in service of the
common good
The UN Human Rights Report on Israel, and Australia’s Statement
The UN special Human Rights investigation into Palestine/Israel which found Israel to be primarily responsible for ongoing unrest and violence received a strong rebuke from the US, which in turn sought support from its allies to sign its statement. Australia declined to do so, issuing its own statement. The significance is not so much in what the statement contained, but in the very fact that after nine years of blindly following the US, Australia wishes to make its own statement and judgement about human rights, justice, and peace. This should be resoundingly applauded. The US statement is predictably partisan, and while the Australian statement mirrors the US statement in the oft repeated claim that Israel is being unfairly picked on, it is far more nuanced. In this and other matters of world politics it is important that Australia takes its own informed position. The blunt truth in relation to Israel/Palestine is that because of its unapologetic partisanship, the US is not, and cannot be, a contributor to a lasting and just peace. For example, the US may make critical statements about Israel’s expanding settlement programme, but Israel simply thumbs its nose, and the US continues to give unequivocal diplomatic support together with $US12B in annual military and loan guarantee aid. The US always has Israel’s back. The UN report simply states what anyone who has visited the occupied Palestinian territories knows, namely, that Israel is the oppressor. The Palestinians are the oppressed. Examples of this oppression have frequently been elaborated by various commentators. The latest egregious act was announced in the Beer Sheba Court last week when after six years in jail Mohammed El Halabi was found guilty of channelling World Vision money from its Gaza project to the military wing of Hamas. Various forensic audits, including DFAT, World Vision and Deloitte, have shown that this accusation is not only untrue, but is impossible to be true. ʺAll the judge said was that the security forces cannot be wrong. That's why he was convicted." (BBC Report) Israel is not being unfairly picked on at the UN or in the court of international opinion. First, China and Uighurs, Myanmar and the Rohingyas, Russia and Ukraine, even Australia and our treatment of First Nations people, all receive appropriate attention. There are currently 8 investigations being undertaken by the Human Rights Council, including others that are open ended. Second and very significantly, Israel is the only country in the world that claims to be democratic, is best friends with Australia, and the US, wants to sit at the table of “respectable” nations, yet at the same time is guilty of perpetuating egregious human rights violations based on racial discrimination. Israel’s claim to live by free world standards should automatically bring it before the bar of those standards. Persecution of a minority is a crime. But Palestinians are not even a minority – they comprise half the population. This is why the word ʹapartheidʹ is now being used to most accurately describe the situation Israel has created. While Australia supports a two-state solution, Israel has already created one-state in as much that it controls everything that occurs in Israel itself, the West Bank, East Jerusalem, and Gaza. Nothing takes place, is allowed in or out, that is not permitted by the State of Israel. In all of this are Palestinians guiltless? Living under oppression makes daily life intolerably difficult; negative reaction to provocation is easy to criticise by those not having to endure it: Palestinian inability to form a cohesive and respected political system is tragic. The PA is a toothless servant of Israel’s occupation. Not only can violence against citizens on either side not be condoned, but it inevitably perpetuates further violence. The reality is that violence always suits an oppressor. It feeds the propaganda machine used to justify further suppression. The Gandhi doctrine cannot be demanded and is very hard to embrace. Without external support and partnership, it is nigh on impossible. Gandhi taught that oppressed peoples must hold their heads up, retain dignity and self-respect, assert their human rights, but resist violence. When you are unemployed as most young in Gaza are, or your cousin on the West Bank has been shot by Israeli military, or your brother from East Jerusalem is in gaol without trial or reason, or your home has been demolished, or your family olive orchard has been raised to the ground, Gandhi’s way is too difficult without support – in this case from the international community. This is where Australia and the new Australian government comes in. We can help dignify Palestinian lives by our words and actions. The Albanese government is committed to the recognition of Palestine. While this wonʹt immediately end the occupation, it will help create the environment where a real and lasting just peace can be negotiated. It will dignify Palestine and Palestinian lives and in so doing promote the ultimate cause of peace and justice. The US has blind spots with almost fatal consequences. Domestically there is no clearer example than in its inability to enact gun control laws and in its political toleration of alternative realities of truth. In relation to Israel its blind spot is in allowing Israel, to continue destroying the very civility of its nationhood. No nation can continue without destroying itself if its very survival is dependent on the permanent suppression of others. In APAN we look forward to working with the Albanese government in charting a fresh forward path, knowing that yesterday’s policies will continue yesterday’s suffering.
0 Comments
Covid and the Eucharistic Common cup – an Anglican position
Abundant caution following the arrival of the covid pandemic in 2019 understandably saw the implementation of restrictions to slow and hopefully prevent the spread of the disease, including withdrawal of the common cup in the Eucharist. While many reverted to communion in one kind, we have also experienced widespread use of individual cups. Should communion in one kind or the use of individual cups now become the norm? Absolutely not!!
I consider there to be two reasons why use of the Common Cup reflects belief at the core of our Christian identity and therefore why the use of individual cups should not be normalised. These reasons run at greater depth than purely pragmatics: disposing of single use plastic cups, properly sanitising multiple glass cups, setting aside a tray of wine filled cups that appear to have no connection to the rite of consecration, disposing of wine remaining in little cups etc.
