Author: Jimmy Day

With growth come many benefits.  With the benefits come countless responsibilities and complexities.  And it is these things that sometimes make us look back with longing for the simpler, less complex days.  And here lies the challenge as we grow to Christian adulthood – what was once simple and uncluttered becomes complex and chaotic.

It was this dilemma that the apostle Paul addressed when he wrote these words to the Corinthian Christians who had complicated their faith: “But I fear, lest by any means, as the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtlety, so your minds should be corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ” (2 Cor. 11:3).  I love those words: “the simplicity that is in Christ.”  The simple message that even a child can understand.

That’s why, when Jesus was asked by His disciples, “who, then, is the greatest in the kingdom of heaven?”  Jesus called a little child to him, and placed the child among them. And he said: “Truly I tell you, unless you change and become like little children, you will never enter the kingdom of heaven.”  Jesus’ disciples were jostling for position – grown men acting in a childish way.  Jesus reminds them that even as they grow into maturity they are never lose their childlike qualities.

I have been studying the Bible for over 30 years.  It’s an amazing and life-changing book but it’s not all easy to understand. One of Jesus’ disciples acknowledged this in his second epistle referring to the writings of Paul, “His letters contain some things that are hard to understand…” (2 Peter 3:16)

I love the story of Karl Barth who is often regarded as the greatest Protestant theologian of the twentieth century.  His prolific theological studies and writings shaped a century and were instrumental in combating liberal theology.  His commentary, “The epistle to the Romans” is considered by many to be one of the most important theological treatises of all time.  Barth’s theology found its most sustained and compelling expression through his thirteen-volume magnum opus, the Church Dogmatics that is widely regarded as one of the most important theological works of the century. The Church Dogmatics runs to over six million words and 8,000 pages and is one of the longest works of systematic theology ever written.

And yet when Karl Barth was at Rockefeller Chapel on the campus of the University of Chicago during his lecture tour of the U.S. in 1962, after his lecture, during the Q & A time, a student asked him if he could summarize his whole life’s work in theology in a sentence. Barth responded, “Yes, I can. In the words of a song I learned at my mother’s knee: ‘Jesus loves me, this I know, for the Bible tells me so.”

Karl Barth, a man of great learning, understanding and maturity had not lost touch with the simple gospel – a message so simple that even a child can understand it.

 

Both men – Andrew and Myuran have had a total life-change since their sentence. Myuran has turned to education and is running art classes in the prison and a few years ago Andrew became a Christian and is running the church services within the prison and is often called upon to help those who are struggling. Both men admit guilt and are deeply sorry for what they did. Andrew expressed to me he isn’t looking for a “get out of jail free” card. He is simply asking that the death penalty be commuted to a life sentence. His desire is to live so that he can continue to help other people in the jail – something that he is currently doing and is making a huge difference to many people.

I know there are those who disagree with the appeal for clemency. Their view is “done the crime, do the time.” I’ve heard people on talkback radio say as much over the past few days. My question is simple: How would you feel if this was your son? Would you want others to demonstrate mercy and lend a hand?

We also need to understand that we live in a country that is opposed to the death penalty, and in fact it has been forever abolished in Australia by the passing of The Crimes Legislation Amendment (Torture Prohibition and Death Penalty Abolition) Bill. Even though no Australian State or Territory has the death penalty, this law ensures none can ever reintroduce it.

As a Christian I fully supported this move by the Australian Parliament – even though some parts of the Bible endorse the use of the death penalty especially for first-degree murder (see Genesis 9:6; 6:5-6; Exodus 21:12-29; Romans 13:1-4). But just because something is permissible does not mean it is beneficial or constructive (1 Corinthians 10:23).

God did not see it as beneficial to take Cain’s life even though he had murdered his brother (Genesis 4:10-16). Jesus didn’t see it as constructive to allow the Jewish religious leaders to stone the adulterous woman to death – even though the Law permitted such action (John 8:1-11)

In the case of Andrew and Myuran who are repentant and rehabilitated, I don’t believe it would be constructive to end their lives and for that reason I am encouraging as many people as possible to support their plea for clemency. You can support them by signing the petition at www.amnesty.org.au and at the Mercy Campaign: www.mercycampaign.org.

This is YOUR opportunity to do a little good! Do it now before something else grabs your attention – their lives depend on it.

To read more on the death penalty, read my blog “Capital Punishment” at this link: https://baysidechurch.com.au/content/view/393/243/

 

According to Monday’s Herald Sun, by refusing to provide a referral for a patient on moral grounds or refer the matter to another doctor, Dr Hobart admits he has broken the law and could face suspension, conditions on his ability to practice or even be deregistered. But he was willing to risk punishment in pursuit of principles. He said he did not believe any doctor in Victoria would have helped a couple have an abortion just because they wanted a boy. Another doctor who was brought before the Medical Board in January for airing his views against abortion was cautioned and warned he could be deregistered if it happened again.

Victoria's Abortion Law Reform Act 2008 specifies the obligations of registered health practitioners who have a "conscientious objection" to abortion. Under the Act, if a woman requests a doctor to advise on a proposed abortion and the practitioner has a conscientious objection, he or she must refer the woman to a practitioner who does not conscientiously object.

But this incident highlights a much bigger problem regarding abortion. The Law states that "the woman's current and future physical, psychological and social circumstances” need to be considered when proposing an abortion (especially after 24 weeks). I agree with the first two conditions: if a woman’s physical or psychological health and wellbeing are threatened by the pregnancy then a higher law comes into play. But what we’re seeing in society today goes far beyond this. Abortion is being used as a form of contraception because a baby would interfere with lifestyle or career, or, as in this instance, because the couple wants a boy not a girl. So, what happens if they become pregnant with a girl next time? Abort? What if they keep having girls? How many babies die until these people get the son they want?

