boy was allowed to play in a girls competition and girls feared for their safety. They didn’t want to play against this muscular dude who is significantly stronger and more powerful than any girl playing the game. I think of my daughter who plays at a high level of cricket. While she enjoys playing in both girls and boys cricket, in the higher grades of boys cricket the fast bowlers are discouraged from sending down thunder claps at her. Both players and coaches and parents understand the obvious. This isn’t a case of boys needing to change the way they view girls, but rather one where boys are rightly observing reality.
As a dad who with three children who all plays sport at a fairly high level and as a parent to what is a lot of community sport and knows numerous coaches and clubs and how they are trying to navigate these issues, The answer is not as simple as those who identify with the other gender let them play. That inevitably means girls missing out on team selection or winning competitions and it often puts them in a place where they are in physical danger. Now I have heard some non-sporty types tried to argue against this but I tell you this is simply reality. Go stick your head out of your iPhone and go down to local footy games and watch what actually happens.
I’m not arguing against boys and girls playing competitive sport with each other. There are some sports where this is workable and at some levels, but there is a difference between mix gendered competition and a girls/women’s competition.
Second, women’s sport forces transgender women to undergo changes.
While this isn’t Le Grand’s argument, his evaluation of the issues show us how transgender athletes are disadvantaged. Transgender women are are forced to medically alter their testosterone levels and therefore reduce their physical strength and biological character in order to compete.
Third, be concerned for young children.
One concern coming further from FINA’s ruling is that it doesn’t rule out children who transition before the age of 12. This may lead to increased pressure upon pre-pubescent boys and girls to medically altar their hormones and bodies at an even younger age.
Fourth, men ought to be speaking up.
Susan and I have raised our boys to show respect to girls and to protect them. Any time they fall short they know dad and mum will be having a conversation with them. I find it quite extraordinary that on this issue, too often it is women who are left to defend women’s sport, while the men cower behind the ifs and buts and I don’t knows.
This isn’t hard. Allowing biological men to compete in women’s sport will mean women missing out on team selection and missing out on competition medals, and in some sports this is dangerous to their physical well-being. If you don’t believe me, just watch a 15 year old boy tackle a girl in AFL. The argument, ‘but this isn’t happening very often’ is simply naive. It is true that it’s not happening everywhere, but examples are not hard to find, and as we continue to the smoke from the pot of expressive individualism and gender theory we will likely see the exceptions become a new norm.
Annabelle Bennett is a member of the FINA legal and human rights panel who framed its eligibility guidelines. She admits,
“this case involves a collision of scientific, ethical and legal conundrums. It also involves incompatible, competing rights.”
Bennet has hit the issue on the head. What do we do when science disagrees with an ethical position? What do we do when reality clashes with personal preference? Too often, our culture will choose against science. Instead of creating fairness and equity, it will create a bigger splash and eventually wash out women’s sport altogether.
For those who are smart enough and bold enough to know that ignoring biology isn’t the way forward and yet also have empathy for those who struggle to fit with their sex, how should we think about FINA’s decision? First of all, they made the right decision, and believing so is good for women. Supporting FINA is advocating for women. Second, FINA is now considering a transgender class-action for elite swimming meets. I have reservations about this move, but I nonetheless recognise that it is a possible way forward. Third, we ought to show compassion on men and women who are either struggling with their gender identity or who simply cannot reconcile sex and gender. Compassion doesn’t require us to agree with or support every feeling or every decision made. That’s the misstep some people make in their understanding of compassion; they assume kindness must lead to agreement and compromise. If that were the case, God’s compassion toward us in Jesus Christ would be shallow and ineffectual. In following His example, we are not required to ignore male and female distinctiveness, but as Jesus did, we honour these as an anthropological good. As a Christian I also mustn’t lose sight of how Jesus welcomes and loves those who sit outside and who experience marginalisation.