These words are plain, instructive, and directive. It is not possible or desirable to disentangle the use of the cup in Communion from the sacrament of grace it facilitates. A sacrament is an ʹoutward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual graceʹ. In this case the common cup is a sign of communal participation in the covenant of life, binding those gathered at the Lordʹs table. Receiving a piece of the broken bread or drinking from the cup is not to be reduced to personal or private communion with ʹmy Jesusʹ. It is to be a recipient of grace in the context of ongoing witness, service and sacrifice to the broken world which God in Christ came to redeem. It is even more than that. Archbishop Desmond Tutu was fond of saying ʺwe cannot be human aloneʺ. Wonderfully, in the Eucharist more than any other moment of life, as we take from the broken bread and share from the common cup, we celebrate our common shared humanity in Jesus, who gifts us with his divinity.
At the table of life, more than any other place, we want, we need, to celebrate as truly as we are able the reality at the core of our being - life in communion. For all the above reasoning, the Common Cup is a central element in our Anglican ʹsonglineʹ. It should not be and cannot be easily abandoned. Of course, its ongoing place in our life may be experienced differently. It may be that some form of intinction is widely adopted. Certainly, there should be a clear understanding that a person conscious of passing an infection of any kind should refrain from the cup on that day. At the very least the common cup should be available to all and its merits taught, even if a different option is made available. This is not a small matter. It goes to the very heart of what it means to be a member of the Church of the triune God. Anglicans Divided over Same Sex Marriage
Since the Reformation we have been used to disunity in the Church being demonstrated through denominational loyalty around historical theological dispute and response. This is no longer the primary case. In the Church, as in politics, the deepening rift is between those who, for the sake of simplicity, insist truth is conveyed through fixed dogmatic assertion, usually on social issues, “conservatives”, and those who believe truth is encountered at the crossroads of faith and life, or to put it more piously, at the point where heaven and earth meet. The latter are commonly called “progressives¨ which, like woke, has become a weaponised term seldom owned by those to whom it is ascribed. (Neither adjective is absolute, relationships are invariably more complex). Both progressive and conservative leanings are present in every denomination. Christians often find more in common across denominational lines with those who share their views, conservative or progressive, than they do within their own denominational membership. In the Anglican Church of Australia, the largest and most well-resourced Diocese is Sydney. Here conservatism is a badge of honour and its expectations a pre-condition of licence. The recent requirement of Sydney Anglican school principals to declare marriage between a man and a woman to be the only legitimate marriage is the latest example of controlled conformity. Another well-known example is the denial of ordination to women as priests or bishops, on grounds that a woman may not hold oversight of a man. It appears the judgment of Lord Matthew Hale, a seventeenth century English judge still carries weight: a wife is contractually obligated to her husband. Anglicans deal with differences, sometimes quite substantive, through a polity of checks and balances, that requires attentive listening and good intentions for the whole Body of Christ; not protection of tribal rules The Anglican Church is a Communion of Provinces (national churches) and dioceses throughout the world in 164 countries with over 85million adherents. It has no equivalent to papal authority, nor is it a confessional Church with a dogma defining statement like the Westminster Confession in the Presbyterian Church. Every Diocese has a large degree of autonomy within what is known as the Lambeth quadrilateral – allegiance to four fundamental principles: Holding and giving expression to:
For those who uphold equality between men and women in ministry on the one hand, or marriage equality on the other, there is no conflict in their doing so with the fundamentals of the Lambeth quadrilateral. Nor do they believe they are out of step with one or more of the instruments of unity. The Diocese of Sydney, however, strongly disagrees. It claims both the ordination of women and the blessing of same sex marriages to conflict with the first fundamental principle - plain scriptural truth. Its position is well known. It contributed $1 million to the “no” campaign in the national same-sex marriage plebiscite. Here is not the place to develop a serious biblical hermeneutic, but conservatives are accustomed to take single verses of scripture and apply them literally without adequate reference to context. To do less, they claim, is to undermine the authority of scripture. I argue that using individual verses as proof texts does the opposite, it undermines the authenticity and authority of scripture. What is required is the hard work of reading individual verses in a much wider scriptural context. Every biblical text must come under the bar of love revealed to us in Christ who said, “You search the scriptures believing that in them you find truth, but it is they that bear testimony to me.” For example, in reference to marriage equality, I argue the starting scriptural injunction is: “it is not good for man (human) to live alone”. As social beings we all long for intimacy. Given we now know intimacy with a person of opposite gender is not possible for a relatively small minority, it is cruel, not to say dangerous, for life-time intimacy to be denied, or its blessing withheld. At the recent General Synod of the National Church, the Diocese of Sydney moved a resolution, which if passed, intended to prohibit the blessing of same sex couples. To be passed, a matter of this weight requires a majority in the three houses of bishops, clergy, and laity. While it received a majority in the latter two, it failed in the house of bishops. The Sydney contingent at the synod was clearly unhappy. Archbishop, Kanishka Raffel, told the synod the church was “in a perilous position, and no one should be mistaken about that”. What he meant by that is far less clear. The General synod normally meets every three years. It is well within the bounds of possibility that in three years a conservative vote on all matters will safely pass all three houses, such is the growing influence of Sydney Diocese nationally. If this eventuality is realised, three serious outcomes will need to be faced. First, the Church will sound and feel increasingly cult-like and irrelevant to the majority of Australians. Most will feel