One in six Australian couples cannot have children. Why don’t people choose to adopt their “unwanted” babies to people who’d love and care for them? But it’s just a fetus, an unwanted pregnancy, just a lump of disposable epithelial tissue right? The word “fetus” comes from Latin and means “offspring”, “bringing forth”, “hatching of young.” When a couple are happy to find out they are pregnant you don’t hear the words, “we’re expecting a fetus.” No, they’re expecting a baby. Maybe our “throw-away” society has just gone too far.

A belief in life after death is important for two reasons. Firstly, it gives meaning to this life, to our often-boring routine, to the predictability of life. Think about it: you’re born, you get an education, you work, you get married (maybe), you have children, then grandchildren, you retire, you die. Even a sceptic like Woody Allen admits, “It’s all meaningless if physical death is the final curtain.” A belief in life after death gives meaning to the personal development of our character and knowledge. The things we work on for a lifetime do not cease at death but we take them with us into the next life. It also gives meaning to our relationships. Not one of us wants to think when we attend the funeral of a loved one that that’s the last time we’ll see them.

Secondly, a belief in life after death brings hope into this life. It deals with the problem of injustice – what about those who seem to get away with gross wickedness in their lifetime? The Christian belief in an ultimate reckoning means that every injustice will be corrected – if not in this life then certainly in the one to come. It also deals with the problem of inequality. It seems so unfair that some people have such terrible lives, have more than their fair share of suffering, are born in places of extreme poverty or in a Caste from which they cannot escape. Life after death means that God has all of eternity to make up for the inequalities of this life (Luke 16:19-31). The Bible speaks of a life after death in which God “will wipe every tear from their eyes. There will be no more death or mourning or crying or pain, for the old order of things has passed away.”

The Bible describes death as an enemy that Jesus defeated when He was resurrected. Many people fear death because of the unknown, so there’s nothing like being the friend of One who’s been there and come back! This is clearly illustrated by looking at the last words of some famous people:

Some are tragic: Elizabeth 1 who reigned for 45 years and cruelly persecuted Christians, “All my possessions for a moment of time.” Confucius said, “No wise ruler comes, no prince invites me to be his counsellor; it is time to die.” Napoleon Bonaparte said, “What an abyss lies between my deep misery and the eternal kingdom of Christ.” The French philosopher Voltaire who said Christ was powerless and who boasted that within 100 years of his death the Bible would be obsolete. At his death in 1778 he was overpowered with remorse and signed a recantation of his philosophy with these words, “O Christ, O Lord Jesus. I must die abandoned of God and man. I wish I had never been born.” Incidentally, 100 years later Voltaire’s residence was being used by the Geneva Bible Society to print Bibles. T.H. Huxley, a friend of Charles Darwin who coined the term “agnostic,” on his death bed suddenly looked up at a sight invisible to mortal eyes, after staring a while he whispered, “So, it is true.” And Joseph Stalin’s daughter Svetlana wrote, “My father died a difficult and terrible death. God grants an easy death only to the just. At what seemed the very last moment he opened his eyes and cast a glance over everyone in the room. It was a terrible glance, insane, full of anger and fear. Then he lifted his left hand as though pointing to something above and bringing a curse down on us all. The gesture was full of malice. The next moment the spirit wrenched itself free of the flesh.”

Contrast this with the last words of people like Mother Teresa: “Jesus, I love you. Jesus, I love you.” Michelangelo (written in his will), “I commit my soul to God, my body to the earth, my possessions to my nearest relatives. I die in the faith of Jesus Christ and in the firm hope of a better life.” William Shakespeare in his last will and testament one month before death, “I commend my soul into the hands of God, my Creator, hoping and assuredly believing only through the merits of Jesus Christ my Saviour, to be made partaker of life everlasting.” Sir Michael Faraday, the greatest experimental scientist of all time. As he laid dying journalists questioned him regarding his speculations of life after death. “Speculations, I know nothing of speculations. I am resting on certainties. I know that my Redeemer lives and because he lives I shall live also.” Martin Luther: “O my heavenly Father, my eternal and everlasting God. Thou hast revealed to me your son, our Lord Jesus Christ. I have preached him, I have confessed him, I love him and worship him as my dearest Saviour and Redeemer. Into thy hand I commit my spirit.” Dietrich Bonheoffer, the German theologian hanged in Nazi Germany during the Second World War. On his way to the gallows he said, “This is the beginning of a new life, eternal life.” And the evangelist D.L. Moody: “Earth recedes and heaven opens before me. It is beautiful. It’s like a trance. There’s no valley here, and God is calling me and I must go. This is my triumph, this is my coronation day, it is glorious. I’ve been looking forward to it for years. No pain, no valley. If this is death it is not bad at all, it’s sweet.”

Finally, just in case this blog is too serious, let’s here some of the funny last words people have spoken: Roman Emperor, Gaius Caligula, who was stabbed by his own guards said, “I’m still alive!” Of course his guards made sure he wasn’t moments later! General John Sedgwick, who was killed in battle during US Civil War said, “They couldn't hit an elephant at this dist…” Author H. G. Wells, “Go away. I'm all right.” Writer Oscar Wilde, “Either that wallpaper goes or I do.” And my all time favourite is from Mexican revolutionary, Pancho Villa, “Don't let it end like this. Tell them I said something!”

But in all seriousness, there is life after death. Jesus has experienced death for you – and defeated it – why not place your faith and trust securely in Him?

 

The question of who Jesus is isn’t new to our day and age. Even while Jesus walked the planet, people were debating this question. Listen to what the Bible says:

“Among the crowds there was widespread whispering about him. Some said, “He is a good man.” Others replied, “No, he deceives the people” (John 7:12).

