Two Worlds
“I live in Sydney, a beautiful city, what a pleasure to show friends from overseas around the harbour, the beaches and the mountains.
And yet, like all believers, my home is the eternal city which is above.
The writer of the Hebrews reminds his readers “For here we do not have an enduring city, but we are looking for the city that is to come” (Hebrews 13:14)…”
– In his latest Moderator’s Comments, Presbyterian Moderator-General David Cook reflects on living in two worlds.
Spiritually Discerning the Redefinition of Marriage
“Between the 11th and 15th of January 2016 the Primates of the Anglican Communion met to deliberate over a number of issues, including the question of a growing demand for affirming homosexual unions within the Western provinces.
This week, in his Presidential address to the General Synod, Archbishop of Canterbury Justin Welby spoke of the Primates meeting, the beauty and energy of the Anglican communion coming together in unity, as well as the crucial process of decision-making and development not being a matter of canons and rules, but one of discernment by the Spirit, based in relationship – but apparently not in revelation. Amidst all the Christian-sounding terminology, what is it that the archbishop was actually saying?
When Welby’s address is read in conjunction with the recently published letter of the Archbishops of Canterbury and York to Jayne Ozanne, a homosexual activist and director of Accepting Evangelicals, a clear pattern and approach to the questions of marriage and human sexuality on the part of the Anglican church emerges, which reflects the radically changed priorities of the established church – a process that has been going on for many decades – to declare man’s word for the cultural moment rather than God’s unchanging word to the world. …”
– So, whose word is our authority?
Dr Joe Boot, Senior Pastor at Westminster Chapel, Toronto, has published this strong piece at the Ezra Institute of Contemporary Christianity. Read the full article here.
Mohler: The Secularization of the West and the Rise of a New Morality
“The claim that humanity can only come into its own and overcome various invidious forms of discrimination by secular liberation is not new, but it is now mainstream. It is now so common to the cultures of Western societies that it need not be announced, and often is not noticed. Those born into the cultures of late modernity simply breathe these assumptions as they breathe the atmosphere, and their worldviews are radically realigned, even if their language retains elements of the old worldview…”
– Albert Mohler publishes Part 2 of a four part series on Secularisation and the Sexual Revolution. See also Part 1.
Why evangelistic courses are like a good joke
Stephen Liggins writes to encourage you to continue to run evangelistic courses.
Here’s why he reckons it’s worth it – at GoThereFor.
The Revolution eats one of its own Midwives
“I do not often find myself in sympathy with gay rights campaigner Peter Tatchell. Indeed, I still remember as a teenager being delighted and relieved at his defeat in the 1983 Bermondsey by-election. It symbolized so well how the new Left, with its preoccupation with gay rights, was of marginal interest to the poor and the working class. Still, it is hard not to have some sneaking admiration for a man who has tried to arrest Robert Mugabe not once but twice.
Yet this veteran human rights campaigner now finds himself on the receiving end of the latest campus malice and silliness …”
– At First Things, Dr Carl Trueman comments on one of last week’s big stories in the UK.
Archbishops’ response to LGBTI activist is a ‘missed opportunity’
“The Church of England has published a reply, dated 12 February, to a letter from Jayne Ozanne, Director of LGBTI campaign group Accepting Evangelicals, and co-signatories.
The letter, which was written by the Archbishop of York on behalf of himself and the Archbishop of Canterbury, responds to Ms Ozanne’s claim that the Church of England has failed its ‘duty of care’ to LGBTI members of the Anglican Church.
Andrea Williams, chief executive of Christian Concern and a member of the General Synod, has issued the following response …
‘This letter was another opportunity for the Archbishops to demonstrate appropriate leadership by reaffirming and promoting God’s clear vision for marriage. Instead the letter suggests that the fundamental issue is an ‘ongoing conversation’ as yet unresolved, implicitly suggesting that God has been unclear.
The role of the Archbishops is not to facilitate conversation but to teach the truth, refute error and discipline those who depart from God’s pattern in either teaching or lifestyle.’…”
– Read the full statement here. Read the Letter from the Archbishop of York here (450kb OCR PDF, originally from the Archbishop of York’s website).
Related: (Canadian) Primate listens to concerns of LGBTQ Anglicans
“‘All of us belong to God,’ said Canon Douglas Graydon to Archbishop Fred Hiltz, primate of the Anglican Church of Canada, at a gathering held to discuss same-sex marriage in the Canadian church. ‘The question is whether we belong to the church.’
