Why Conservatism Can’t Save Us

As I sat down to write this blog about why Conservatism can’t save us, as with so many other things in my life, and likely in yours, I got momentarily distracted by Facebook. Now low and behold what was the first post I saw, it was a comment on this exact issue. The comment was posted by a right wing (which by the way is not a dirty phrase like some think it is) commentary and blog site called Caldron Pool, and one part of the post said this: “The problem with secular conservatives and libertarians is that essentially they’re all just relativists like the left.” This is spot on and incredibly important for us to remember. But why is this so significant?

Well let me answer that question with another question: what are secular conservative values? Right about now you may be thinking something like: free markets systems, rule of law, and unless you want to import what the extreme left think are conservative values, you will be running out of things to say. I have called myself a political conservative all my life, and I can’t really say what the conservatives actually stand for, other than reacting to the constant push from progressives. In reality everything I ever see them do is generally just a reaction to what the progressives are doing, or a holding of the pass on one issue or another to try and stop the progressive advance, and quite ineptly.

The progressives push for superannuation, the conservatives oppose it, fail to oppose it, and then incorporate it into their values of the free market (which is crazy because superannuation is literally the government paternalistically confiscating your money, not letting you touch it, and allowing organizations to take a chunk of it out in fees, which you can’t avoid and can at best mitigate). Conservatives say they believe in family, but then allow policies through, or even push them through themselves, which pushes more and more of the families responsibility for provision onto the government, which incentivises more and more people to get divorces, because they can get lots of services and financial help from the government. The progressives push for the redefinition of marriage and conservatives oppose it, fail to oppose it, and then many of them find a way to say they stood for it all along, as a conservative value of freedom and liberty. This is just a few examples of how conservatives cuck out on all their principles. As I’ve heard many people say recently, “Conservatives have failed to conserve anything. They didn’t even conserve the ladies room.”

So if conservativism is useless and reactionary and fails to conserve anything than what should we replace it with? Well, the traditional right.

The modern centre right, and really much of the moderate right, is really just the left, having advanced into the spaces where the right once existed. The overtone window has moved so far to the left that we have strong leftists like Dave Rubin, Sargon of Akkad, and even sometimes people like Joe Rogan, either describing themselves as centre right, or being labelled as such by those who are further to the left. Rubin himself has done a video where he states he did not leave the left, the left move so far to the left, they left him behind. But Rubin’s views on the family, sexuality, drugs, and so many other issues fall far outside of a traditional right leaning perspective. And this is just one example. 

Here in Australia it has long been recognized that we have an extreme left party (The Greens), a far left party (Labor), and a moderately left party (LNP) with a few conservatives thrown into the mix, who spend much of their time trying to appear as moderate as possible. But the so-called conservatives in these parties have been as about as effective as a wet blanket for keeping you warm in the snow. So, what is the traditional right then?

It is the old-fashioned nationalist right. Right about now people freak out because I used those two words together in a positive light (I refer you to my previous post on Nationalism to read why it’s not a scary word here). But the old-fashioned nationalist right is simply a system which has three pillars: God, People or Nation, and Family. This idea can be seen in the American phrase “One nation under God.” Family is implicit in nation, because nation traces back to a Latin word “natio”, which can mean “birth” or “tribe” or “people”, so in other words a nation is made up intrinsically of families. A nation is an extension of the families which are its foundation. Some people phrase it: God, King, and country. But the idea is the same: the traditional right believes we live under the rule of God, and that we should be loyal to that rule, our nations king or government should be in submission to God, and we believe strong families who are taught to honour God make for a strong people.

Notice how straight away this gives us a positive vision for society. It’s not a reactionary posture like conservatism, it’s a vision with which we can evaluate our society and see how close to that vision we stand. At the moment we live in a country that has largely rejected God, that is moving further and further towards abdicating it’s own sovereignty to foreign powers (the UN, Paris Agreement, Trans Pacific Partnership, etc, etc) and even advocating policies which harm its own people, like encouraging high immigration to force wages to stay low. Our nation has so diluted the meaning of family, that it now means anything or really nothing. If we on the right, those who are often called conservatives, want to make a difference we need to stop reacting to the progressive advance and advance against it.