“Once Jesus asked his disciples, “Who do the crowds say I am?” They replied, “Some say John the Baptist; others say Elijah; and still others, that one of the prophets of long ago has come back to life.” Then Jesus asked, “But what about you? Who do you say I am?” Peter answered, “You are the Messiah” (Luke 9:18-20).

Even people who believe in Jesus have all kinds of opinions and portrayals of him. There's hippy Jesus who teaches everyone to give peace a chance, imagine a world without religion, and helps us remember all you need is love. He walked around Galilee sporting Hebraic dreads and eating mysterious-yet-kosher plants that gave him moments of groovy wisdom. “Man, you should totally give stuff to the poor”

There's Macho Jesus who was all man all the time – wild at heart, some might even say. He was rugged, worked a job in construction, and man-ish to the extreme. Fundamentalist Jesus is macho Jesus after drinking several gallons of Hater-aide. This is the Jesus you see picketing at inappropriate events and holding up unkind signs that marginalise the already marginalised.

There's pop Jesus. Yes, you guessed it: Jesus is your homeboy. He’s a hipster who wants to “kick it” with you. He walked around two thousand years ago and tried to show people a good time. When you feel down, his goal is to give you a hug of optimism. When times are tough, he’s conveniently the name that you can call upon (sometimes via the curse word) to make sure everything is gonna be alright. When times are good, he’ll keep his distance and not interfere too much with your life. This Jesus exists to make sure we’re all happy campers.

There’s Starbucks Jesus who drinks fair trade coffee, loves spiritual conversations, drives a hybrid and goes to film festivals.

Open-minded Jesus loves everyone all the time no matter what, except for people who are not as open-minded as you.

Sporting Jesus determines the outcome of football games and helps Christian athletes run faster and jump higher than non-Christians.

Gentle Jesus is meek and mild, with high cheekbones, flowing hair, and walks around barefoot, wearing a sash.

There’s Yuppie Jesus who encourages us to achieve our full potential, reach for the stars, and buy a boat.

Spiritual Jesus hates religion, churches, pastors, priests, and doctrine; and would rather have people out in nature, finding the god within and listening to mystical musical.

Cliche Jesus is good for Christmas and Easter services and greeting cards; he inspires people to believe in themselves, and lifts us up so we can walk on mountains.

Revolutionary Jesus teaches us to rebel against the status quo and blame things on the “system.”

Guru Jesus is a wise, inspirational teacher who believes in you and helps you find your center.

Then there's Judge Jesus who gave us a list of rules and then left us to try and keep them and punishes us when we don't.

Last, but not least, is good-example Jesus who shows you how to help people, change the planet, and become a better you.

I heard it said once that in the beginning God made people in His image – and ever since we've tried to return the compliment. It certainly seems that way with all of these "images" of Jesus. But what is Jesus really like? Who is he really? One of my favorite authors, C.S. Lewis, explains the answer in the best way.

Lewis was raised in a religious Irish family, but became an atheist at a young age when he came to view his faith as a chore and a duty. He later described his young self as being ironically “very angry with God for not existing.”

Lewis's interest in the works of Scottish author and Minister George McDonald was part of what turned him from atheism. He slowly re-embraced Christianity, influenced by arguments with his Oxford colleague and friend J. R. R. Tolkien (author of The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings). He fought greatly up to the moment of his conversion, noting that he was brought into Christianity like a prodigal, "kicking, struggling, resentful, and darting his eyes in every direction for a chance to escape."

He says, “You must picture me alone in my room, night after night, feeling, whenever my mind lifted even for a second from my work, the steady, unrelenting approach of Him whom I so earnestly desired not to meet. That which I greatly feared had at last come upon me. In the Trinity Term of 1929 I gave in, and admitted that God was God, and knelt and prayed: perhaps, that night, the most dejected and reluctant convert in all England."

After his conversion to theism in 1929, Lewis converted to Christianity in 1931, following a long discussion and late-night walk with his close friend Tolkien. He records making a specific commitment to Christian belief while on his way to the zoo with his brother. He became a member of the Church of England – somewhat to the disappointment of Tolkien, who had hoped that he would join the Catholic Church.

During the Second World War, C.S. Lewis gave a number of lectures on BBC radio, talks that later became the source of his book, “Mere Christianity.” In one of those lectures he said this:

“I am trying here to prevent anyone saying the really foolish thing that people often say about [Jesus]: I’m ready to accept Jesus as a great moral teacher, but I don’t accept his claim to be God. That is the one thing we must not say. A man who was merely a man and said the sort of things Jesus said would not be a great moral teacher. He would either be a lunatic — on the level with the man who says he is a poached egg — or else he would be the Devil of Hell. You must make your choice. Either this man was, and is, the Son of God, or else a madman or something worse. You can shut him up for a fool, you can spit at him and kill him as a demon, or you can fall at his feet and call him Lord and God, but let us not come with any patronizing nonsense about his being a great human teacher. He has not left that open to us. He did not intend to. … Now it seems to me obvious that He was neither a lunatic nor a fiend: and consequently, however strange or terrifying or unlikely it may seem, I have to accept the view that He was and is God.”

Then Jesus asked, “But what about you? Who do you say I am?” Peter answered, “You are the Messiah." What is your answer to that question? Who do you think Jesus is? Eternity hangs upon your correct response.

 

“To you, the mothers who were betrayed by a system that gave you no choice and subjected you to manipulation, mistreatment and malpractice, we apologise.  We say sorry to you, the mothers who were denied knowledge of your rights, which meant you could not provide informed consent.  You were given false assurances. You were forced to endure the coercion and brutality of practices that were unethical, dishonest and in many cases illegal." 

The apology also acknowledged "the profound effects" on fathers and the sons and daughters who grew up not knowing how much they were wanted and loved.

In the apology, Julia Gillard said, "no collection of words alone can undo all this damage.  But by saying sorry we can correct the historical record.  We can declare that these mothers did nothing wrong.”