intrusion into their personal lives offensive. Worse, the conservative obsession with sex and gender on the one hand and male headship on the other is proving to be part of the problem in a country where abuse and the exercise of unequal power is endemic. A recent poll has shown domestic violence to be more prevalent in the Anglican community than in the wider population. Second, if the Church is to retain any public interface, it will be perceived to be the spiritual guardian of the political right, a position already held by the Australian Christian Lobby (ACL). This is a bizarre situation for the Church, committed as it is to Gospel imperatives for justice, and a bias towards the voiceless and powerless. Advocacy for social justice and cohesion is the more natural place for Christian alignment. While the Diocese of Sydney has used a megaphone to declare its position on gender and sexuality, its voice on the ethics of climate change, indigenous rights, asylum seekers and refugees, transparency in politics, social housing, homelessness, etc has not simply been muted, it has been silent. Third, those Anglicans who believe the Church should be immersed in the world for its justice and transformation, and who hone their theology at the coal-face will feel they have nowhere to go, the Church of their heritage will feel a foreign place. It is unlikely such people will start another Church, it is more likely they will exercise the ministry and love of Christ outside such confining, and in truth unscriptural, boundaries. It is a sad indictment on a world that increasingly longs for certainty (political, economic, and religious) that what we end up experiencing is arrogance, narrowness, and meanness of spirit. Pentecost
ʺThe wind blows where it wills. You hear the sound of it, but you do not know where it comes from or where it goesʺ. On Sunday we celebrate Pentecost (Whitsunday) one of the three great festivals of the Christian year. But these days you would not really know unless you are a complete insider. On 3rd June 1770, Captain James Cook, sailing through the Coral Sea clearly did know the significance of this day, and named the paradise like islands he was passing, the Whitsundays. Much has changed in 250 years, and not all for the better. Pentecost celebrates the all-pervading presence of God: God who creates, God who redeems, and God who gifts life. Pentecost origins are embedded in the biblical creation narrative where we are reminded that nothing exists outside the breathing (wind) of God: breath that especially enters humans to make us truly alive. It is through this divine breathing we have ʹsoulʹ. But is this reality universally cherished and fed? President Biden claims that on a visit to the Kremlin in 2011, when he was Vice President of the US and Vladimir Putin Prime Minister of Russia, he looked into Putinʹs eyes and said: ʺMr Prime Minister, you have no soulʺ. Bidenʹs observation which echoes through the Ukraine invasion, is given credence in the ongoing creation narrative. We find it in the story of Cain and Abel, a narrative not so much about humanity’s first children, but about each one of us. In each of us Abel (wind spirit or soul) abides, as does Cain (possessor, controller, owner). In each of us Cain is quite capable of predominating to the extent that Abel dies. I have always been certain of the universal reach of the creative and redeeming love of God, but I am not a universalist, I do not presume rest in the presence of God is an inevitable human destiny. Because everything exists through the omnipresent blowing of the spirit of God everything is connected to everything else, and we should be able to find language to address or speak to everything and everyone else – with respect. But as we know to our loss and shame, this is not so. This reality is picked up in the ongoing creation narrative. The Tower of Babel narrative highlights human resistance to respect, and humility in the commonality of life. Again, this is not a story about an event at the beginning of time, but about all time, and especially our time. Humans, unhappy with living appropriately choose dominance, superiority, elitism; they choose to build a tower. The consequence, we are told, is that humans lose the capacity for genuine communication, beyond self-interested tribal interests. How tragically true this has become of global political life – not least, recent past in Australia. In his brilliant book, the Go-between God, John Vincent Taylor talks of the Spirit as divine energy holding all things in harmonious unity: the Spirit is the ʹgo-betweenʹ. In the famous chapter 37 of Ezekiel, the prophet picks up the same theme when he describes the spirit putting back together the broken pieces of Israel. Today marks the end of a week of prayer for Christian unity and the week marking reconciliation in Australia. A season celebrating and praying for unity aways precedes the celebration of Pentecost. Harmony and reconciliation is always the mark of God’s presence. As we turn to the New Testament, we can hardly be surprised to learn that the birth and ministry of Jesus: the taking of human nature and subsequent proclamation of the Kingdom of God, is ascribed to the action of the Spirit. (Jesus’ conception was ʹof the Holy Spiritʹ while his ministry commencing at his baptism was marked by the Spirit ʹalighting on him as a doveʹ). In the creeds Christians assert the Holy Spirit is the ʹLord and Giver of Lifeʹ. John tells us he wrote his gospel that we might understand Jesus is the Son of God and that in him we would experience life. Clearly the gift of life was manifest in everything Jesus said, and in every person he touched. What then of his death through crucifixion. Was this to be the end of such imminent divine presence? No! Early in his Gospel John makes it clear that after his death and resurrection, that same spirit they experienced in Jesus would become manifest in them ʺout of the believers shall flow rivers of living waterʺ. Pentecost is therefore the outpouring of the same spirit that was in Jesus, the imminence of God is not restricted to any locality but is poured out on the believing community. The Spirit is the Spirit of the crucified and risen one. The resurrected Jesus is present to us through the spirit and in our baptism, we are baptised into that spirit. 