What did progressives do to move society this far? They moved into virtually every institution of society that moves the culture forward. They have advanced through academia, through politics, they virtually have a stranglehold on the media, and they are in the process of completing their advance through the churches. They had their vision, which is a semi-Marxist vision: specifically the restructuring of the family, the denigration of the church, increasing the influence and size of the government, all to move society towards an atheistic, or relativistic, secularism. And their methodology? Identify an oppressed victim class, and identify with and advocate for that victim class, and when there are no victim classes left redefine what a victim is and identify with that newly created victim class and continue to carry forward accordingly, until you have brought every institution to heel.

They have been so successful in their advance that they have even caused much of the church, who should be the greatest opponents to the destruction of things like family, to tow the line and advocate on their behalf. The social gospel’s popularity in the modern evangelical church is a sign of vast capitulation by the church to the Marxist vision for society. If you don’t believe me read the Communist Manifesto and compare the goals outlined in it, with the things achieved and advocated by the modern progressives, or advocates of what is called "liberation theology".

If we want to push back against this effectively we need to stop identifying ourselves with the defeatist posture of just seeking to conserve what we can, we need to take a long-term view of society and begin to advocate for and advance towards the right things. Old fashioned right wing nationalism is really just lifting up God, being loyal to and working for the best for your people, your country, and recognizing that the family is the number one institution in society that gives it it’s strength. So this gives us our vision. What is our methodology?

Well it starts at home: men get a wife and have a family. Raise your kids to believe in God and honour him and take them to a church where you can all be discipled in God’s ways. For those of us who already have families we need to do likewise. The most important thing anyone can do to improve this world is to have a strong family where you build strong Christian values into your children. Right back in Genesis 1 and 2 we were given this mandate. Too many Christians live their lives for themselves today, or for their careers, and put family on the back burner. But focusing on career instead of family goes completely against God’s vision for how we should live. It’s one thing to need to work and have a good job, it’s another thing completely to say, “I don’t want kids because I want to focus on my life goals at this stage.” By living this way Christians have bought into the self-glorifying message of this world, not the self-denying message of the scriptures. In other words structure your life in a way which best achieves this goal of a strong Christian family, rather than trying to fit your family around your life.  

Extend this structure into everything you do: advocate for government policies which strengthen families, rather than weakening them. Go into a career which allows you to provide and build your family up, rather than just achieve your personal career goals. Never give your vote to a politician who has policies which go against strengthening the family. Be open about your vision with society. Progressives have done this for decades. Many have found these progressives insufferable, but over time they have gained many adherents, and achieved their goals, because they believed in something and stuck with it. Do the same. Don’t be apologetic about believing this country should be a country under God, dedicated to protecting its people first and foremost, and based on strong families. Stop hiding your biblical ideas on how society should function, and encourage every Christian, nominal Christian, and Christian influenced westerner, to do the same.

There is much more which could be said, but at the end of the day we need to move away from the reactionary self-description of conservative and move towards a positive self-descriptor which actually tells people what we stand for: God, nation and family, the old fashioned right, before those words became dirty words. Let me just address one more thing before I close.

I hear many Christians thinking: Matt this is not our home. Why would we focus so much energy seeking to influence this world in this way, when our true home is in heaven? Well because Jesus told us to: “And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority on heaven and earth has been given to me. God therefore and make disciples of all NATIONS, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold I am with you always, to the end of the age” (Matthew 28:18-20). To often we view this as just being about individual evangelism, but Jesus wants us to teach NATIONS that all authority is in him. He’s given us a command, he has his vision for us to achieve, let’s stop playing Aussie goal keeper against Brazilian striker, let’s move forward with a positive goal of what we want this country to be, and work towards it.