Some of the submissions to the report into the practice of forced adoptions are heartbreaking:

My mother became hysterical, when she realised I was pregnant, she was bereft about the neighbours, the relatives, and the church members, finding out her daughter was pregnant out-of wedlock … I had to hide in the house, she had contempt for me … It was decided that I go to a home for unmarried mothers, “for a few weeks” so I would not been seen by others who would make judgement (Ms Marilyn Murphy, Submission 150, p. 2).

In 1965 I was sent to “Carramar” Church of England Home for Unwed Mothers … I did not go there on my own freewill.  I was woken that morning apparently, I must have been drugged by my mother with a sleeping pill or similar, as I did not come around till I was shaken awake by a Preacher … As we were parked in the driveway facing a two-storey older style building I asked him, “Where are we?” and he said, “This is a home for girls who are pregnant like you to stay till they have their babies”. I was terrified as he led me to the door to be met by a stern looking woman who led me inside (Mrs. Beverley Redlich, Submission 112, p. 1).

If we went into the shops for personal items we were only allowed to go in twos, so as not to upset the home owners in the area who had complained about us ‘walking the streets in our state’, we were a large blot on their pleasant society and the church did not want any trouble. Shopkeepers commented that we were from the local ‘baby factory’ (Ms. Angela Brown, Submission 402, p. 1).

The following is an excerpt from an adopted child.

I remember a time after returning to Australia at age 14. I was being belted so hard and so many times, I remember the belt wrapping around my neck once. During my adoption I still spent most of the time in boarding schools and church hostels (Mr. Wayne Lewis, Submission 408, p. 3).

Christine Cole, the head of the Apology Alliance who lost a child through forced adoption, told ABC television the words were long overdue: “I had my baby taken from me in 1969, and I think the use of the term forced adoption polarises the actual phenomena of what was going on.  What was going on was kidnapping children, kidnapping newborn babies from their mothers at the birth, using pillows and sheets to cover their face, drugging them as I was drugged, with drugs like sodium pentothal, chloral hydrate and other mind-altering barbiturates.  It was cruel, it was punitive and then often the mother was transported like I was away from the hospital so you had no access to your baby.”

What can we learn from this blot on Australia’s history?  Firstly, to make sure the Prime Minister’s promise is kept: “We can promise that no generation of Australian will suffer the same pain and trauma that you did.”  And yet the direction Australia is moving in with surrogacy laws will break the promise – future generations will grow up not knowing who their biological father or mother is.

Secondly, the Australia of the 1950s to 1970s is described as “a conservative and predominantly Christian nation and religious groups largely drove the adoptions.” This is something that Christians and churches need to understand because it was often church groups and church-run hospitals, hostels and care facilities that were directly involved in the injustices.  Recognising this the Catholic Church apologized in July 2011.  The Uniting Church has also accepted responsibility for this practice.  Anglicare says it apologised in the 2000 “Releasing the past” report for abuse at the Carramar maternity home.

It seems to me (as a conservative Christian) that conservative Christianity has much to apologize for.  In fact one pastor in the USA taught a series called “Confessions of a sinful church”.  They included:

Apology #1 – We’re sorry for our self-righteousness and hypocrisy

Apology #2 – We’re sorry for our endorsement of slavery

Apology #3 – We’re sorry for our mistreatment of homosexuals

Apology #4 – We’re sorry for the Medieval Crusades

Apology #5 – We’re sorry for saying the earth is flat

We could add to these apologies: we’re sorry for our oppression of women; for our refusal to recognise marriage between different races; for treating divorced people as second-class Christians; for saying that we’re all sinners saved by grace and yet showing contempt for those who are still in sin.

Christians have done a lot of good though the centuries and added great value to the world in which we live, but we’ve also got it wrong on more than one occasion.  This has been highlighted by last week’s apology by our Prime Minister.  We are sorry for the things we’ve got wrong.  I’m just hoping – and praying – that we don’t have too much more to apologise for in the future.

Why are women allowed to speak in the church when the Bible says they should be quiet?  There are two passages of Scripture that teach this very clearly: 1 Corinthians 14:34-35 and 1 Timothy 2:11-12:

“Women should remain silent in the churches. They are not allowed to speak, but must be in submission, as the Law says. If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home; for it is disgraceful for a woman to speak in the church.”

“A woman should learn in quietness and full submission. I do not permit a woman to teach or to have authority over a man; she must be silent.”

The word “silent” refers to “The quietness of the disciple who receives instruction.”   “To have authority over,” means, “to domineer or usurp/seize authority”.

On closer inspection of the context and culture of these verses, it becomes clear exactly what the apostle Paul was addressing.  The Corinthian church was out of control.  They were gripped with carnality, lawsuits, immorality and false teaching.  People were getting drunk during the Lord’s Supper and their church meetings were a mess with everyone competing for a chance to use the gifts of the Holy Spirit.  It’s with this in mind that the verses in 1 Corinthians are to be understood: “If they want to inquire about something, they should ask their own husbands at home.”  It seems that the women of the church were asking their husbands questions during the teaching of the Word and, this too, was disrupting the worship service.

The first letter of Paul to Timothy was written to prevent the spread of heresy in the church.  It appears that women were the main culprits of spreading the false teaching and so Paul temporarily prohibits them from teaching until they had been instructed in the Word thus correcting the error that was being taught.  Professor David Sholer puts it this way, “These injunctions are directed against women involved in false teaching, who have sought to abuse proper exercise of authority in the church, not denied by Paul elsewhere to women, by usurping and dominating the male leaders and teachers in the church at Ephesus”.

One of my lecturers in Bible College in the 80s, Spencer Gear, said, “1 Timothy 2:11-12 is not a command to prevent all women from teaching in the church at all times.  Paul’s intention was not to place a permanent limitation on women in the ministry. Rather, these verses were addressed to a problem situation in Ephesus where women were teaching heresy”.