It was a question many LGBTQ Anglicans brought forward in a question and answer session that took place after a talk Hiltz gave following the ‘queer Eucharist’ service hosted monthly at the Anglican Church of St. John’s West Toronto”
Protecting free speech in the Same Sex Marriage Plebiscite debate
“An article in the The Guardian today, ‘Override hate speech laws to allow marriage equality debate, urges Christian lobby’ reports that Lyle Shelton, managing director of the Australian Christian Lobby, has made proposals urging greater protection of free speech for those opposed to the introduction of same sex marriage in the forthcoming Australian plebiscite on the topic.
Of course, the reader will see that the Guardian headline and my summary of the proposals seem quite different. In its support for same sex marriage, the Guardian and those it quotes describe the ACL proposals as follows: the ACL wants to ‘permanently override anti-discrimination laws’ …
I think the Guardian has slanted the ACL views unfairly. (Even more unfairly, the Sydney Morning Herald report on the story features a cartoon of an ACL representative complaining that they can’t be expected to make their case ‘without expressing hatred and bigotry’.) Let me suggest reasons why the ACL proposal, so far as can be ascertained from these press reports, sounds limited, moderate and sensible. …”
– Neil Foster, Associate Professor on Law at Newcastle, adds some clarity to reporting on those opposed to the introduction of same-sex marriage in Australia.
Update: See Part 2 here.
Malcolm in the Middle
“On Friday 12 February, at the invitation of the Australian Christian Lobby, I joined a delegation to meet Prime Minister, Malcolm Turnbull, in his Sydney office. It was agreed that we confine our remarks to the issue of the plebiscite regarding single gender marriage which will be held, in the event of a coalition victory, soon after the next Federal election. …
When the PM was asked about freedom of conscience for those in the marriage industry, florists, caterers, etc, he said that he was sure that common sense would prevail…”
– Presbyterian Moderator-General David Cook reports that he was ‘profoundly disappointed’ after a meeting with the Prime Minister last week. Read it all here.
Secularisation and the Sexual Revolution: Evangelical Theology and the Cultural Crisis
“In the face of the sexual revolution the Christian church in the West now faces a set of challenges that exceeds anything it has experienced, of a similar magnitude, in the past. This is a revolution of ideas—one that is transforming the entire moral structure of meaning and life…”
– In the first of a four-part series, Albert Mohler argues that the foundations of the sexual revolution were laid almost a century ago.
True Anglicanism: Gospel proclamation, compassionate care, cultural leadership
“Here is the main argument put forward by revisionists for the Church of England to change the historic doctrine of sexuality and marriage: ‘the majority of people believe this, so the church leadership should follow’. Leaving aside the interpretation of statistics, and the question of whether this societal change has happened by chance or as a result of sustained cultural re-education by a secular elite, we need to ask: should the Church accommodate itself to the culture as the revisionists demand, or should it be providing a lead in developing a counter-culture which influences and transforms the values of society?
Or perhaps the church should ignore the surrounding culture and be concerned only with the beliefs and actions of its own members and the small fringe of contacts which it hopes to draw in? This approach may have the strength of an authentically biblical foundation, but is it Anglican?…”
– At Anglican Mainstream, Andrew Symes looks at the way forward for the Church of England.
When politics becomes your religion
On the 4th January 2016 edition of The Briefing, Albert Mohler discusses an article, “What explains the Vicious Left?”, by Professor David Gelernter at Yale.
Speaking in a US context, Mohler says,
“…what professor Gelernter is arguing is that on the left, political ideas have taken the place of religious doctrines and religious truth claims, and have become ends in themselves and matters of absolute truth claims, and have become ends in themselves and matters of absolute truth claims. …
I think Professor Gelernter is absolutely right that for many on the left, politics is all that remains. It’s all they have left.”
Listen or read here. (Segment 3)
When Abortion suddenly stopped making sense
“We also thought, back then, that few abortions would ever be done. It’s a grim experience, going through an abortion, and we assumed a woman would choose one only as a last resort. We were fighting for that ‘last resort.’ We had no idea how common the procedure would become…”
– This long and disturbing article was written to coincide with the 43rd anniversary, this last weekend, of the Roe v. Wade decision in the US Supreme Court.
Since that time, 59 million babies in the USA have lost their lives through abortion. Image: National Review.
My Request — Phillip Jensen
Heartbreak, Humiliation and a Death Certificate
“‘Heartbreak and humiliation’ were the opening words of the current affairs show ‘The 7:30 Report’ on the national public broadcaster, the ABC, on Thursday Friday 21, 2016. The story? The tragic accidental death of David Bulmer-Rizzi, one member of a UK same sex couple who were visiting the country.