In Defence of Nationalism

There is a wide spread antagonism towards nationalism in the modern Western world today. We see this especially present in the mainstream media. Often those who describe themselves as nationalists are spoken about as though they are racists or at the very least xenophobic. To be fair some who call themselves nationalists are also racists and xenophobic, but nationalism and racism are not synonyms. Even in the Church, whether Protestant or non-Protestant, nationalism is often spoken about in suspicious tones. The accepted biblical stance is that nationalistic pride is antithetical to the Christian faith, and therefore many pastors and theologians will steer their people away from thinking in nationalistic terms. But nationalism isn’t antithetical to Christian faith, and it definitely is not in opposition to Biblical teaching.

Biblically, nationalism is something that God gave the world as a gift to protect it from globalism, which is really just imperialism dressed up in modern clothing. Those who know their Bible well will know I am referring to the Tower of Babel. In this biblical account God is concerned about the evil that humanity can fulfil while they are unified as one people. “And the Lord said, “Behold, they are one people, and they all have one language, and this is on the beginning of what they will do. And nothing that they propose to do will be impossible for them. Come let us go down and confuse their language, so that they might not understand one another’s speech” (Genesis 11:6-7). In his mercy God dispersed the people into nations, different groups of people, to limit their ability to commit evil.

We tend to think of humanity uniting together to be a base line good thing, a united humanity brings to mind for many the world of Star Trek, a utopian war free almost heaven like existence. But really everything depends on why humanity unites.

The scriptures teach that humanity is sinful, and that people want power; no one, atheist, Muslim, Jew, or Buddhist, or whatever, will disagree with these two facts: that humanity is sinful (imperfect) and desires after power. The tower of Babel is an episode where all of humanity united together to seek to lift themselves up as great as the gods. This is what it means when it says they wanted to make a name for themselves. Think of every conquering emperor, or would be emperor, in history, what was his goal? To increase power and to make a name for himself. From Nebuchadnezzar, to Alexander the Great, to Napoleon to Hitler, all of these men and more sought to subject multiple nations into their empires, to extend their power over people, and in doing so they all did great evil.  

So what did God do to limit empire? He confused the language of the peoples and split them up into nations. On our own, humans can achieve evil. Together we can achieve much evil. We can at times achieve some good things, but if you look across the history of empire, you will see many evils committed in its name.  

Let’s look at this another way, what is the opposite of nationalism? Imperialism or globalism, both of these are movements towards centralized power, in the hands of fewer and fewer people. We have been conditioned to see globalism as a good thing in the wake of World War 2, partly because many who called themselves nationalists did evil things. But what is nationalism?

Nationalism is simply identifying yourself with the people of your nation. It can be identifying with the nation state, but this is better described as statism, the idea that the state is supreme and all should bow to it. The people of the nation do not exist to serve their state, the state exists to serve the people of their nation. Too many politicians forget this truth, and look out for their own interests. Nationalism in many ways is just neutral: it’s the idea that you find an affinity with or identify with your given people or nation of people (the Greek word for nation, ethnos, can also mean just mean people group).

This can be stirred up by evil people with evil purposes. For example, when Hitler stirred up hatred for those in Germany and Europe whose nationality was not German. But Hitler was not really a nationalist. He couched some of his arguments in nationalist terms. But he was really an ethnic imperialist. He believed the Germans were the superior race and should rule over all other peoples: this is the definition of imperialism, not nationalism. He was a German supremacist (some people will respond here that he was Austrian, but Austrians are ethnically Germanic, in this broad sense Hitler was German). Obviously, this idea is crazy and dangerous, everyone knows the Japanese build better cars than the Germans. But we should not confuse nationalism with ethnic supremacy. Ethnic supremacy is an evil blight on this world. Nationalism is God’s means of limiting the imperial pretensions of powerful world leaders, like Hitler. Who rose up against Hitler to limit his imperial goals and eventually stop him? Other nations.