2000+ year ago those gathered in Jerusalem on that fiftieth (jubilee) day after the resurrection were from all possible nations and tribes. For them and potentially for us all, the Tower of Babel is reversed. Each hears in their own tongue ʹof the wonderful work of Godʹ. What is this common language? It is not so much what the ear hears, but what the eye sees and the heart expresses. Described by Paul as ʹfruitsʹ the Spirit is made manifest in ʺlove, joy, peace, patience, kindness, generosity, faithfulness, gentleness, and self-controlʺ. He says ʺthere is no law against such thingsʺ, in other words, it is in such traits that transformative life resides. Like laughter, this is common and unifying language. On the day of Pentecost there was so much exuberance that those passing by rather derisively remarked ʺthey are all drunkʺ. One of the marks of this exuberance was speaking in tongues or glossolalia. Glossolalia is not specifically, or exclusively, a Christian phenomenon. It is a feature of many and varied exuberant expressions of spiritual awareness. It most certainly should not be claimed as a badge of identification for born again or class A Christians. If there is such a badge it is demonstrated in the afore mentioned fruits. Paul is later to describe ministries which he identifies as gifts or empowerments of the spirit. I do not wish to dwell on them but to highlight one – the one most strongly emphasised – prophecy. There is much pious nonsense spoken of in relation to this ministry. Prophecy is essentially the gift or capacity of making God or truth known. Jesus is the greatest of all prophets because it is in him that God and truth are most perfectly known. Islam makes the right call when it refers to Abraham, Moses, and other Old Testament figures as prophets, for they each make God known. We should all covet prophecy for we are all to make God known. I do hope and pray that Pentecost can recover its place alongside Christmas and Easter as one of the three great festivals. I hope and pray too that Pentecost can be reclaimed from Pentecostalism and the extravagances associated with it. In our narrative and living we, the Christian community, are vehicles of the Spirit’s renewing breath that began the process of creation and is fully invested in its redeeming. Christians and the Federal Election
Christianity and Christians cannot be neutral or disconnected from politics. Christianity is an incarnate faith. While it rightly gives central place to personal piety, Christianity is, at its roots, a way of life deeply immersed in the world for its justice, renewal and transformation. It is so because God, who took human likeness in Jesus, is prejudiced toward harmony and justice and therefore is on the side of the poor and needy, the downtrodden and voiceless. The divine agenda is nothing less than the transformation of human society into one where the first will be last and the last will be first. Christians pray: thy will be done, on earth, as it is in heaven. For this reason, at the forthcoming federal election Christians have a solemn obligation not to vote for blatant self-interest but to vote for a person or party they believe will be most inclined to serve justice and common good, a sustainable future, not just in Australia, but throughout the globe. Those currently in power wish to remain in power, an understandable but not necessarily virtuous aspiration. They are encouraging us to believe the direction we have been heading is the direction that should be maintained. Let me come straight to the point. I do not believe a Christian, in good conscious, can support a political party wedded to neoliberal capitalism and self interest. My reason is simple, it is that neoliberal capitalism is a construct embedded in a flawed philosophical and quasi-theological position which inevitably leads to injustice and is incapable of addressing the 21st century crises faced by humanity. Neoliberal capitalism is born from a post enlightenment position that contends the individual and not community is the fundamental unit of society; and on a broader scale that nations and national interest (nationalism) should shape international life. It is flawed because humans are social beings. None of us can live alone. None of us are capable of true independence. We are all interdependent. We are who we are through others. Reflecting on the catastrophic slaughter of WW1, an international gathering of Christian leadership in 1920 contended that self-interest is the basis of human violence and disintegration and the greatest of all evils is national self-interest. Neo-Liberal capitalism is founded on a quasi-theological position because of the obvious mutual interdependence, one could say marriage, that exists between the political and religious right. But the religious right is misleading its political friends and giving them false comfort. Priority given to individual identity is an entirely novel idea imposed by the religious right on scripture and is a novel thought to Christianity. Scripture contends we are as strong as our weakest members and that while each is unique, our uniqueness lies in the contribution with which we can gift the identity of the whole body. “Church is the only society on earth that exists for the benefit of non-members” is attributed to both William Temple and Dietrich Bonhoeffer. If there is to be a marriage between Christianity and politics, it must be founded on the idea that our interest is developed through investment in the legitimate interest of others and that national interest must serve global best interest. Neoliberal capitalism was given a huge kick along by Thatcher, Reagan and Howard and exaggerated to absurdity by Abbott and Trump. The philosophy has meant individual rights have triumphed over societal good. Individual rights and needs are transient, societal good endures across generations. Neoliberal capitalism wins at the ballot box through temporary hip-pocket incentives at the expense of long-term policy and reform. This flawed philosophy has resulted in the privatisation of much that should have remained in public hands – not least the port of Darwin. We have seen the consequences play out in, amongst other areas, aged care, the prison system, and the inability of the electricity grid to be made fit for purpose as we journey towards decentralised generation of renewable energy. We have seen this flawed philosophy play out in the decimation of the public service. The corporate memory and skill of the public service exists to serve the common good. It is almost beyond belief that neoliberal politicians and especially the Prime Minister deride ‘non-elected experts’ and insist that they, partisan politicians, are the ones to decide strategies, the merits of which can only be properly understood through expert technical, scientific, or modelling analysis. This flawed philosophy has insisted the market makes the necessary adjustments and reforms that society needs. If this is the case, why have government at all? But at least it goes part way to explain why the current government appears to have no reforming policy on any of the crucial issues that confront us. For the three years of its latest term the government has presided over a policy void. The market does well what it is designed to do – make maximum profit at minimum cost. But the market cannot address the appalling pay level endured by aged care workers or the inaccessibility of housing. Nor can the market determine the support that should have been given to the Pacific Island Nations. These and many other