PS. Apologies for any typos. I’ve written this while watching my children at sport this morning
Over the past 10 years, I have noticed a significant and growing volume of books, articles and posts talking about men and women. The broader culture is not only debating questions that relate to the equality of the sexes but even the most basic of questions: what is a man and what is a woman? Sadly, many people no longer know the answer, or at least, out of fear they no longer feel safe to give an answer.
Churches have something positive and wonderful to contribute to this conversation. For example, the book of Genesis takes us back to the very beginning and to humanity’s essential nature.
“So God created mankind in his own image,
in the image of God he created them;
male and female he created them”.
While Genesis sets the foundations, it is Jesus Christ who redeems sinful men and women and does so not by eradicating sex and gender but through restoration. This redemption does more than return us to Eden, but points us to the ultimate realisation of humanity, to be known by Christ and found in him. For the Christian, our truest and deepest identity lies in our adoption to sonship,
“In love he predestined us for adoption to sonship through Jesus Christ, in accordance with his pleasure and will— to the praise of his glorious grace, which he has freely given us in the One he loves” (Ephesians 1:4-6).
These concepts are unique to Christianity and for centuries they have provided essential ingredients for societal understanding of and valuing people. It is no wonder that as our culture distances itself from these truths we find growing confusion about the nature of manhood and womanhood. We have not only removed the theological underpinning for human nature but also biology and scientific fact. Trying to speak of men and women is becoming like a game of pin the tail of the donkey, except that not only are we disallowed from using our eyes, they’ve taken away the donkey altogether!
As much as passages like Genesis ch.1 and Ephesians ch.5 deserve repeated study, in this post I want to draw attention to Romans ch.16. My purpose isn’t to dig in and exegete every detail and name mentioned in this grand kaleidoscope, but hopefully, I can present a portrait that is faithful to the Apostle’s telling that is helpful for churches as we consider the roles of men and women in our churches, and therefore how our churches can faithfully execute God’s intention for the church to be “a pillar and foundation of the truth”.
As with all Christian doctrine, we are required to take in all of the Bible and to observe the Bible’s internal story line and logic ( ie, creation, fall, redemption, and consummation). I’m preaching through 1 Timothy this term at church, and so there will be a few weeks where we look at men and women and their roles in the church and home. As I prepare I have also revisited Romans chapter 16 and it is on this passage of Scripture, that I wish to make a few observations here.
Romans chapter 16 provides us with a different sort of explanation to what we find in some other parts of the New Testament. It’s not different in that it contradicts other NT passages, but rather, the contrast is one of style. Romans ch.16 is not one of the didactic passages which directly outline a theology of men and women. It is not a narrative like John’s retelling of Jesus engaging with the Samaritan woman. Romans chapter 16 is a list of names. It is a series of greetings that form the closing part of Paul’s letter to the church in Rome. This isn’t the only occasion where Paul’s letters contain such lists, it is however the longest.
Romans 16 isn’t foremost about men and women, it’s about the Apostle Paul commending his ministry team to the church in Rome. It is a team that consists of many people from all kinds of walks of life. Among the number are many men and many women. In other words, the inclusion of women is a beautiful albeit secondary consideration in Paul’s mind. Perhaps for that reason, this natural spilling out of affection for his coworkers reveals the internal workings of the Apostle’s team dynamics.
Romans 16 does a stunning job in describing the rich layers of contributors in Gospel work that was headed up by Paul. It is a snapshot taken in time that depicts the dynamic advance of the Gospel across the Mediterranean.
There is Phoebe,
“a deacon of the church in Cenchreae. I ask you to receive her in the Lord in a way worthy of his people and to give her any help she may need from you, for she has been the benefactor of many people, including me.”
Priscilla and Aquila are a married couple who’ve partnered with Paul for years and in various places.
There is Epenetus, a close friend of Paul’s and the first Christian convert in Asia.
Some people are named without any mention of what their ministry role is, but they are known to Paul with affection.
One of the lessons this surely presses home for churches (and for para-church organisations) is an Apostolic appreciation for the breadth of Christian service and which involves men and women. It is however a misstep to conclude from this chapter that there is no delineation in the church between how men and women serve. To be sure, there is much overlap and there is also some distinction.