  

Nationalism can also be stirred up for good. For example: we are Australians and we believe that no Australian child should grow up in poverty. Bob Hawke used this slogan to try and stir up support for his policies that were presented as seeking to help the Aussie battler. This is positive nationalism. Another example is the National Disability Investment Scheme. This is a scheme which has been implemented because of an Australian value that we don’t want to leave anyone in our society behind, we want every Aussie to be able to have a fair shake at living and functioning in society. A scheme like this, if implemented properly, is in the national interest of Australians.

Notice how in both of these examples you can refer to national pride. In the first instance you have national pride in the sense of haughtiness or arrogance, which will always lead to evil. Whereas in the second instance you have pride in the sense of being pleased with your accomplishments or pleased with what you can accomplish as a nation. Galatians 6:4 (NIV) uses the word pride in this positive sense, which is not sinful: “4 Each one should test their own actions. Then they can take pride in themselves alone, without comparing themselves to someone else…”. I would argue that it if you want to describe yourself as a nationalist, you should be someone who is contributing to the good of your nation, and who is going to leave your country a better place, in your sphere of influence, than it was when you found it. This can be done in many ways.

It is neither wrong, nor sinful to identify with your nation, or your people. Where it becomes wrong is when you exclude others or see yourself as superior to others. This is racism. As nations develop across time, the people you will identify yourself with will change. The English are a mix of Celt, Roman, Anglo-Saxon, and Danish, but they all identify themselves as English, and in a broader sense, the English, Welsh and Scottish identify as British. Someone may identify themselves as African, but also as Sudanese, others may describe themselves as European and Italian, or Swedish, etc. 

The groups we identify with are not strictly fixed, or even strictly genetically separate. The Anglo-Saxon is not all that different to the Frank. So racial purity is again pointless, and sinful and harmful. In fact you can watch videos of Europeans online who thought they were one ethnicity and when they received their DNA tests it showed their ancestors were not who they thought they were. Being obsessed with racial purity will only ever lead to evil, every human being is created in God’s image. In fact often when God criticizes nations in the Bible it is because they oppressed those who were of a different nationality who were living amongst them. This is wrong and we are right to reject all forms of racial bigotry.

But the most significant reason that nationalism is important for our world is encapsulated in letter written by the Arminian Philippus Van Limborch to the English Philosopher John Locke in 1689. He says, “I hope, however, that all obstacles are eventually to be overcome by the strength of the kingdom of England that so at last the excessive power of the Frenchman, or so to say more truly of his outrageousness, may be restrained by united forces” (pg. 607).  He is referring to the unification of England under William and Mary, the new Monarchs. The English had crowned William as king, and Van Limborch is hoping that the Scot’s and the Irish will do the same (the Scot’s had, but he didn’t know that yet).

Why is he hoping they will be unified? So that “the excessive power of the Frenchman…may be restrained by united forces…” In other words so that the powerful Catholic Kingdom of France, which had been faithfully (in the eyes of the Pope) persecuting French Protestants, and who had their eyes on potentially taking back England, could be opposed in their goals. Protestant England, which was on the verge of allowing toleration for dissenting Christians in a large measure, would better be able to counter the influence and power of France, if the Kingdom was untied. A united British Kingdom stood a better chance of opposing the powerful French imperialist goals. Which would influence a lot of Europe, to move towards tolerance of religion.

In other words nationalism is important for the world, because it protects us from the evils of centralized power, which both globalism and imperialism seek to increase. It’s allows there to be powers to counteract other powers, and it means that the powerful, and the especially the powerful who have evil goals, cannot unite to enforce their evil on the whole world. To put it another way, nationalism, defined as identifying with your nation, and competing with other nations, allows a counterbalance of powers in the world, to prevent one form of evil taking hold everywhere.

