http://blogs.news.com.au/heraldsun/andrewbolt/index.php/heraldsun/comments/how_much_longer_can_email_last/

The above link bemoans the amount of rubbish that finds its way into our Inbox everyday. It’s like my snail mail inbox. I said to Tress several times, that it is well and truly timely for me to have the “No Junk Mail” sticker up because the bulging swathes of paper in our mailbox are predominantly junk.

The thing is – Andrew sorted through his Inbox, and then read his 22 emails which were worth sending.

Amidst the danger of being drowned by a daily deluge of worthless emails, a very busy and productive journalist managed to get to the bottom of the pile and read the 22 emails which mattered.

If only people entrusted with the work of God showed similar industry.

Today’s the last public holiday for a while. The next one would not be until November, when the Melbourne Cup comes around.

We didn’t spend the day on some rest and recreational activities. Instead we spent it with friends who needed to process what has been happening at LifeGate church. Someone rang us late in the morning and asked us to go to a persons home for yet more conversations.

We went at 2pm, and didn’t get home till about 7pm.

The journey continues for many.

Is winter really here?

Posted using Tinydesk blog app

Tress and I have had some really wonderful time recently. It is the serenity of having just emerged from a very messy bog of a phase, one we (I in particular) were totally unfamiliar with.

Yet in the midst of my new found peace, I ache from day to day. The pain of seeing Jason and Mel go through a similar journey – several times more severe – is almost palpable.

This morning we received copies of emails where it looked as though Tham Fuan and his leaders have sought to implicate Jason in a departure of Chek Chia.

Chek was the pastor of ICC when we first attended that church, but he left about a year and a half after we started attending. It was then that Jason became the de facto pastor for the next 5+ years. Chek’s departure was a fuzzy event in the sense that no one knew exactly why he left. What we know was Jason made all attempts to have him stay.

The suggestion that Jason had a problem getting along with pastors, is an evil attempt by whoever was responsible, to cast aspersions on a brother which is totally unfounded. It is a lie of a very grave sort. Jackie had told us that Tham Fuan asked her that question in their meeting so we have reasons to think it is Tham Fuan who now makes this point. If this is true, it is very hard to explain – like I said in an earlier entry – how this man who is a full time minister, can publicly say he came to Jesus at the foot of the cross and yet go on to falsely implicate a brother in that manner.

Tress and I want to stay out of this but I offered to look into this. Jason declined and I’m glad he did but I also pine for the right thing to be done by him and for this lie to stop. Jason and Mel have been hurt enough. Why do people want to go on hurting them by spreading such lies?

Tress and I didn’t make it to the G yesterday – just as we were about to leave home for the station, it rained and that put us off. A sadistic part of me wanted to see Hawthorn annihilate Melbourne and the near 100 point margin plus a near empty G would have made the event not quite an entertaining footy match so we saved ourselves some dosh…

We were at St Alfred’s again and a very young minister preached a very sound message on how the Pharisees accused Jesus of doing miracles through the power of Satan. Instead of grabbing at fuzzy notions of Satanic attacks to explain unpleasant experiences, the sermon showed what it meant to recognise Jesus for who He is and the impact of that recognition on our lives.

That impact is how we should watch our words. Our words – according to the sermon – is a window to our heart, which God can change if we allow Jesus to do His thing.

That sermon cut both ways. While obviously it made me point my fingers at Tham Fuan, it also made me very sorry for the many times MY words have been very carelessly uttered and our Lord said that showed the state of MY heart.  Honestly, my heart now has very little love for the leaders of LG. I suspect I am in the same boat as my dear brother.

The sermon said our Lord wants to heal our hearts. I hope we all become healed very soon.

That young minister also mentioned John Dickson in his sermon, specifically in the context of gay marriage. It was to illustrate how you can always find aspects of Jesus to support whatever your cause, without examining who Jesus really is and what sort of life changing responses that entails.  I have not looked at the Centre for Public Christianity website for a while now and so this morning I jumped onto that site, mindful that my stated quest to better understand the current burning issue which would not go away – gay marriage and the whole issue of homosexuality in church – needed to be followed up.

In an article co-written with Greg Clarke, John mentioned a book by Robert Gagnon and my quick amazon lookup tells me that has to be my next book. I had read Butterfield’s biography a few months ago, which gave me fresh insights and now it looks timely to get some hard yards in to better understand the core issues.

Here’s John Dickson and Greg Clarke’s short piece…

It’s the time of year to make the claim that Jesus is gay. It seems to happen semi-annually.  A few years back, a Queensland academic made the claim that Jesus had sex with his male disciples and a special relationship with ‘the beloved’ disciple, John. This year it was the turn of another John, Elton John, to raise the topic of Jesus’ sexuality, adding the new element that Jesus was a “super-intelligent” gay man.