My friend and brother in Christ, Mike Bird, recently posted some thoughts on Romans 16. Michael is a considered theologian armed with a writing style akin to a firecracker ignited indoors. Mike created a little stir when he commented on how Romans 16 led him to an egalitarian view of men and women in the church.
“For me, it was reading Romans 16, noting all the women that Paul mentions, seeing what he describes them doing, that brought me to the egalitarian position’.
I remain unconvinced. Romans 16 is an exciting and encouraging passage that shows us the size of Paul’s ministry team and the affection he has for each of them. Far from contravening instructions regarding Pastor/Elders and the task of preaching/teaching to the Sunday assembly, it fit perfectly within those boundaries.
Phoebe is a Deacon. in the New Testament, Deacons are faithful servants set aside by the local church to oversee the practical administration of needs. Deacons are distinct from Elders/Pastors (cf Philippians 1:1l 1 Timothy 3), the latter who are set aside to oversee the local church, primarily through the task of preaching and teaching.
Priscilla and Aquila are a couple renowned for their hospitality. They opened their home to Paul when he visited Corinth. They later accompanied Paul on his missionary journey to Ephesus. While living in Ephesus they welcomed Apollos to stay with them and they “explained to him the way of God more adequately”. In Romans 16 they are again mentioned for their hospitality, they are hosting a church in their home.
Junia (who is coupled with Andronicus in v.7) is a somewhat enigmatic figure. There is some debate as to whether the name represents a man or a woman for it can refer to either. Most scholars lean toward the view that Junia is a woman (for various reasons that I won’t delve into here, but I concur). The next question is whether the Greek phrase should be read as ‘known by the Apostles” or “known among the Apostles”. The grammar works both ways. In other words, are Andronicus and Junia two people with a good reputation among the Apostles or are they two Apostles? New Testament scholars are divided and where they land often depends on what prior commitment they hold regarding gender roles in the church. There is one further piece of information that is important in Junia’s profile: the word Apostle has more than one meaning in the New Testament. There are the 12 Apostles, who hold a unique office in the early church. Their authority is unique and non replicable, and so it is only right to discount that possibility from Junia. Sometimes apostle is used as a small ‘a’ apostle and denotes a messenger (2 Cor. 8:23; Phil. 2:25), and this is a plausible reading of Andronicus and Junia. Messengers are vital players in advancing the Gospel but to assume compatibility with the office of Apostle and or with Church Elders is requiring more than the text provides.
Romans 16 is a tapestry that sits comfortably within a classical understanding of men and women in the church. One might even say, Romans 16 is precisely what an authentic complementarian should expect to find: men and women serving alongside each other in a variety of ways, and none of which overturn patterns of leadership and gender roles that are taught throughout the New Testament.
Returning to a bigger picture. Here are some takeaways from reading Roman 16:
Paul is thankful for his ministry team. How can we express thanksgiving for many people who serve in the multitude of ways that together glorify God and see the Gospel advancing?
Gospel coworkers are doing many different works. Let’s honour not only public and formal ministry, but also the informal and personal that occurs in homes and lives every day.
Paul‘s team consists of many men and women. Solo leadership is a disaster area. If Paul needed a big team, so do we all. We are working together and every member of the church is an essential worker.
Romans 16 fits precisely with what we expect to find with a classical understanding of men and women and their roles.
A challenge for complementarian churches is to see that women, and men, are being encouraged and equipped for ministry. Invite men and women to training programs. At Mentone, we have had and are open to women doing a full-time apprenticeships. At our lay leader training events about 50% of attendees are women.
If women are not pastors or doing the Sunday preaching, ensure they are fully immersed into other areas of church life and are rightly visible and honoured in the Sunday gathering.
Pastors need to find ways for listening to and engaging with the ideas and concerns of those who are not part of the Eldership (women, other men, youth, elderly, etc).