So to describe nationalism as intrinsically evil or anti-Christian, is to miss the gift that nationalism is. God has given it to us to protect us from our own human desire for complete power. Given the chance to work together, do you really think our world will only do good?

Yes people can use nationalism, or a corrupted form of it, to do evil. But this is true of many other things. The important point is this: the opposite of nationalism is imperialism, and we see how the centralization of power can lead to the oppression of people throughout history. The globalism we see today which is seeking to usurp the sovereignty of nations and infringe global power on all peoples is the same Imperialism we see condemned at Babel, and in Egypt, and in the Persian empire, and in Rome.

God is not against people identifying with their nation, the nations are there at the end of time in Revelation 22 (look it up, God wants to heal them not destroy them), what he cares about is how the nations treat each other, and how they treat the weak amongst their borders. In fact consistently in the Bible when God condemns nations it is because they have committed a combinations of three sins; 1) rejecting him as God, so idolatry, 2) oppressing the powerless within their realm, and 3) unlawfully or unrighteously seeking to conquer other nations, so imperialism (cf Amos, and Isaiah for example). Nationalism is not wrong. Globalism and by that I mean the centralization of power into the hands of fewer and fewer individuals and the nullification of the sovereignty of nations, is the evil we need to avoid.

List of References:

The Correspondance of John Locke, edited by ES de Beer, The Clarendon Edition of the Works of John Locke, Volume 3, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1978.

The Best A Man Can Get

By now most of you will have seen the Gillette ad. If you follow me on Facebook you will know that I am not a fan of the ad. Although I will say that I appreciate that part of their goal was to inspire more men to treat women and each other well, and to call out bad man. You can’t really disagree with this goal. There are too many men who treat too many women very poorly and this needs to stop. But someone should tell Gillette that this is a message that most men already understand. Most men treat the women in their lives with the utmost of respect. However, I have said enough on my Facebook page, and the page of a couple of friends, about the ad itself. Here I want to talk about the goal of the ad: inspiring men to be the best they can be.

This has been the goal of many organizations throughout history. Indeed for twenty years the American Army's recruiting slogan was “Be all you can be”, though this was partially directed at women as well, the largest proportion of their recruits were, and likely still are, men. These men were not offended by being challenged to improve themselves, they took up the challenge and enlisted, because they believed they could improve themselves in the Army. Calling men to be better, calling men, to step up, not only isn’t a bad message, it is a message that I have done myself on many occasions. In fact, if I am being truly honest it is a message I preach to myself often. I don’t want to plateau, I don’t want to be content with who I am today, I want to push on to be the best man I can be, the best husband I can be, and the best father and friend I can be. To plateau is to give up and this negatively effects yourself, and those around you.

So why did this ad rub so many people the wrong way then? Because of how they framed the message, because of their emphasis, and their lack of nuance. At least this is how a lot of men felt, including myself. But let’s ask a better question: what is the best a man can get? Or to put it another way: what does a good man look like? I could use many examples of men for this, but I really think the best man we can look to, to learn how we can be the best we can be, is King David, the Great King of Israel.

Our first introduction to David comes in the Old Testament book of 1 Samuel 13:14. David is not named in this passage. The corrupt king Saul is told that he is about to lose his kingship because he did not follow the commands of God. He is told that God has found someone who is a man after his own heart to replace him. Our first description of David is someone whose heart is moved by the things which move God's own heart. The next time he is mentioned is in 1 Samuel 15:28, where Samuel simply tells Saul that the one who is going to replace him is a better man than him; again he is not named. But this guy sounds pretty awesome, and he was.

Where Saul was a proud, arrogant man, who cared too much about what people thought about him, and not enough about what God told him to do, David was a simple, humble shepherd, who loved to worship God and honoured him. The first mention of him where we learn his name, also tells us that he is simply tending sheep. But as we get to know David we realize this says a lot about him, and a lot about being a good man. 