issues need value attributed to them independently of the market, values that undergird societal good. Ironically the market can now make a major contribution to climate transition given it is cheaper to use renewables than it is to generate energy from fossil fuels. (The government, feeling stymied that its commitment to fossil fuels no longer has the support of business or the market, now abuses the very market principles it espouses by subsidising fossil fuels to the mining industry). Finally, the extreme end of this flawed philosophy and quasi theology makes place for and gives comfort to conspiracy theories. People such as Craig Kelly and George Christensen have been tolerated, even protected, within the government. Can the Coalition parties be political platforms through which Christians can invest their energy and commitment? Yes, of course yes. But this can only be so with integrity if those parties free themselves from the flawed ideology in which they are trapped by the extreme elements in their ranks. Wanting social equity, an environmentally sustainable world for future generations, transparency and accountability in government, compassion and empathy for refugees and asylum seekers, a voice to parliament, should be cross party aspirations. That they are not, is shameful and the reason for the rise of independent voices. At the federal election we, people of faith must be bold enough to stand up for the divine agenda made manifest in Jesus. Easter: A New Thing
We like to think 21st century humanity is somehow superior to past generations, possessed as they were with less knowledge and sophistication, but the invasion of Ukraine tells us otherwise. The unspeakable depravity visited upon the Ukrainian people by Russian forces completely dispels any illusion we might have held that humanity’s intellectual evolving over centuries has flowed universally to a more advanced moral civility. If we are honest with ourselves, we did not need the Ukrainian invasion to tell us this. Here in Australia, we have held some asylum seekers and refuges in detention for almost a decade. We incarcerate our indigenous population at rates hardly exceeded anywhere in the world. We enjoy a political system which scrutinises welfare recipients, but protects incompetence, even corruption, by legislators. We know that a sustainable future for the planet now hangs on a knife edge, yet here in Australia we would rather defend and prolong past harmful activity than invest in a sustainable future. Two thousand years ago an enigmatic figure and his donkey made a short trip into Jerusalem. This trip and its fateful destiny had become an inevitability because his vision, and the power structures of his time, religious or secular, were on a collision course. His announced ‘kingdom’ and the way power operates were, (indeed are), irreconcilable. For a while the crowd misunderstood, they thought he offered a similar power structure, but more powerful, one that was on their side rather than Rome. When it became clear this was not Jesus’ agenda their cry of ‘hosanna’ changed to ‘Crucify’. This misunderstanding, or worse, terrible misrepresentation prevails today. In the US the right of politics is filled with the halleluiah choruses of those who see Jesus’ mission fulfilled in Donald Trump, while it is reported that the Russian Colonel in charge of troops murdering civilians in Bucha was blessed by a Russian Orthodox bishop before he left for the invasion. The sad truth is that we are all no different, we seldom seek a different way, we simply want a power structure that is more transparently mirroring our view of the world, rather than a way that seeks a civility embracing all creation inclusive of humanity: recognising that none should “think of themselves more highly than they ought to think”. While claiming Christian commitment, it is clear the present Australian government has completely lost its way and should be defeated at the May election, we can only hope that its replacement will be less partisan, more consultative, and more transparent. The events of what we now call Good Friday are well known. A man who had chosen for himself the title ‘Son of Man’ was made to carry his cross and face the fate of a common criminal. All humanity is embraced in his self-chosen title. He saw himself no more but no less than common humanity, the cross of all humanity is being borne here. This is the point. Ukraine reminds us that in the pursuit of self-interest and fed by prejudice and ignorance we all live lives but a hairs breadth away from criminality. Domestic violence, homelessness, a thousand dollar an hour salary for some and twenty-three dollars an hour for those who care for us in our old age; wanton disregard for habitat, etc are all part of the same spectrum. This ‘Son of Man’ faced both the religious and politically powerful. Before Pilate he was asked “what is truth”? All humanity must face the same question, but most of us are too afraid, or too self-absorbed. What Pilate could not grasp was that the truth he sought was being lived out right in front of him.
While over the past two thousand years many saintly women and men, followers of Jesus, have understood and followed his way, in our time some have intuitively understood, while not outwardly calling themselves Christian – Mahatma Gandhi and Nelson Mandela come to mind. Others, less well known, have also followed the way of the cross, like the Palestinian Mohammed El Halabi who languishes in an Israeli gaol because he refuses to confess to a crime he has not committed. A false confession would give comfort to his oppressors who wish to further disempower his people. All of this is pretty grim, unbearably so if it were the end of the story. But it is not. Good Friday gave way to an astonishing truth – love is more powerful. It cannot be vanquished. When there is light, darkness must give way. No matter what happened yesterday, today offers possibilities of a new thing. Today is a day never lived before and can be filled with grace. Easter is not primarily about an empty tomb but about the irrepressible presence of life, focussed in the Easter narrative on the one who is its source. Isaiah, who is traditionally read in the lead up to Easter, speaks of the promise of a ‘new thing’. What he is referring to is not ‘new’ in the sense of never having been tried before, but new in the sense of ‘renewing’ that which has the power to make new. In the Ukraine we have glimpsed this ‘new thing’ in the extraordinary generosity and courage of thousands who have provided safe refuge. We have seen it in the Ukrainian grandmothers who have shaken their brollies at Russian soldiers and told them to go home to their own mothers and grandmothers, and hopefully we will see it in a Ukrainian nation which will seek justice but not revenge. Here in Australia, we desperately need to experience a ‘new thing’ and to hear its promise in the lead up to the May election.