We live at a time where the world at large is struggling to know how to identify and relate to one another and to understand the most basic of existential and ontological questions. By no means am I saying this is the final answer, I am simply offering a small contribution here by pointing to a great Bible text. I do believe the Bible gives us the answer. The Bible paints a magnificent picture and it is one that is to be displayed in and by the local church. That’s why we mustn’t give up on difficult conversations about men and women and it’s why we must also pursue these conversations with grace and kindness. Too often churches have fallen and failed, either by understating gender or by overstating gender. It is not only gender confusion that is creating issues in every sphere of life, but the wicked issue of abuse has all too readily appeared among the people of God. It must not be. If your church is harbouring misogyny then it needs to be repented of before Christ snuffs out the candle.
We all can and must learn from the example given to us throughout Scripture including the exciting and attractive panorama that is Romans 16. As Tom Schreiner reminded us recently,
“Every argument for every perspective should send us back to the biblical witness. The word of God still pierces our darkness and can reshape how we think and live. The Bible can and should still be heard, believed, and followed—even though we are all fallible and culturally situated.”
Victoria is not the only jurisdiction in the world to introduce laws prohibiting conversion practices. While Victoria’s The Change or Suppression (Conversion) Practices Prohibition Act remains the most extreme, both in the breadth of what is banned and in the criminal sanctions that are threatened, other Australian State and several countries have or are in the process of banning elements of Christian practice and belief.
The United Kingdom is introducing legislation to ban so-called conversion practices. More than 2500 pastors have signed a letter to the Government, explaining their position,
“It should not be a criminal offence for us to instruct our children that God made them male and female, in his image, and has reserved sex for the marriage of one man and one woman. Yet this seems to be the likely outcome of the proposed legislation,” they write.
“We therefore very much hope (and pray) that these proposals will be dropped in their current form. We have no desire to become criminals and place a high value on submitting to and supporting our government.
“Yet we think it important you are aware that if it were to come about that the loving, compassionate exercise of orthodox Christian ministry, including the teaching of the Christian understanding of sex and marriage, is effectively made a criminal offence, we would with deep sadness continue to do our duty to God in this matter.”
These are not words of bigotry. These are not malevolent attitudes toward fellow human beings who don’t identify with their biological sex or as heterosexual. These are reasonable convictions accompanied by love of neighbour. Indeed, the views articulated in the letter remain normal and orthodox in Christian churches around the world today (including Melbourne). The classical view of sex and marriage was even broadly held in civil society until just a few short years ago. But of course, the socio-political landscape has changed dramatically and it will continue to do so.
No doubt there are many faithful pastors who haven’t signed the letter. While others are weighing up the right course of action. I cannot of course speak for many who have signed. Among the signatories though are friends of mine. Indeed, some signatories are same-sex attracted. These are men and women who love God and are convinced by God’s good Gospel about his Son.
They are not malicious troublemakers or intolerant social miscreants. These are thoughtful people who are convinced by the teaching of Scripture, the very same Scriptures from which our society gleans the belief that all men and women are equal and that all life has value.
Perhaps I should clarify for those who are reading and are unsure about Christian motives behind objecting to these laws;. Christians seek good laws to govern society. Christians desire good for all citizens, and not just for those who agree with us. But introducing bad legislation for the sake of keeping up with today’s cultural controllers isn’t beneficial for anyone. Where people are mistreated on account of their gender and sexuality, we all call it out. The problem with these laws however isn’t just that they are an affront to religious freedom, but that they will also harm the very people the laws are designed to protect.
I’m sure there are more than a few Church leaders in the United Kingdom who are happily following Demas and have no issue with this Governmental intrusion and oversight. But that kind of fallacious living is myopic in the extreme. For those who choose Christ and care for their congregations by teaching the full counsel of God, Christian ministry will become more difficult in the United Kingdom as it is here in Victoria, Australia. There may be short term pain and trouble (and let’s not pretend, this pain and trouble will impact lives in significant ways), but to those who persist in faithfulness, there is eternal gain.
I am encouraged by the stand these Christian ministers are taking. No doubt, the decision to sign their names wasn’t done lightly. It takes courage to take this kind of public stand, knowing that signing your name may well cause attention and trouble for you and knowing it may indeed lead to accusations and slander, and even criminal charges.