The culture in which a church finds itself also has a large bearing on the matter.  Tony Campolo in his book “20 hot potatoes” says, “If the existence of women preachers created a barrier to non-Christians coming into faith, then it was right for women to refrain from being preachers.  In today’s world … keeping women out of pulpits is having a negative effect upon the propagation of the gospel throughout the outside world, and therefore the policy on the matter which was in place in the past should be set aside” (Pg.39).

If we were to take these passages literally today we would disqualify all women from any vocal ministry in the church.  That would include Sunday school teaching, youth leadership, speaking at women’s meetings, missionaries, singing in the church in any way, praying in prayer meetings and so on.  This would also contradict what Paul wrote a few chapters earlier in 1 Corinthians 11:5, “And every woman who prays or prophesies with her head uncovered dishonors her head-it is just as though her head were shaved.”  So, women ARE allowed to speak in the church then!  The “church” being wherever believers are gathered together.

If we were to take these passages literally for all situations we would also contradict the rest of the New Testament, which clearly permits women to minister.  Women ministers include: Anna the Prophetess (Luke 2:36), Dorcas (Acts 9:26), the woman of Samaria (John 4:7), the four daughters of Phillip (Acts 21:9), Priscilla (Acts 18:24-26), the older women (Titus 2:3-4), Phoebe (Rom 16:1, 2), Euodia and Syntyche (Phil 4:2,3), Tryphena and Tryphosa (Rom 16:12).

In general, the gifts of the Spirit, many of which are vocal gifts used in the church, are available to all believers regardless of gender (Rom 12:6-8; 1 Cor. 12:8-10; Eph. 4:11; Col. 3:16).  Acts 2 also makes it clear that God supports women in ministry: “In the last days, God says, I will pour out my Spirit on all people. 
Your sons and daughters will prophesy, your young men will see visions, your old men will dream dreams. Even on my servants, both men and women, I will pour out my Spirit in those days, and they will prophesy.”

John Stott says, “If God endows women with spiritual gifts (which He does), and thereby calls them to exercise their gifts for the common good (which He does), then the church must recognise God’s gifts and calling, must make appropriate spheres of service available to women, and should ordain (that is, commission and authorise) them to exercise their God-given ministry …”

Finally, if we were to take these passages in 1 Corinthians and 1 Timothy literally today we would nullify Christ’s work on the cross.  The Old Testament Temple was divided into three sections: The Holy of Holies where the High priest entered once a year.  The Holy Place – reserved for Jewish men only, and the outer court – for Jewish women and gentiles.  This all changed at the crucifixion when the veil that separated the Jewish men from the Jewish women and gentiles was torn from top to bottom (Luke 23:45).  The New Testament allows open fellowship of ALL people who come to God through Christ, whether male or female: “You are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus, for all of you who were baptised into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. There is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female, for you are all one in Christ Jesus” (Galatians 3:26-28)

I am so grateful to God for the incredible women that He has called into leadership at Bayside Church – not least my amazing wife, Christie.  The church community would be so much the poorer if we commanded them to remain silent ~ and I don’t like the chances of that happening anyway.

 

When I heard the news that Pope Benedict had resigned I put a lighthearted comment on my social media pages: “There’s a vacancy in the Vatican. Thinking of applying. Your thoughts?” There were lots of comments, some suggesting I’d be better off running for Prime Minister! One person asked the question: “What would you do if you were made Pope, Rob?” It’s a good question that got me thinking. Here’s my answer

Putting theological differences aside (such as the veneration of Mary and praying to the saints; the doctrines of transubstantiation and purgatory), there are many things that I appreciate about the Catholic Church.

What’s good

Firstly, they believe in God as well as in Jesus’ death and resurrection. We certainly do have our doctrinal differences but having faith in God as well as in the finished work of Jesus to redeem humanity, have got to be the two most important things to believe. There are over one billion Roman Catholics in the world today (it’s the biggest Christian denomination in the world) ~ and each and every one of them is loved by God; and each and every one has faith in God and in His Son, Jesus.

Secondly, the Catholic Church does a lot of amazing work in education, health and social justice. Catholic education in Australia began in the 19th century and has grown to be the second biggest sector after government schools with more than 650,000 students and around 21% of all secondary school enrolments. The 75 hospitals and 550 residential and community aged care services operated by the Catholic Church in Australia comprise the nation’s largest non-government health provider. In 2010 our then two-year-old daughter, Trinity, was critically ill with pneumonia. It was at a Catholic hospital Cabrini, that she got the most amazing care and treatment. We will never forget the kindness and attention of the staff. Christie and I are deeply appreciative that our precious little girl made a full recovery.

Thirdly, the Catholic youth movement continues to reach hundreds of thousands of youth and young adults around the world. The annual World Youth Day, established by Pope John Paul II in 1984 has attendances between 400,000 and five million people. The theme song for the 23rd World Youth Day was “Receive the Power”, written by Guy Sebastian (winner of the first Australian Idol contest in 2003) and Gary Pinto. It was built around the theme chosen by Pope Benedict XVI: “You will receive power when the Holy Spirit has come upon you; and you will be my witnesses” (Acts 1:8). The lyrics (http://www.justsomelyrics.com/793885/Guy-%2B-Paulini-Receive-The-Power-Lyrics) are amazing and it’s a song that our congregation has enjoyed singing over the past few years.

Other things I appreciate about the Catholic Church ~ their reverence for God; their observance of milestones and pathways of faith such as First Communion; the great sacrifice made by priests and nuns (and many other church workers and volunteers) in making a difference for good amongst the poor and marginalised; and the strong ethical and moral foundation that is taught to children.

