Obadiah Slope writes about four cautionary tales. Sorry, this column is about politics.
Those mosquito bites: Murray Campbell might be one of the most conservative Baptist ministers in Melbourne. The prolific blogger gave his readers a warning this week. There’s no surprise that the progressive politics of the Andrews government concern him. But the antics of some of Andrew’s opponents concern him as well.
“There is a counterpoint emerging on the right side of politics that is also deeply concerning, and perhaps more so. Daniel Andrews may talk about how his catholicism influences his life, but people can see through the disconnection. Christian nationalism, on the other hand, has started to captivate some pew sitters and pastors and therefore it is more likely to create issues for Gospel ministry in Victoria. This theorem is thankfully marginal and I pray it doesn’t take hold as it is doing in parts of the United States, but nonetheless, I don’t wait for 100 mosquitoes to enter my house before dealing with the first one.
“Christians, be careful of voices that speak more about politics than they do the Great Commission and use more words of anger than they do words of compassion and mercy. By all means, as commitment to common grace and out of love for your neighbour, keep government accountable. Christians might join a political party and stand for Parliament, but even the most Christian of political leaders and most Christian of political agendas isn’t going to redeem society. That kind of thinking ignores the testimony of Scripture, namely that the gospel is God’s power of salvation and the church is God’s big game in town. Our churches are more likely today to sit on the sideline of culture and be ignored by many, but nonetheless, the church is the centrepiece of God’s work. Therefore, whatever you do in the name of political inspiration, aspiration or disappointment, don’t confuse it with the Gospel, don’t conflate common grace with saving grace, and don’t fuse the church with the state.”
###
Gerson’s last sermon: Author David Brooks, told the PBS Newshour that Michael Gerson the Bush Speech writer, evangelical and never Trumper who died last week, that Gerson was most pleased when someone told him that they had read something he wrote and decided “to give that Jesus guy another chance.”
In one of his last sermons, Gerson spoke movingly of his experiences with depression. Obadiah would like to share a highlight with you. Here he discusses one of his journal entries. (He suggested journaling as a good habit for depressives. This column it turns out is mine.)
“‘It has probably been a month,’ I wrote, ‘since some prompting of God led me to a more disciplined Christian life. One afternoon I was led to the Cathedral, the place I feel most secure in the world. I saw the beautiful sculpture in the Bishop’s Garden – the prodigal son melting into his father’s arms – and the inscription how he fell on his neck, and kissed him. I felt tears and calm, like something important had happened to me and in me… My goals are pretty clear. I want to stop thinking about myself all the time. I want to be a mature disciple of Jesus, not a casual believer. I want to be God’s man.’
“I have failed at these goals in a disturbing variety of ways. And I have more doubts than I did on that day. These kinds of experiences may result from inspiration… or indigestion. Your brain may be playing tricks. Or you may be feeling the beating heart of the universe. Faith, thankfully, does not preclude doubt. It consists of staking your life on the rumour of grace.”
###
US codifies gay marriage: Obadiah is fascinated by the responses of Christians to the US Congress passing a law that supports gay marriage – that pre-empts an attempt by the US Supreme Court to reverse the Obergefell decision that legalised it.
In one corner is David French, an evangelical writer for the Despatch who swam against the tide on same-sex marriage, coming to oppose it during the Obama years and now supporting this latest bill. He describes “my flip, flop, and flip back again on civil marriage. I emphasize the word civil because my view on the religious nature of marriage has not changed. It is a lifelong covenant between a man and a woman, sealed before God, and breakable only on the limited conditions God has outlined in his Word.
“But declaring that religious belief is not the same thing as declaring civil law. Outside of the most hard-core integralists or dominionists, there is broad and wise consensus that importing divine standards whole cloth into civil law can be a recipe for division, oppression, and ultimate harm to the church itself. Our nation possesses an Establishment Clause for a reason.
“Thus, we often have to wrestle with a series of difficult questions. When should we import our religious values into civil law, and how should we choose between competing religious and moral values when deciding that law? Even prior to same-sex marriage, the law governing civil marriage differed substantially from my religious beliefs. No-fault divorce, for example, is a standard far more permissive than my faith requires.”
As French points out the Supreme Court has sided with religious freedom, especially on hiring people of faith, and this new act also contains protections for religious organisations and individuals.
For French, the new law is an imperfect compromise in protecting both sides of a cultural divide.
In the other corner is a number of evangelical leaders who strongly disagree with French. But for the Southern Baptist leader, Al Mohler, “The Parable of David French” is a story of surrender. Mohler decries French’s acceptance of pluralism, of Christians living alongside those who disagree with us. “That argument should astound evangelical Christians,” Mohler writes. The key issue seems to be French’s basic confidence in pluralism as the great civic goal and central political principle. But pluralism requires careful definition and boundaries.”
He adds. “One of the most perplexing marks of our time is the defection of so many “conservatives” from the cause of conserving what Russell Kirk called “the permanent things.” If marriage is not conserved—if civil marriage is not conserved as a man-woman union—then nothing genuinely conservative can last, at least for long. Support for the Respect for Marriage Act is bad enough. The way David French frames his argument is worse. This is how conservatism dies, and this is how marriage is surrendered.”
Obadiah wonders if Mohler should re-read 1 Peter, a book about Christians living in a society in which we are a minority. Mohler may have a good point about whether the new law has sufficient protections for religious freedom – the same sort of arguments we will be having as the Albanese government turns its mind to religious discrimination. But Mohler’s objection is about the acceptance of civil marriages, not the extent of religious freedom protections.
If Mohler is right on the issue of surrender, conservatism in Australia is dead. But as Obadiah has previously observed, most “complementarian” ministers in Australia also fail to meet Mohler’s rigorous standards for that form of conservatism.
Obadiah looks at the new US bill as the sort of debate some observers say should have happened in Australia, combining any move on marriage with new rules to protect freedoms for religious schools and other religious organisations. Obadiah has heard stories of how that possibility was meant to be raised in the Liberal Party room discussions leading up to the postal vote but failed to be put forward.
###
Meanwhile in Queensland: Lyle Shelton’s case in the Queensland Civil and Administrative Tribunal about remarks he made about drag queen story time has now been heard and he, and the two complainants, await judgment. This case tests the limits of free speech and discrimination law. Describing drag queens as “dangerous role models” for children after a drag queen storytime event for children at a Brisbane City Council library triggered the case against Shelton for alleged vilification.
Similar cases – for example, the Archbishop Porteous case in Tasmania – have not made it to resolution by a Tribunal.
Obadiah suspects the judgment, expected in the new year will be appealed no matter which way it goes.
Image credit: Alvesgaspar
Thx Obadiah – great issues, great quotes, a biblical perspective. Keep up your amazing work.