To my brothers and sisters in the United Kingdom, may you be encouraged and strengthened. As Paul writes to Timothy, “For the Spirit God gave us does not make us timid, but gives us power, love and self-discipline. So do not be ashamed of the testimony about our Lord or of me his prisoner. Rather, join with me in suffering for the gospel, by the power of God.”
Governments and societies are important but they are not infallible. Sometimes popular ethics makes huge mistakes. Remember, Jesus found himself on the wrong side of popular opinion and on the wrong side of the courts. The Apostle Paul often found himself on the wrong side of the dominant culture, whether it was Jerusalem or Ephesus or Philadelphia. Christianity has often played this unwanted role in the last 2,000 years of history. It’s just that our cultural moment is unusual. In parts of the world like Australia and the UK we have reaped the rich gains of the Christian message, but we are now slowly turning our backs in pursuit of a life without God.
During one of the many occasions when Paul was imprisoned he wrote a letter to a young Timothy and encouraged him not to give up. Paul didn’t suggest altering the message, he didn’t argue for cultural domination or appropriation, nor did he resort to embittered speech toward those who had him put away. Paul did confront judges and legal counsel when he thought it wise, but he could not betray the God who saved him nor the people around him. After all, he had experienced Divine mercy, he who self-identified as the worst of sinners. How could he not seek good for others too?
From his prison cell, Paul wrote a letter to encourage Timothy. He said to Timothy, join me in being enthralled by what lays in store,
“In the presence of God and of Christ Jesus, who will judge the living and the dead, and in view of his appearing and his kingdom, I give you this charge: 2 Preach the word; be prepared in season and out of season; correct, rebuke and encourage—with great patience and careful instruction. 3 For the time will come when people will not put up with sound doctrine. Instead, to suit their own desires, they will gather around them a great number of teachers to say what their itching ears want to hear. 4 They will turn their ears away from the truth and turn aside to myths. 5 But you, keep your head in all situations, endure hardship, do the work of an evangelist, discharge all the duties of your ministry.
6 For I am already being poured out like a drink offering, and the time for my departure is near. 7 I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith. 8 Now there is in store for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day—and not only to me, but also to all who have longed for his appearing.”
Let us not give up trusting and obeying God. Let us not give up loving others.
I thought I would take a moment to share some of the things pastors are trying their best to address at the moment. Pastoring a church is a tremendous privilege and joy, and it’s not always an easy task. Indeed there is reason why many pastors burn out after a few years and many don’t make it beyond 10 years in the ministry. This pandemic has bowled a googley at all of us, no matter our religious views, job, and life situation. Pastors are not immune from the daily stresses, troubles, and temptations that we all face. If there is a difference, face although it may be, there is an expectation that pastors will continue to work with a smile on the face, they will accept all the comments made to their face and behind their back, and push through whatever the cost.
In recent weeks numerous pastors have shared with me how they are going; most of them are barely surviving. This isn’t because our task is necessarily harder than others, but for this one simple reason, we are just like everyone else. It’s because of one such conversation I had today, that I thought, let me an open window and let people see inside to gain a snapshot of the kinds of issues and responsibilities confronting pastors in Melbourne churches at the moment (in no particular order):
We are trying to pastor people who have undergone all manner of trials and hardships over the past 2 years.
Trying to love and pastor people who are wrestling with all manner of non pandemic related difficulties.
Recognising that everyone is tired, run down, and desperate for a holiday, pastors don’t want to burden their congregations with what are often routine tasks, so they agree to shoulder a little more.
Overseeing COVID Safe plans.
Planning the regathering of our churches after months without any in person gatherings, and doing so under tight and changing Government directives.
While many people are about to wind down for the year and planning to go away and take off time, the pastor’s workload is increasing.
We are counselling those who are nervous about returning to church, due to many reasons including those who are immuno-compromised and those who are fearful of becoming a COVID close contact and being forced into isolation (again).