I have found that Catholics also tend to have a strong theology of suffering that draws people to God during tough times. A theology of suffering is often sadly lacking in the contemporary church so that, when people inevitably go through difficult times, they are tempted to blame God and even walk away from their faith. I have found the opposite to be true of Catholics that I have known. They realise that suffering is part of life and draw closer to God in order to receive strength. Like the apostle Paul we need to pray, “That I may know him, and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his sufferings, being made conformable unto his death” (Phil 3:10).

So, they are the things I wouldn’t change if I were Pope.

But there would be some things I would change.

What needs to change

Firstly, I’d allow priests and nuns to marry if they wanted to. Forbidding people to marry is strictly forbidden in Scripture (1 Timothy 4:3) and was not adopted as church practice until the First Lateran Council of 1123 (however, Pope Alexander VI (1492- 1503) is known to have fathered nine illegitimate children and openly kept a mistress in the Vatican). And that’s the problem. Denying someone’s right to a life-partner can sometimes lead to unhealthy expressions of sexuality including pedophilia. And on that subject, if I were Pope I would totally cooperate with the authorities over the child abuse scandals and remove all priests and church workers who were guilty of such crimes. There also needs to be adequate care of and compensation to those whose lives have been affected – or even ruined – by such horrendous acts of abuse.

If I were Pope I would allow ordination of women priests. I believe women bring a wonderful balance of care, compassion, discernment and insight into the church. To deny them the right to minister ~ and to deny the church of their ministry ~ is simply wrong. In Bible times women played a key role in the spread of the Gospel, being the first to report the news of the risen Christ as well as teaching and preaching in the first century church. I’ll say more on this in a future blog.

If I were Pope I’d remove the ban on the use of contraceptives that often leads to increased poverty because of large families. Nowhere does the Bible forbid contraception. In fact it implies otherwise by admonishing us to take good care of our families emotionally, physically and spiritually. This can hardly be done properly when parents are having more children than they can provide for. A person’s decision as to how many children they have is a personal one – not a matter for the church to legislate on.

Finally, if I were Pope I would encourage all Catholics to take the next step in their faith from simply believing in God and Jesus to accepting Jesus as their Lord and Saviour. The Bible says “all who received him, to those who believed in his name, he gave the right to become children of God” (John 1:12). If I’m sick and the doctor gives me medicine just believing the medicine will make me better won’t be enough. I have to receive the medicine and then I will recover. It’s the same with Jesus. Just believing in Him may not change our lives ~ receiving Him will.

If that describes you why don’t you pray this prayer now?

“Father God, I thank you for the gift of your Son Jesus. I believe that Jesus died on a cross to pay the price for everything I’ve done wrong. I believe Jesus rose again so that I can be fully pardoned and completely saved. I receive you Jesus as my Lord and Saviour. Come into my life, forgive me and fill me with your Spirit. From this day on I will live my life in relationship with you. Amen”

Ash Wednesday, originally called dies cinerum (day of ashes) is mentioned in the earliest copies of the Gregorian Sacramentary, and probably dates from at least the 8th Century. One of the earliest descriptions of Ash Wednesday is found in the writings of the Anglo-Saxon abbot Aelfric (955-1020). In his Lives of the Saints, he writes, “We read in the books both in the Old Law and in the New that the men who repented of their sins bestrewed themselves with ashes and clothed their bodies with sackcloth. Now let us do this little at the beginning of our Lent that we strew ashes upon our heads to signify that we ought to repent of our sins during the Lenten fast.” This quotation confirms what we know from other sources, that throughout the Middle Ages ashes were sprinkled on the head, rather than anointed on the forehead as in our day.

As Aelfric suggests, the pouring of ashes on one’s body (and dressing in sackcloth, a very rough material) as an outer manifestation of inner repentance or mourning is an ancient practice. It is mentioned several times in the Old Testament. What is probably the earliest occurrence is found at the very end of the book of Job. Job, having been rebuked by God, confesses, “Therefore I despise myself and repent in dust and ashes” (Job 42:6). Other examples are found in 2 Samuel 13:19, Esther 4:1,3, Isaiah 61:3, Jeremiah 6:26, Ezekiel 27:30, and Daniel 9:3. In the New Testament, Jesus alludes to the practice in Matthew 11:21: “Woe to you, Korazin! Woe to you, Bethsaida! If the miracles that were performed in you had been performed in Tyre and Sidon, they would have repented long ago in sackcloth and ashes.”

In the typical Ash Wednesday observance, Christians are invited to the altar to receive the imposition of ashes, prior to receiving the holy Supper. The Pastor applies ashes in the shape of the cross on the forehead of each, while speaking the words, “For dust you are and to dust you shall return” (Genesis 3:19). This is of course what God spoke to Adam and Eve after they eaten of the forbidden fruit and fallen into sin. These words indicated to our first parents the bitterest fruit of their sin, namely death. In the context of the Ash Wednesday imposition of ashes, they remind each penitent of their sinfulness and mortality, and, thus, their need to repent and get right with God before it is too late. The cross reminds each penitent of the good news that through Jesus Christ crucified there is forgiveness for all sins, all guilt, and all punishment.

Ash Wednesday, like the season of Lent, is never mentioned in Scripture and is not commanded by God. Christians are free to either observe or not observe it. It also should be obvious that the imposition of ashes, like similar external practices, is meaningless, even hypocritical, unless there is a corresponding inner repentance and change of behaviour. This is made clear in Isaiah 58:5-7 when God says,

Is this the kind of fast I have chosen, only a day for a man to humble himself? Is it only for bowing one’s head like a reed and for lying on sackcloth and ashes? Is that what you call a fast, a day acceptable to the LORD? “Is not this the kind of fasting I have chosen: to loose the chains of injustice and untie the cords of the yoke, to set the oppressed free and break every yoke? Is it not to share your food with the hungry and to provide the poor wanderer with shelter– when you see the naked, to clothe him, and not to turn away from your own flesh and blood?