The famous singer’s admiration of Jesus extends beyond his claim that Jesus was gay and smart: Elton admires Jesus’ compassion, naming the forgiveness of sins that Christ achieved on the cross as a key element of the Christian message, and something worthy of emulation.

This is encouraging news for those who understand that Christianity is first and foremost about forgiveness of sins, turning back to God and attempting to live in the manner that Christ exemplified.

We might disagree with Jesus, but we should at least deal with what the man actually said rather than what we’d like him to say (the church, as much as anyone else, needs to remember this)

However, the claim that Jesus was gay stretches the biblical and historical data too far. Unless we rely on the conspiracy-style argument (which runs: Jesus’ gayness is suggested by the Gospels’ suppression of any mention that he was gay), we just have to accept that a first-century Jewish teacher who spoke against porneia, the catch-all biblical term for all sexual acts proscribed by the Jewish law, could not have accepted homosexuality as a moral good. We might disagree with Jesus, but we should at least deal with what the man actually said rather than what we’d like him to say (the church, as much as anyone else, needs to remember this).

Christians do feel the pressure to adopt the emerging majority view on this—who wants to be the nay-sayer?—but they cannot bring themselves to reject 2000 years of utterly consistent Christian tradition going all the way back to Jesus for the sake of this particular cultural moment.

However, it’s blindingly obvious that the Church overall, and many Christians individually, have made a complete mess of their relationships with gay people. Let’s say it more constructively: Christians have a lot to apologise for to the gay community. Too often, Christians have hidden behind biblical texts about homosexuality in order to express their own personal homophobia and hatred. They have allowed their biblically informed views to promote unbiblical rhetoric and behaviour.

In all honesty, Christians rarely relate to gay people with anything like love, kindness, gentleness, patience and peace—the very things that are considered ‘spiritual’ in the Christian faith.

Surely it is possible for a mainstream, orthodox Christian to hold his or her view that homosexual behaviour is not encouraged in the Christian way of thinking, while at the same time being loving, kind and peaceful towards those who identify as gay. We are not talking about condescension — “Oh, I’ll be nice to you even though I think you are of the devil” — but genuine human connection with someone who lives differently from the way you yourself support.

It was the genius of Jesus that he could flex two mental muscles at the same time: he could have deep convictions about right and wrong yet extend love and friendship to all regardless. This is a lost art. Nowadays, we either stop loving those we disagree with, or in the name of love, adjust our own moral convictions.

The approach of biblical scholar Professor Robert Gagnon is the sort of thing we would like to see more often. In his landmark book, The Bible and Homosexual Practice (Abingdon Press, 2001), Gagnon summarised his 500-page study, saying, “The church should reject the notion that the only alternatives are to affirm homosexual behaviour or to hate and harass homosexuals” (p.485).

It will be a sad day for pluralistic democracies when a Christian has to claim to support homosexual behaviour in order to be thought of as loving; likewise, a Christian should hear the criticisms of the gay community in a spirit of friendship.

Gay and lesbian people are often so hurt by churches or Christians that it may take a very long time before any agreeable dialogue on the matter is possible. Elton John’s claim that Jesus is gay may not cope with much historical scrutiny, but that might be irrelevant at present, until we can find a way to acknowledge the damage that has been done and recover the art of friendly disagreement. 

This article first appeared on The Punch

Sometimes I’d read a book and make notes and markings but the bits that linger on in my mind would be parts that didn’t earn a scratch. Weeks after reading Alister McGrath’s CS Lewis biography, this extract, quoted from the Screwtape Letters (end of Chapter 8), still linger on in my mind:

Our cause is never more in danger than when a human, no longer desiring, but still intending, to do our Enemy’s will, looks around upon a universe from which every trace of Him seems to have vanished, and asks why he has been forsaken, and still obeys.

I met a couple of Churches of Christ folks yesterday, to talk about what happened in LifeGate recently. Towards the end of our conversation I referred to the above passage. I said to them whatever happened is in the past. I am keen only to look ahead. I said I still wanted the opportunity to work on the things of our Lord and His Kingdom. I needed to still obey.

For a long time, I had no desire and saw nothing to suggest God’s presence was there. Indeed I felt like I was forsaken or allowed myself to be forsaken. I needed to obey. Because regardless of my desires and intentions, regardless of my sense of his presence, He remains God almighty and I need to obey. Even if He is not “there for me”. But of course, I know He is. 

 

Tress and I were at the same church yesterday and on my part (and I believe for her too) I felt at peace, settled and was looking forward to allowing ourselves to find a new home there.