Counselling those who remain unvaccinated and who are feeling hard done by as a result of Government rules.
Navigating 50 different expectations and demands on what returning to church ought to look like.
Advocating the Government for the unvaccinated to be free to return to church while also encouraging people to be vaccinated and knowing the responsibility to protect the vulnerable.
Working to uphold the unity of the Spirit through the bonds of peace when society has become fragmented and angry, and these influences capture hearts inside the church.
Urging people to remain gospel centred rather than allow political issues and allegiances to dominate and divide.
Writing and preaching sermons every week.
Organising church services.
Leading Bible study groups.
Training leaders.
Meeting with leadership teams.
Keeping an eye on ever unstable finances.
Having late nights away from the family because of another meeting or crisis.
Processing Victoria’s new Conversion and Suppression Practices laws that target Christians, Writing articles and letters to raise awareness, appealing to the Government to overturn these unjust laws, and preparing our churches for laws that are a genuine threat to Christian freedom, belief, and practice.
Reading, understanding and responding to legislation amending the Equal Opportunity Act which will further limit religious freedom in Victoria.
Spending time in prayer for the people under our care, and for our community and the world around us.
Fast tracking the reading of books and articles that’s required to understand the theological doozys that regularly arise in our preaching and in our pastoral care.
Christmas. Did someone say we’re having Christmas Carol services and Christmas Day services?
Planning for 2022. Who knows what that will mean!
Welcoming visitors (and praise God for people who are checking out Church).
Rejoicing with those who are rejoicing and mourning with those who mourn, correcting the wayward, and grieving those who depart.
Burying the dead, visiting the sick, marrying couples, sitting with those with marriages falling apart.
Loving our families and giving them the love, time and attention they need and deserve.
These are some of the things pastors are working on this November. As I hope you can see, these things are rarely quick, easy or unimportant. Most of these activities demand an intellectual, emotional, and psychological gravitas that overwhelms pastors at the best of times, let alone in the time and place we currently find ourselves. This isn’t a cry for help or asking for a slap on the back. This is just a little message to share what pastors are up to at the moment. To our churches, we love you and we’re there for you in the good times and the bad. But understand, we are also tired and the emotional fuel tank is running pretty low.
We get tired and grumpy and worn out. The words, actions, and attitudes of others impact us too. We love the people whom God has committed under our care, but there is only Saviour and we’re not him!
I am incredibly thankful for the saints at Mentone who despite their own tiredness and troubles, are persevering and together we are running the race.
And that’s how it’s meant to work. This isn’t about pumping up pastors with pride but as each member lovingly serves the other, pastors are better able to give and serve as we ought. And indeed, as pastors do their work well, the congregation is released to ministry and to grow together. This is why when one of my own congregation asks how they can be praying for me, I often ask them to pray for the church: let us keep loving one another and serving each other with patience and grace. Everyone wins and God is glorified and the Gospel is seen for what it is: stunning and beautiful and good.
The Apostle Paul put it like this,
“Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love. Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace.” (Ephesians 4:2-3)
“Therefore if you have any encouragement from being united with Christ, if any comfort from his love, if any common sharing in the Spirit, if any tenderness and compassion, 2 then make my joy complete by being like-minded, having the same love, being one in spirit and of one mind. 3 Do nothing out of selfish ambition or vain conceit. Rather, in humility value others above yourselves, 4 not looking to your own interests but each of you to the interests of the others.
5 In your relationships with one another, have the same mindset as Christ Jesus:” (Philippians 2:1-5)
And pastors, let’s remember we are not superman, iron man or whoever the current superhero is meant to be. And we are certainly not the world’s Saviour.
Be content in not doing everything.
Keep things as simple and straightforward as you can.
Be willing to say no to people
Be understanding that many people’s capacity for serving is reduced at the moment
Take regular breaks.
Make sure you take proper annual leave over the summer; otherwise you may not survive 2022.
Do something fun.