Yesterday 36 people were killed and thousands were injured in North India as an estimated 100 million people seeked to wash their sins in the holy river before the sun and moon changed – they only have 12 days every 10 years to do this.  It is expected that thousands will die as people fight to get a place – they are so desperate. With this in mind, let the 40-Days of Prayer & Fasting be a wonderful time for repentance and spiritual renewal by reminding ourselves of what has been achieved on our behalf by Jesus’ sacrifice.  It is only by Jesus’ death and resurrection that we are cleansed from sin, guilt and shame, and have the confidence of being right with God.  Let this time be a time of great rejoicing in that truth ~ and a time of prayer for others, like those in India, who need to know Jesus’ love and grace.

One of America’s leading churches came to this realisation back in 2007 after conducting extensive research amongst its people to see how effective the church was at making disciples of Jesus.  Willow Creek Community Church Senior Pastor Bill Hybels said, “We made a mistake. What we should have done when people crossed the line of faith and become Christians, we should have started telling people and teaching people that they have to take responsibility to become self-feeders. We should have gotten people, taught people, how to read their Bible between services, how to do the spiritual practices much more aggressively on their own.”

In other words, spiritual growth doesn't happen best by becoming dependent on elaborate church programs but through the age-old spiritual practices of prayer, bible reading, and relationships.

That’s why this year we’re focusing on teaching people the daily devotional approach to the Bible.  This method is concerned with what the Bible has to say ~ especially what it has to say to me personally. What does the Bible tell me about God? Jesus? The church? My relation to the world? What does it tell me about what to believe? About how to act? About social responsibilities? How can the Bible help make me closer to God? How does it help me to live? Daily devotions help us to read the Bible in order to find out what to believe and how to live our life in a way that is pleasing to God and the best for others and us.

When Willow Creek were looking for help with this they turned to Wayne Cordeiro, Senior Pastor of New Hope church in Honolulu. Many years ago Wayne developed the SOAP method of Bible reading.  Watch this video where he explains how to do daily devotions using SOAP.

I’ve taught SOAP daily devotions several times over the years at Bayside Church, but it’s time to refresh it and teach it again and get everyone on the same page ~ literally!

In a nutshell, SOAP in as acrostic that works like this:

S – Scripture – From your daily reading write down a verse or two that particularly speaks to you.

O – Observation – Write a brief observation from this verse as to what you see in it.

A – Application – What truth can you apply to your life from this scripture?  How will you be different today because of what you have just read? (Use words like: me, myself & I)

P – Prayer – Finish your time by writing a prayer using the verse(s) through which God has spoken to you.  Then take the scripture with you through the day; read it regularly and meditate on its truth.

Here’s an example from my own journal:

S: “Do not be afraid Zacharias, for your petition has been heard, and your wife Elizabeth will bear you a son…” (Luke 1:13)

O: Zacharias, as a priest of God, was going about his daily work of serving God and His people.  Zacharias and his wife were elderly, and his wife Elizabeth was also barren.  This was no doubt a point of distress and disappointment to them both and a matter of regular prayer that, until now, had gone unanswered.  But that was about to change… “For your petition has been heard!”

A: A lack of immediate response to my prayers does not mean that God hasn’t heard me.  It does mean that the time has not yet arrived to answer them.  As I continually and faithfully serve God and His people each day, God will answer my prayers at the right time and in the best way ~ not just to bless me, but also to bless others.

P: Jesus, help me to exercise faith and patience in life and not to see divine delays as unanswered prayer.  Amen

When reading the Bible, look for lessons to be learned, examples to be followed, promises to be enjoyed and Jesus to be revealed.

Finally, here are some things to help you on your disciplined journey of feeding yourself on God’s Word.

Download the reading plan from the Bayside Church website or download the New Hope Oahu App.


Don’t try and read the whole reading every day (unless you want to).  Read until you get something and then start journaling.  Make it work for you – don’t bite off more than you can chew.  Better to read, remember and practice one verse than to read and forget four chapters!

If you’re new to the Christian faith focus on the New Testament readings and Psalms.  If you find something that you want to study further, make a note of it and go back to it when you have more time.  If you miss a day, skip it.  Don’t try and catch up.  Make it doable so that it is a blessing not a burden.  The goal of your time with God is to grow closer to Him. It’s not to check off your list. You can get together and “SOAP” with others too.  Take an hour ~ 20 minutes to read, 20 minutes to journal, 20 minutes to share.

The Christian life is not rocket science.  It’s wonderful to belong to a vibrant Christian community and to be taught God’s Word on a regular basis, but who would only want to eat once a week?  Learn to feed yourself on God’s Word everyday, put your roots deep down into eternal truth and become steadfast, immovable, and always abounding in the Lord's work!

The Global Burden of Disease Report – a massive research effort involving almost 500 scientists in 50 countries – also concluded that we have finally got a handle on some common infectious diseases, helping to save millions of children from early deaths. But collectively we are spending more of our lives living in poor health and with disability.

Across the world, there has been significant success in tackling malnutrition, with deaths down two-thirds since 1990. But increasing prosperity has led to expanding waistlines in most countries as people eat more and get less exercise everyday.

Dr Majid Ezzati, chair of global environmental health at Imperial College London, and one of the lead authors of the report, said: “We have gone from a world 20 years ago where people weren’t getting enough to eat to a world now where too much food and unhealthy food – even in developing countries – is making us sick.”

But although obesity is a bigger problem, we still have a long way to go in the fight against malnutrition.  With this in mind a hundred charities have joined together to call on world leaders to tackle the "scandal" of hunger. 

The “Enough Food for Everyone IF” campaign is the biggest mobilisation to address poverty since Make Poverty History. 