The sermon was on Matt 12, and the minister spoke with an English accent that sort of reminded me of that minister back in Kingsford in Sydney. I think John Smith was from Birmingham and I haven’t got a clue where Mike McNamara grew up in England but there were moments I felt like I was listening to a younger sounding John Smith.

A more important moment however, was when Mike made a point about the context of the passage. Jesus had just suffered a case of injustice. He was breaking a rule on Sabbath when he had just healed a man. The Pharisees were then plotting to kill Jesus.

Jesus’ response was to withdraw. This evoked a passage in Isaiah which referred to the Messiah as someone who would not be heard in the streets. He would not cry out or quarrel. He would not bruise a reed or snuff out a smoldering wick.

I have been thinking about how best to really move ahead. Leaving behind what had hurt a lot, would probably work best if I no longer allow myself to revisit any of the actions of those involved.

I have to also withdraw, or encourage either myself or anyone else (including my dear brother Jason) not seek to “be heard on the streets”.

Jesus withdrew because there was work left to be done.

If I still wanted to do any of the work of the Kingdom, I too have to withdraw. I can’t let this blog continue as a source or medium to battle those “Pharisees”. At least for as long as I can hold it all in and keep my eyes on what I want to still do, for the Lord. 

I needed to respond to the word of God preached well. So right there on the pew in church, I made this blog private again. I hope to keep it that way for as long as I need to or can.

The prelude sounded purposeful. “Going back to Jesus” tends to evoke a sense of seeking one’s “true north”. So not only did that prelude sound purposeful it also sounded promising. Going back to the foot of the cross was even more focused, even more poignant? The promise was of a new day dawning.

Yet how does one go back to Jesus at the foot of the cross but partake in scheming and lying and in a deceptive manner, get rid of a brother by delivering a public execution styled shaming? How can one preach returning to Jesus at the foot of the cross and yet look on as his team members go behind a fellow team member to get rid of him?

No sin has been committed by that condemned board member. He hasn’t committed any sin worthy of such public execution. He has not renounced his faith, has not rebelled against the Lord in a public manner – did absolutely nothing anywhere near capital. Stand him next to me and he’d be a saint.

So why was there a near unholy haste to remove Jason? How can one on a pulpit, in one breath say he sought Jesus at the foot of the cross and in the next, preside over the culmination of secret manoeuvres to remove a fellow church leader?

It sounded far too close to using the name of the Lord in vain. Somehow, to say he has returned to the foot of the cross but to proceed to allow a brother to be hurt and harmed as Jason was, appears to be a much greater sin than using the name of Jesus as a swear word.

Kiddo used to be in the music team in what was then ICC Church. We’d send her for practice on either a weeknight or Sat morning, and pick her up maybe a couple of hours later.

Kiddo’s generally a happy-go-lucky sort of person then so she’d not say much about how she felt about those practices. Too often however, she’d mumble something about the team leader.

That team leader – Kah Mun – was a young, brash and in-your-face sort of person. Tress and I would ask kiddo how practice went, and she’d mumble something about getting stressed up by KM’s demeanour and harsh words and actions.

After hearing a few more accounts of such encounters – from people other than kiddo –  I’d go and speak with Jason. I had told him the effect this young hot head was having on the team and team spirit. People were getting put off.

Without fail, Jason would defend KM. He’d say things to support and build him up – not directly in front of him, but by supporting KM’s reputation and building up my esteem of  KM. He’d say things to get me to see the better side of this young man and accept him for who he is. He even succeeded in making me also want to encourage KM.

There were numerous encounters  like this. I’d relay to Jason what other said about KM and he’d keep saying good things about KM. He’d do all he can to build KM up, build up others’ esteem of KM. 

This went on for years.

Finally when Kiddo was doing year 12 and was starting to ease off her involvement in music ministry, I was sort of relieved that she did not have to be subjected to that harsh and tense practice sessions again. I said to Jason then that I was glad Kiddo was no longer involved and Jason would continue to say only good things about KM. By then I would also start to hear Mel using terms of endearment in referring to Rachel – as though she was her own daughter.

And so when KM was seated not more than 10 feet away from me last Sunday, publicly asking Jason questions in short and curt manner and in derisive and belittling tones that made it look like he had little time for Jason, I was aghast. I was also aghast at the same derisive and dismissive tone he used against my aunt (Tress’ aunt) – one who had such close ties to the family. It was a public dressing down by a young man against his elders who have done only the best to support and nurture him all these years.

Many later told me they were disgusted with what they saw and heard.

For me who witnessed for years, how Jason treated KM like a son, I am still trying to digest what KM did to him last Sunday.