As a shepherd he spent lots of time with the sheep in his care, he made sure they were provided with food and with drink, with cool shade in the heat and warmth when it was cold. As a shepherd he defended his sheep from the wolf, the bear and the lion, and this was in a day when you had either your bare hands, or simple weapons like sticks and slings to do this with. In other words he was a brave man, who was willing to risk his life for those under his care. He did everything he could to care for the needs of those he was responsible for. He was a servant leader. These are the traits of a good man.

David was a man who was incredibly sensitive. He was a musician who wrote many Psalms where he often poured out his genuine emotions and struggles. But he was also a man who was incredibly strong, in fact he was genuinely mighty. He slew the giant, Goliath, when he was still a young man, and he was successful whenever he led an army in battle. He was simultaneously more masculine and more in touch with his emotions than most modern men. To really display him well in a modern movie you would need to get someone who is the cross between The Rock, Ryan Gosling, and Jon Bon Jovi of the Young Guns era. He was the handsome warrior, crossed with the handsome lover, who could dazzle many with his musical ability. In many ways he typifies the best a man can get.

But David was no perfect man, indeed in one pitiful exhibition of toxic masculinity he displayed how bad he really could be. In the period of a few short days David seduced the wife of one of his best friends, while this friend was faithfully at war fighting for his king. He then brought his friend home and got him drunk, to get him to have sex with his wife to cover up his shameful act. When his friend refused to have sex with his wife because all the other men were still at war, David had him carry orders to the army's field commander that would seal his friend's death. “Put him at the front of the line and attack the cities walls,” were the orders. David proved himself to be more depraved than most of us think we are. In fact what he did was downright evil. 

It’s at this point that many of you are thinking: why on earth would you use David as an example of the best a man can get Matt? Surely Jesus is really the best a man can get? Well it depends what you mean by the best a man can get. If by that phrase you mean perfect in every conceivable way, then yes Jesus, and Jesus, alone is your man. He is compassionate, loving, caring, strong, forgiving, honourable, angry at sin, and merciful to sinners. He is everything good you can think of, to a level of goodness we really can’t fully fathom as human beings. His life and deeds are so compelling even unbelievers find it hard to say a bad word about him. So yes, Jesus definitely is the best a man can get in the sense of perfect. 

But if you mean the best a man can get in this fallen world, then David teaches us something about ourselves which should drive us to Jesus in an instant: if a man as good as David, described as a better man than Saul, and called a man after God’s own heart, can fall into despicable sin, then how much more can any of us, man or woman, do the same? David was the best a man can get, without being the God-Man, and he committed such heinous crimes late in his life, that if he was the character in a movie, we would most certainly all cry for his downfall, and be satisfied when it happened. He started off alright, but a little way into the story he turns out to be as bad as Fernand Mondego, who takes everything away from the admirable Edmond Dantes, in The Count of Monte Cristo. He is the villain who steals from the hero his wife, his family and everything else. 

David teaches us that for us human men the best we can get is never really good enough, because we are always one sin guided episode away from being the worst a man can get. David teaches us men something incredibly important: we must watch ourselves, let we fall.

You see the Gillette ad got a couple of things right, and the most important thing it got right is that there is bad in every man. A lot get this, and seek to have it dealt with, and a lot don’t get this. But something Gillette will never tell you is that this is true of all people, whether men or women, we are all effected by a toxic problem; it is called sin. And in Jesus is the only way this toxin can truly be dealt with. In Jesus he offers those of us who recognize we are not the best we can be, a chance to know the one who is the best you can get, and to have the forgiveness that comes with knowing him. This is what salvation is: to recognize who Jesus is and to trust him to make a way for us to be with him and his father in the next life. To recognize that only he can do this for us, because none of us are really the best we can be.

So, the best any of us can get is Jesus. Yes we should call out bad behaviour in men, and I think in women too, really everyone one has moments where we should be called out for our behaviour. But at the end of the day, no matter how good we think we are, Jesus is the one we need, and the offer of salvation in him is the best offer we will ever get.