The campaign has the backing of philanthropist Bill Gates and Archbishop Desmond Tutu, as well as organisations like the Church of England, Tearfund, Christian Aid, Bond, Oxfam and Save the Children. 



Together they warn that almost a billion young people will experience a childhood of hunger and malnutrition by 2025, despite living in a world where there is enough food for everyone. 

A report by the groups says that the life chances of some 937 million children and people between the ages of 15 and 40 will be permanently damaged by the impact of childhood hunger.  Although 14,000 fewer children are dying each day than in 1990, the groups warn that unless hunger is addressed, progress will falter. 



The campaign calls upon David Cameron to make the most of the UK's G8 presidency this year to unite world leaders in addressing the root causes of hunger. 

Campaigners say that the hunger crisis can be solved if:

 

- Governments keep their promises on aid and invest to stop children dying from malnutrition (noting that the Australian Federal Government just cut foreign aid by $375 million).



- Legal loopholes are shut down to stop big companies tax dodging in poor countries.



- Poor farmers are not forced off their land and the available agricultural land is used to grow food for people and not biofuel for cars.



- Governments and investors are "honest and open about the deals they make in the poorest countries that stop people getting enough food."



Archbishop Tutu said hunger could be ended if leaders and individuals take action: “Hunger is not an incurable disease or an unavoidable tragedy.  We can make sure no child goes to bed hungry. We can stop mothers from starving themselves to feed their families. We can save lives. 
We can do all of this, if we are prepared to do something about it … we can make hunger a thing of the past if we act now.”

And “act” is the responsible of all of us who “have” in order to help those who “have-not.”  We’re living in a world where there is enough food for everyone.  The problem is some people have too much while others have way too little.

With the season of Lent starting on February 13 why not make a commitment to cut back on your food intake for 40 days, and then donate the money you save in order to combat poverty and hunger?  Let’s fight overeating and malnutrition at the same time – and make a difference to those in need.

Early Christians decorated their homes with evergreens during winter as a reminder that, even though everything else dies in the cruel, cold months, evergreens live on. For those Christians, evergreen decorations represented the steadfastness of faith and symbolised life in the midst of death.
In the eighth century, when Saint Boniface explained how an evergreen tree’s triangular shape symbolised the three Persons of the Holy Trinity ~ Father, Son and Holy Spirit ~ Christians began decorating the trees; this tradition has continued to today.

Paradise Play

From the eleventh century, religious plays called “mystery plays” became quite popular throughout Europe. These plays were performed outdoors and in church buildings. One of the most prevalent of these plays was the “Paradise play.” The play depicted the story of the creation of Adam and Eve; their disobedience to God, and their banishment from Paradise. The Paradise play was simple by today’s standards. The only prop on stage was the “Paradise tree,” a fir tree adorned with apples (to signify the forbidden fruit) and wafers (symbolic of communion, life and redemption). The Paradise tree was later placed in homes and round objects such as shiny red baubles eventually replaced the apples.
From this tree, at the appropriate time in the play, Eve would take the fruit, eat it, and give it to Adam.  The play would end with the promise of the coming Saviour and His Incarnation (cf. Gen. 3:15).

Christmas Lights

Another custom was to be found in the homes of Christians on December 24 since the late Middle Ages. A large candle called the “Christmas light,” symbolizing Jesus, who is the light of the world, was lit on Christmas Eve. In Germany, many smaller candles were set upon a wooden pyramid and lit. Besides the candles, other objects such as glass balls, tinsel, and the “star of Bethlehem” were placed on its top.
It is widely held that Martin Luther, the 16th-century Protestant reformer, first added lighted candles to a tree.  Walking toward his home one winter evening, composing a sermon, he was awed by the brilliance of stars twinkling amidst evergreens.  To recapture the scene for his family, he erected a tree in the main room and wired its branches with lighted candles.

Right Royal

The Christmas tree made its royal debut in England when Prince Albert of Saxony, the husband of Queen Victoria, set up a tree in Windsor Castle in 1841.  Five years later the royal couple were sketched in the London News standing with their children around a Christmas tree. After this the tradition grew in popularity, though in 1850 Charles Dickens was still referring to it as a “new German toy.”
In 2004, Pope John Paul called the Christmas tree a symbol of Christ. This very ancient custom, he said, exalts the value of life, as in winter what is evergreen becomes a sign of undying life, and it reminds Christians of the “tree of life” in Genesis ~ an image of Jesus, the supreme gift of God to humanity.  In the previous year he said: “Beside the crib, the Christmas tree, with its twinkling lights, reminds us that with the birth of Jesus the tree of life has blossomed anew in the desert of humanity.”

Tree of Truth

For many Christians the Christmas tree still retains the symbolism of the Paradise tree. The tree reminds us of the tree in Eden by which Adam and Eve were overcome and which thrust them into sin. But more importantly, the tree reminds us of the tree by which our sin was overcome, namely the tree upon which Jesus was crucified.
Is it a stretch to refer to the cross as a tree? Hardly, for this is the language of the New Testament itself! The apostle Paul writes in Galatians 3:13, “Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who is hung on a tree.”  And Peter writes, “He himself bore our sins in his body on the tree, so that we might die to sins and live for righteousness.”
Therefore, the Christmas tree is a wonderful symbol and reminder of salvation and forgiveness through Jesus Christ!  This Christmas, every time you see a Christmas tree may it remind you of Jesus.  He is…
  • The one who is evergreen, the giver of life, and the one who never dies.
  • The one who redeems and restores us to fellowship with God.
  • The one who is the light of the world. Who said, “Whoever follows me will never walk in darkness, but will have the light of life.”
  • The one the angel announced as “good news that will cause great joy for all the people. Today in [Bethlehem] a Saviour has been born to you; he is the Messiah, the Lord.
Joy to the World, the Lord is come! 
Let earth receive her King;
Let every heart prepare Him room.