The tragedy was compounded, the report said, by the fact that the South Australian authorities were proposing to issue a death certificate which stated that the deceased was ‘never married’. But the couple had entered into a same sex marriage under UK law…”
– At Law and Religion Australia, Neil Foster provides the legal context behind some of the media reporting surrounding a tragic death.
My request for Australia Day: Please stop attacking extremists
Phillip Jensen argues we need more extremists, not fewer –
“Extremism is not the problem. There is nothing wrong with extremism. It all depends on what cause you are extreme about, and how you implement it.
For people or societies that have no morality and no religion, ‘extremism’ is the worst of all behaviours. For Governments who believe in management over justice and truth, extremism is the chief ‘sin’ that has to be opposed and controlled. Western societies are trying to fight ‘extremism’ because we, in the West, refuse to even discuss religion, or religion based morality. So we are left opposing all religions as if they, and their extreme expressions, were the same thing. And we are paranoid about all extremism and only fight when something disturbs our peace.
But consider some extremists: A couple of successful, capable, health professionals leaving all the comforts, prosperity, security, and career advancements in Australia to help the desperately sick in an isolated, dangerous, impoverished, dysfunctional society. They have not done it as a short-term stint to help the needy in a crisis but starting in 1972 have continued for over 40 years. Here is a surgeon still working in his 80’s, for there is no other to replace him, amongst the thousands of well remunerated, western surgeons. He is the only surgeon for a couple of million people, building a hospital from nothing. He and his wife have not worked for money or fame but for their ultimate aim “to show the love of God”.
These people are extremists. Their whole life is anything but normal, average, usual or mainstream. They are extremists: Christian extremists. They are not alone. All over the world there are Christian extremists like this: People who have voluntarily given up the great Australian secularist life for something higher, grander, better. Extremists who have sacrificed the materialist dream to serve Christ by serving the poor, marginalised, endangered and sick.
When Muslim extremists kidnapped them, their life came into the public domain. At first they were called ‘humanitarian workers’, as were the other seven who were killed at that time elsewhere in Burkina Faso. But their motivation was not simply humanitarian, it was religion that made them extremists. And not simply religion but Christian religion – for each religion has its own ways of living extremely – and sacrificing your life for the benefit of others is profoundly Christian. We do not follow a warrior prophet but the crucified Christ. Our extremism is good for the world, which is why wise governments have supported and promoted it – for it is for the common good.
Sadly Christians don’t always get it right. But when we are wrong, call out what is wrong. Don’t blame extremism or religion. In 1963, some clergy opposed Rev. Martin Luther King’s campaign of non-violent protest. They were wrong. But they were right when they called him an extremist – for he was!
In his famous letter from the Birmingham gaol he wrote:
But though I was initially disappointed at being categorized as an extremist, as I continued to think about the matter I gradually gained a measure of satisfaction from the label.
Was not Jesus an extremist for love: “Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them which despitefully use you, and persecute you.”
Was not Amos an extremist for justice: “Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness like an ever flowing stream.”
Was not Paul an extremist for the Christian gospel: “I bear in my body the marks of the Lord Jesus.”
Was not Martin Luther an extremist: “Here I stand; I cannot do otherwise, so help me God.”
And John Bunyan: “I will stay in jail to the end of my days before I make a butchery of my conscience.”
And Abraham Lincoln: “This nation cannot survive half slave and half free.”
And Thomas Jefferson: “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal . . .”
So the question is not whether we will be extremists, but what kind of extremists we will be. Will we be extremists for hate or for love? Will we be extremists for the preservation of injustice or for the extension of justice?
In that dramatic scene on Calvary’s hill three men were crucified. We must never forget that all three were crucified for the same crime–the crime of extremism. Two were extremists for immorality, and thus fell below their environment. The other, Jesus Christ, was an extremist for love, truth and goodness, and thereby rose above his environment.
Please stop attacking extremists; we need more of them not fewer. But we need extremists for the right causes not the wrong ones. And that means we need to face the hard issue of saying what is right and wrong and why it is right or wrong. Otherwise, we will simply end up making conformity the great good and extremism (of any form) the great evil. And that, in the end, is a recipe for tyranny.”
– Phillip Jensen.
First published at PhillipJensen.com. Formatting of the Martin Luther King quote adjusted for clarity.
What we believe
The message at the heart of Christianity is really quite simple…