Disasters and their opportunities
Covid, flood, war, are disasters which no counter narrative can disguise. They have brought, and are bringing, untold suffering and misery on so many people. And yet, is it not also true that they have within them the seed bed of possibility, something new, something fresh, something hopeful, something life giving. The tragedy is that the opportunity may not be grasped by those who have the most leverage to deliver it. The recent floods in eastern Australia have been ‘unprecedented’. They have been recognised, with those with eyes to see, as another graphic harbinger of a changing climate and the urgent need for changed human responsibility. As of this moment there is not the slightest indication that the Morrison government will do anything, invest anything, to meet this challenge. In response to the 2019 fires ‘he did not hold a hose’ and in the floods refuses to walk the open streets for fear of being told home truths by the people. It is far too early to reflect on opportunity and change available when eventually the brutality inflicted on the courageous Ukrainian people comes to an end, but we can only pray that those with political power in the US, Europe, and Russia, will have vision and courage to enable a freer and more noble European order. I want to reflect on the covid pandemic from personal experience and consider the opportunities it has presented to the Church. I hardly need to recall that the Church and the practice of Christianity in the Western world, especially Australia, has been, and is, in sharp decline. On first look it is reasonable to assume that Covid caused restrictions on gatherings has hastened this decline. Many, perhaps most congregations report reduced numbers. Since the beginning of covid, Margaret and I have been spiritually nourished from two sources that would not have been there if it were not for covid. The first has been the daily garden congregation emanating from Robert Willis, the Dean of Canterbury Cathedral. Without missing a day, he has given an extraordinary daily gift to thousands around the world who have joined him. How he has maintained the daily gift in addition to all his other responsibilities, not to mention the need for personal refreshment and rest – I do not know. Partly by accident, partly by intuition, largely through Godly inspiration he has hit on a recipe that works. That he is erudite, a fine musician, theologically and biblically scholarly, helps a great deal. Like all talented people he makes what he does seem simple when it most certainly is not. He settles himself somewhere in the Dean’s Garden, variously amongst pigs, turkeys, geese, cats and flowers, sunshine or rain, with a prayer book, bible and cup of tea. He starts with the opening of morning prayer from the prayer book, reads the set psalm, and a passage of scripture and then reflects. The reflection on the scripture is both scholarly and yet easy to follow, almost always there is an insight which may not have been apparent before. He then goes on to reflect upon events or lives from the past that have an anniversary on this date, and in doing so brings relevance and insight to our contemporary lives. He also reflects on present day events most latterly of course the war in Ukraine. He concludes with prayer, silence and a blessing. When he retires after Easter one can only hope that somehow this gift will have a continuing life. The second resource has been the weekly or fortnightly gathering of people in our home. When covid began and gatherings were shut down, Margaret and I offered to keep contact with parishioners who live ‘north of the river’ in our Parish. The original list has changed, but now we have between 20 – 30 folk who join us – not all on the same day. !5 squeezed in once but mostly it is 12. Interestingly, a significant proportion of those who attend have not been, or would not otherwise be, regular Church goers. Again, we seem to have hit on a recipe that works. We sit around an extended dining room table. Margaret decorates the table according to the season or the theme for the Sunday. Everyone lights their own candle opposite their seat. I do not wear robes, but my stole lies across the length of the table. We start with some music, a reflective prayer (often from a Celtic source), join in the prayer of preparation and I pray the collect for the week. Three pieces of scripture are read (responsibility for reading conveyed by email). I lead the reflection on the readings for 8 – 10 minutes. Everyone participates in the ongoing reflection for perhaps 15 minutes (on occasions it is much longer)!! We then pray, led sometimes by one of the others at the table. I celebrate the Eucharist, using various sources, often Celtic. Each communicates the person next to them. I then conclude with prayer and blessing. With liturgy over, the table is stripped of it candles and decorations and brunch is served. Conversations follow from the earlier reflection and cross over to shared experiences of the week etc. By the time folk leave two hours have passed – on occasions three. Folk are constantly reminded that here they are participating in the life of the wider Parish, Diocese, and universal Church. I share both these experiences to demonstrate that worship in a conventional Parish setting is not necessarily the only or even the best way of nourishing spiritual life in the contemporary world. The need for a spiritual dimension is widely felt, but the place to find it eludes most. We all grow through participation. Participation is made possible through hospitality - in my first example in a garden and in the second, a dining room table. Christianity is not primarily or even secondarily submission to dogma – it is essentially about following a WAY, a way that has taken human flesh. Christians are nourished through Word that is spoken and bread that is broken. The opportunity/challenge facing the Church is to find ways of offering a range of hospitable experiences through which people can grow spiritually – for It is a terrible mistake to think that the role of Christian leadership is to ‘do God for people’, people and God do their own business. Our task is to find, or create, hospitable and open spaces where this can be nurtured. хай живе Україна (Long Live Ukraine)
There are no words to describe the utter depravity being inflicted on the people of Ukraine, nor indeed are there words to adequately describe the heroism of the people and their president. However, there were words, wonderful words, in the United Nations General Assembly last week from the Kenyan Ambassador to describe what is at stake here. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-africa-60603232 The ambassador spoke of his own nation and its national boundary, carved, and bequeathed by its colonial master (Britain). What he said of Kenya equally describes most African countries as they emerged from the colonial era. “These are not boundaries we chose” he said. He went on to say: “people on either side of the boundary are the same people”. One could say the same for West Papua and PNG, or indeed for most countries of the Middle East. Having said that, he went on: “while they may not be the boundaries we chose, they are the boundaries which exist and define us in the present”. Trying to return to a romanticised past would only create endless turmoil and conflict. Instead, Kenya and most African countries are committed to cooperation across their boundaries through the Organisation of African Unity. Much is being speculated as to the motivation of Vladimir Putin in prosecuting this cruel war. It appears he has a romanticised view of what he believes to have been the ancient people of Rus, from which Russia and Belarus derive their names. He apparently believes Ukraine and the Ukrainian people to be indissolubly part of this family – as perhaps he does of other nations previously part of the old Soviet Union. There may or may not be vestiges of historical truth in this romanticism. However, the people of Ukraine now live in a very different present, a present from which they have no wish to be forcibly separated. The war in Ukraine is reinforcing awareness of the awful danger in which we place others when boundaries are not respected. We learned this bitter truth in Vietnam, the Middle East and Afghanistan. At a personal level we know its truth when personal boundaries are transgressed through abuse. Far too many people live diminished lives because their personal boundaries have been transgressed by others. On a global scale humanity is now reaping the consequences of having refused to acknowledge the boundaries necessary for the maintenance of a stable and a self-regenerating natural order. The other side of the truth told by the ambassador is equally important – ‘those on the other side of the boundary are the same’. It is beyond comprehension that Putin and his army could inflict so much unbearable suffering on the Ukrainian people. If he genuinely believes Ukrainian people and Russian people are part of the same ‘stock’; how is it possible that he and his army can so indiscriminately hit schools, hospitals and residential areas and confine citizens within their city with no power food or water? What sadistic madness is at play here? Respect through recognition of commonality must be foundational to a hoped for harmonious and peaceful world. Covid has painfully reminded us of our common, and vulnerable, humanity. None are superior or inferior. Greatness and weakness have potential within all humanity’s diversity. It was Francis of Assisi who reminded us that ‘sameness’ and relationship extend beyond human boundaries. He referred to the sun and moon, animals, and plants, as brothers and sisters. We human beings must seek commonality not simply with all human beings but also with the natural order. Since the commencement of the industrial revolution, we have seen ourselves as ‘apart from’ the natural order over which we have sought sovereignty and control. Through natural disaster, the last few years have demonstrated how foolish this ambition has been. In similar manner, Putin is being shown how foolish his attempt for sovereignty over Ukraine has been. Even if he gains control over cities through destructive force, this will not be over. Hopefully those around him will be wise enough to say that respecting others is strength not weakness, and bullying others is weakness not strength. In the meantime, as we lift our prayers and direct our thoughts to the brave people of Ukraine, we would all do well to remember that respect for boundaries, wherever they are, builds trust and respect. At the same time, we must also remember that on either side of the boundary people are the same. The Russian people, themselves, must take their rightful place as significant contributors to a peaceful world order. Religious Discrimination – Time for more open Dialogue
That people should be protected from discrimination on the basis of ethnicity, age, sexual orientation, gender or religion there can be no argument. If there is a perceived legislative gap, it should be filled. However, none should be protected from observing the values, standards, mores, expected of all citizens, especially dignity and respect to all, from all. The chaotic mess the government got itself into last week was not primarily because of a difference of opinion in their ranks about the rights of people of faith, but because the bill put on the table was not transparently about the protection of individuals from discrimination based on their religion. The bill had been drafted to suit the specific agenda of an influential group of lobbyists – the Australian Christian lobby. That this is the case was made clear when the prime minister announced he was withdrawing the bill from debate in the senate because the ACL declared it no longer fitted their purpose. In the minds of many politicians, and Joe public, I am sure there is an assumption that by virtue of its name this lobby reasonably expresses the voice of Australian Christians. It most certainly does not. It speaks for a significant and very noisy minority with an obsession for judgement based on sexual orientation and gender. Living in this obsession they appear to find comfort and assurance about what is acceptable to God. It appears they think Christian identity and faithfulness can be demonstrated by their interpretation of a few biblical verses on human sexuality and gender. There is even evidence that those involved with this lobby are involved in political branch stacking in certain coalition electorates in pursuit of their public and national agenda. Let this fact be laid openly on the table. While in 50+ years of ministry I can honestly say I am unaware of any discrimination because of my faith, clearly this is not the case for all. For some men, and some women, religious commitment is easily identified through dress code, which makes them vulnerable to discrimination. They must be protected. Some have suffered discrimination through association. This has particularly been the case for the Muslim community. Because extremism and violence has been perpetrated by some who claim membership of the Islamic faith all have suffered, as most tragically seen in the Christchurch shootings. Australia has become a multi-cultural, multi-faith society, but its history and tradition is firmly rooted in its Christian foundations. Care therefore needs to be taken to ensure that the needs, customs, and festivals of other faiths are both respected and given space for celebration. In the relative privacy and security of faith communities, people of faith should be able to practice whatever tradition they like, as long as they do not break common law. For example, some faiths practice a hierarchy of male only leadership. However, people of faith have no right to expect that this, or like tradition, should be practiced outside their own community. If a community of faith accepts taxpayer money for the offering of health, education or welfare, that service should be subject to the expectations values and standards of the wider community. What is even more problematic is the articulation of belief outside communities of faith which adversely affects the lives of others. A clear example has been experienced in this season of Covid. Conspiracy theory and antivax propaganda has many origins, but sadly such origin includes faith communities. Within such communities, people should be free to propagate and enact what they believe – again, as long they are not in breach of the law. Outside that community it is a different matter. Conspiracy theory and antivax propaganda undermines the health and security of the wider population. This is not an opinion, it is a statement based in scientific fact. The politician George Christiansen has the right to espouse these theories in his community of faith, but he has no right to do so as a politician using taxpayer funding. The promotion of theories or beliefs which put others at risk warrants no protection. Dylan Alcott tells the awful story of being informed his disability is punishment from God for past sins. The speaker has no right of protection, on the contrary the speaker should have been subject to appropriate, and if necessary, public sanction. The broader Australian population has every reason to cherish and encourage communities of faith and their presence in all streams of public life if their motivation is to “To do justice, love kindness and walk humbly with their God”. (Micah 6: 8). For most such