Refresh yourself daily in God’s word and in prayer
Share and be accountable to a small group of peers (including inside the church)
“And let us run with perseverance the race marked out for us, 2 fixing our eyes on Jesus, the pioneer and perfecter of faith. For the joy set before him he endured the cross, scorning its shame, and sat down at the right hand of the throne of God. Consider him who endured such opposition from sinners, so that you will not grow weary and lose heart.” (Hebrews 10:1-3)
My suburb of Mentone was struck with awful news on Sunday evening. A teenage boy was killed by a man driving erratically on the wrong side of Nepean Hwy. Lachlan McLaren died at the scene, outside my local supermarket, and his girlfriend sustained injury.
It was his 16th birthday.
Despite some 24,000 people living in the suburbs of Mentone and Parkdale, I have been surprised by how interwoven peoples lives are in this community. I never had the privilege of knowing this young man but my eldest son was in the same Grade 5/6 class as Lachlan in 5 years ago. All my children attended the school where Lachlan’s mum teaches, and we have friends who know the family and we know children who attend Mentone Grammar School. These layers of connections intensify the sense of shock and sadness that our community is experiencing this week. Most of us barely know each other and yet we are interconnected. Of course, our shock is nothing compared to the grief that a family is now undergoing just a few streets away from where I live.
Mentone beach
As a dad living in Mentone, my heart goes out to the McLarens and my prayers are with them. All parents know how precious their children are. It is not for us to second guess the sorrow and distress of another, for each person’s grief is profoundly personal, and yet we want to share the burden that must be carried.
As a pastor of a church in Mentone, I have sat in many homes over the years with grieving families and conducted many funerals. Each one is accompanied by great sadness. Trying to make sense of the incomprehensible is natural but not always possible. It is often impossible for us to offer words to what is inconceivable. Sometimes we must simply sit in the dust and mourn with them.
I recall how the Bible recounts the occasion when Jesus hears news that his friend Lazarus has died. When Jesus arrived at the family home, he saw Lazarus’ sisters weeping and the community grieving. We read, Jesus was “deeply move in spirit and troubled”.
We are then told in what is the shortest verse of the Bible and yet one of its of tender, “Jesus wept”.
He wept because he loved his friend. Jesus wept because death is awful. Indeed, the Bible describes death as God’s enemy. As Jesus grieved he also knew that the grave is not the end, death will not win in the end.
Jesus said to Martha, “I am the resurrection and the life. The one who believes in me will live, even though they die; and whoever lives by believing in me will never die. Do you believe this?”
Life is fleeting. Life is inestimable.
Parents, hug your children and tell them that you love them. Teenagers, yes it may feel a little awkward, but let your mum and dad have that moment to give you that hug.
Teenagers, tell your friends how you appreciate them.
I thank God that he hates death. I thank God that he understands grief; his only Son died on a cross. And I thank God that because of Jesus he will one day remove death forever. I thank God that in Jesus he promises resurrection and reconciliation.
I watched the first Presidential debate yesterday. Over the last two months I have also been watching many of Premier Daniel Andrews daily press briefings during the Melbourne lockdown. To say politics has been both enthralling and disturbing in 2020 is an understatement. There is much that is concerning, polarising, frustrating, and even dangerous.
At Mentone Baptist we made the decision to preach through the book of Revelation during the latter months of 2020. We settled on this last book of the Bible for several reasons, among them is how Revelation reminds us that the local church is key to God’s eternal purposes.
Jesus authored the book of Revelation. He tells John to write down everything he sees and hears and to have messengers send the manuscript to the 7 churches. These 7 churches were real and historical churches, each located in what is today Western Turkey (Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thyatira, Sardis, Philadelphia, and Laodicea). In apocalyptic literature the number 7 also denotes wholeness, suggesting that Revelation is not only for those original 7 churches but for the entire church. The timeframe in which Revelation is set (from Jesus’ resurrection to his return) and the way Jesus addresses those who are forgiven and are made citizen of his kingdom, all strongly suggest that this book is for all churches regardless of time and place.