communities, I believe this to be the case and Australia is the richer for it. However, the legislation before the parliament last week did not come from such communities. It came from those which have agendas of their own to prosecute, agendas that clearly cause hurt, misunderstanding, and division. It is ironic that if I have personally felt discrimination, it is because of being slotted in, by association, with such people in the mind of the public. “You are a Christian and you believe women should have no authority over men”. “You are a Christian and you do not believe in the priority of climate change”. “You are a Christian and you believe in creationism”. “You are a Christian and you believe all who do not believe what you believe are going to hell”. etc etc. It is my subjective feeling that parties on the left of the political spectrum have unintentionally discriminated against mainstream religion because they associate it with such ridiculous positions. No, I absolutely do not believe such nonsense. I believe that to know God is the human vocation. I believe that Jesus is the pathway to this knowledge. I believe we are called to follow his way and in doing so to cherish the lives of all for who they are, ‘straight’ or LGBTQI+, male or female, Malawi or Rohingya, Buddhist or Jew. To be a person of faith is to say ‘yes’ to life. ‘Yes,’ to God. ‘Yes’, to all fellow human beings. ‘Yes’, to the earth that nourishes us. ‘Yes’, to this place, this time. What was presented to the parliament expressed little ‘yes’ and an abundance of ‘no’. Israel declared to be an apartheid state
This week’s Amnesty International’s report, declaring Israel to be committing apartheid will come as no surprise to those familiar with Israel’s systematic and institutionalised discrimination, based on ethnicity. It further enforces the judgement already made by Human Rights Watch, the Israeli NGO, B’Tselem and Palestinian human rights and legal organisations. Nor will it be a surprise to hear that the Israeli propaganda machine was in full swing even before the report was released, claiming the authors to be guilty of partisanship and antisemitism. Nor will it be a surprise to hear that the Australian Prime Minister quickly dismissed the implications of the report saying no state is perfect and that the report makes no change to Australia’s unconditional support for Israel. At least he is consistent: apparently reports of alleged abuse by friends and colleagues of the Prime Minster are to be treated the same, be they abuse and potentially corrupt activity by members of his cabinet, or serious alleged criminality by a friendly state – nothing to see here. We are appropriately quick to condemn ethic violence against the Rohingya in Myanmar and the Uighurs in China, but apparently championing the rights of Palestinians is off limits. The Shadow Foreign Affairs Minister, Penny Wong, is correct to say no international court has, as yet, declared Israel to be guilty of apartheid, a very serious crime. However, the case has not been put to a court. The International Criminal Court (ICC) has agreed to hear the accusation that Israel and some Palestinian paramilitary groups are guilty of war crimes. It is urgent that the very serious accusation of apartheid criminality also be referred to the court. If Israel is confident it would be found - ‘not guilty’, it should be eager to have the case heard. Of course, it can have no such confidence - and knows that. Israel has enacted laws which entrench discrimination, including the 2018 Israeli New State Law. Increasing numbers of Jews, both in Israel and in the diaspora, are courageously acknowledging that apartheid is the best and only way of describing the policies of the Israeli government. The pendulum is swinging. The actions of the Israeli State will increasingly become subject to opprobrium, not simply from human rights advocates, but also from those who in the past have afforded the State unconditional support. Until recently support for Israel was a nonnegotiable badge of identity for American Evangelicals. The result of a recent poll shows that support for Israel amongst young US evangelicals has dropped from 69% to 34% in the period 2018 – 2021. Commentary suggests the most important reason for this extraordinary drop is that many of these young evangelicals have come to believe that Israel is an oppressor nation, a lawless state, squarely on the wrong side of human rights and social justice. Israel is now the villain, with Palestinians as the mistreated. “The images of Israel that dominate the thinking of many young people are vivid and almost unrelentingly negative: hundreds of Palestinian homes bulldozed, and Palestinian buildings blown up. They see reports from various human rights groups of the excessive use of force by Israeli police and Israel Defence Forces (IDF) troops”, US based commentators say. People are already making concrete responses to Israel’s behaviour. Protests such as the boycott of the recent Sydney Arts Festival, disrupting 40% of the performances, are going to increase, with a diverse section of society involved. When those involved are accused of antisemitism, frankly, it insults members of the Jewish community in the past, or present, who suffer, or have suffered, real and cruel antisemitic behaviour. The long list of discriminatory practices that contribute to the apartheid label have been frequently catalogued. So, what is to be done? Is there anything to be done? Yes, the following must be done, for the sake of Israel and its long-term integrity, as for the Palestinian people. First, the accusation against Israel that it has institutionalised an apartheid regime, a crime in international law, should be taken up by the International Criminal Court. Second, the paraphernalia of occupation must be dismantled under the supervision of the United Nations. Palestinians must be relieved of cruelty through administration under military law while the illegal settlers who daily harass them are administered under civil law - without punishment. This disparity in administration should have prevailed for a maximum of 12 months after the 1967 war, it has continued to exist for more than 50 years. Thirdly, the Palestinian people must have a body that represents them. This is not the Palestinian Authority – it was only established as a 5-year interim administration to oversee the establishment of a Palestinian State. It has devolved to the point of merely being an instrument in the apparatus that is the Israel occupation. The PLO (Palestinian Liberation Organisation) was acknowledged by the Oslo process as the representative of the Palestinian people, and this must be supported, reconstituted, and revitalised. Fresh elections of this body could ensure there is representation for all Palestinian people – those in Gaza, the West Bank including East Jerusalem, those languishing in refugee camps and throughout Palestinian Diaspora. Only when the Occupation has ceased, and the Palestinians have a truly representative elected body, can there be a foundation for true peace talks. Only then will there be some semblance of power and genuine authority for Palestinians at the negotiating table – currently we are asking Palestinians to negotiate without legitimate representation and with Israel’s boot on their throats. Meaningful negotiations of course require a respected international mediator who can help nut out the future in which all have the potential to flourish. . The future cannot, must not, be a continuation of the present. In the words of the 8th century BC Hebrew prophet Amos: “Let justice roll down like waters and righteousness as an everlasting stream”. Then and only then peace, security and flourishing will prevail. |
|
Proudly powered by Weebly