Importance in our society is laid at the feet of Governments, education institutions, and celebrity opinion. Public conversation and newspaper columns are filled with stories about politics, disasters, and sport. What is remarkable about Revelation is that as Jesus interprets the world and defines justice, life and death, it is to his churches that he speaks. He does not address Governments, Prime Ministers or Presidents. His attention is not toward political representatives, corporate CEOs or university Vice Chancellors. His message is for his churches.
Not only is Revelation addressed to the church, the message is largely about the church. The central message is the triumph of Jesus Christ over death and evil, but this Gospel is tightly connected to the church, both the challenges they will face in this temporary world and the hope that is guaranteed to all who persevere to the end.
For example, the first of two visions that are recorded in Revelation (1:12-20) explains that the Son of Man is among his churches. Jesus Christ is described in terms of holding sovereign authority and majesty and yet is found among the 7 golden lampstands. He is with his churches and he is concerned for them. The seven letters that follow this vision (chs. 2 and 3) demonstrate the love Jesus has for his churches, whether he is consoling them or correcting them. Not only is the Son of Man addressing his churches, but God reveals the Church to be more pivotal than any other institution, and to have greater influence than even an Empire such as Rome and an Emperor such as Domitian.
This vision strikes a different song to the one our own culture plays on repeat. Keep in mind that this was equally the case in the First Century AD, only those churches had even less public capital and fewer legal protections. As apocalyptic literature reminds us, what we see and what is, are not always identical. This is no excuse for entertaining speculations and gnostic theories about Governments and cultural power brokers. The function of Biblical apocalyptic is to reveal that which would otherwise be veiled. In a world like ours where secular ideals takes centre stage and where progressive religion serves as priest, Revelation reminds us that the message is Christ triumphant and his church is where God is centralising his work and purposes.
In other words, the best thing Christians can do in this unhealthy political environment is to invest in your local church: join, commit, persevere, serve. There is an important role for Christians in politics and in the public square, but we must not engage at those levels at the expense of the mission and life of the local church. As Jonathan Leeman often reminds, the best solution to the mess and fears and divisiveness that mark our culture is to ‘build healthy churches’.
Is this counter intuitive? It is certainly counter-cultural, for it means investing in a covenant community that is assumed by many as irrelevant, antiquated, and even as a threat to society. That is why Jesus’ words to his 7 churches are so poignant for churches today. Let his word rules our hearts and let his purposes set our agenda. If the Son of Man identifies his church as central to the purposes of God, how can we suppose otherwise?
Perhaps we are suffering from an Ephesus problem. Have we forsaken the love we had at first? Our attention and affection is drawn elsewhere and we have little time for giving effort in our local church. There are plenty of distractions and demands on us and Jesus recognises that Church life is not always easy. The 7 letters to the church show how church life can be rocky at times, and yet see how Jesus persists with even erring churches.
Are you concerned about ideological changes that are grabbing hold of our society? Are you concerned by the lack of integrity and humility that so often absent from the public square? Are you frustrated by dangerous theories that are sexualising our children in perilous ways? Do you fear the lack of resolve among political leaders to address issues that effect the most vulnerable in society?
Instead of entrenching ourselves into partisan politics, we need deeper roots in our local church. Rather than sliding into the ditch of either pole in the culture wars, and lobbing tweets at opposing views, our allegiance to Jesus Christ expects us to hold tightly to his word.
In an apocalyptic world there remains one message of salvation; the Gospel of Jesus Christ. Even in an apocalyptic era, the one who is the Alpha and the Omega remains with his churches; this is the testimony of Revelation. Jesus’ words being true, how can Christians therefore consider abandoning the local church or diminishing ones commitment? In this fracturing world we need healthy local churches more than ever. Recent Barna research indicates that during the pandemic many Christians are deciding to think less of church and even of leaving altogether. For any who confess the Lordship of Christ, to take that route is to ignore the words of the Son of Man and to be played as fools by the world around us.
As Christ said to the church of Sardis,
“Remember, therefore, what you have received and heard; hold it fast, and repent’
MurrayCampbell.net 