It’s Beginning To Look A Lot Like Debt Time

“8 Let no debt remain outstanding, except the continuing debt to love one another…” (Romans 13:8, NIV).

So Christmas is upon us again, that wonderful time of year where we get to celebrate with family, join in on amazing Christmas traditions like carols nights, and turkey and glazed ham and open presents. Oh the presents, for some people, especially younger people, so many presents, present’s galore.

Gift giving is one of the great traditions of Christmas, and it even predates the Christian celebration of the birth of Jesus. In Yuletide in northern Europe people gave each other presents. In pagan Rome people gave each other presents. Indeed if you remember the Christmas story well you will know that several Magi, from the East (aka from a pagan nation, likely Babylon) came to Jesus’ birth place, Bethlehem, bearing gifts. Gifts are a wonderful expression of human generosity and human selflessness. They allow us to express our care for others in a tangible and solid way, and they allow us to shower blessings on, and increase the joy of, those we care about, at least for a time. There are even wonderful opportunities to give gifts to complete strangers on the other side of the world through charitable organizations.

But if I said that this gift giving experience was only positive, we all know that would not be true. Gift giving is a wonderful opportunity to bless someone else. But in our modern society it has been turned into an opportunity for showmanship, braggadocio and worst of all, it has become a trap that sends people into further and further debt every year. A rather confronting meme has been making its rounds online, and though it is a harsh image, I think it says something powerful about what Christmas is and isn’t. It is a picture of someone who is cutting their wrists with a credit card, and their blood is flowing down to a wrapped present and landing in the shape of a bow. These words accompany the picture: “No holiday should manipulate you to the point where you’re going into debt just to show someone you love them.” It’s a confronting picture and a powerful message, but I do not view it as an anti-Christmas message.

You see the message of Christmas is not supposed to be, and never really was, go into debt to blow your children’s minds with what you can give them. I understand the desire to want to give your children good things, and if you can afford much by all means give to your hearts content. I also understand the idea that we don’t want to appear stingy, and I think some people do compete with others with the amount they give their children for Christmas. But this is not what Christmas was ever meant to be about or should be about. We cannot let Christmas get co-opted by the mercantile nature of those who just want to turn it into money making enterprise. I think something inside of all of us is repulsed at the way Christmas has become so much about money and things. We understand there is more to life than this, and we want to experience those other aspects of joy that don’t come through money. And that’s what the true meaning of Christmas actually points to. 

You see the message of Christmas is not go into debt, it is this: you can have your debts paid. I don’t mean someone else will literally pay your credit card debt (though how cool would that be, but also how bad for us would this be if it kept happening?). I mean the message of the Christmas is that there is a God who loves you, no matter how many or how few possessions you have. There is a God who wants you to have a chance to know him. A God who we have all sinned against, who instead of just sitting in the sky looking for a chance to judge us, actually makes a way for our record of sinful debts to be cleared. You know those sins, those mistakes that keep us up at night? The ones that weigh on our mind and steal sleep from us? Those hurts we have inflicted on others and feel terrible guilt about? You know those deep wounds that no amount of retail therapy can actually heal? Jesus offers us salvation, in others words to pay our debt of sin, and clear our slate. 

The way he did this was by sending his son to become a small child, Jesus, who was born in a manger, who lived a perfect life, the life we cannot live. This child became the grown man Jesus who then died on our behalf taking the punishment we deserved, and that he didn’t deserve, and he did this willingly. Then he rose to life again, so that anyone who wants to trust in him can have the eternal life he achieved.

The message of Christmas is not: get into debt to impress. It is this: God wants to pay our debts, that we owe him. He wants to free us from our guilt and shame through forgiveness.

In other word’s the message of Christmas has been directly inverted by our culture. And this is sad. I encourage you to remember the free gift of salvation that God offers us. The free gift that he promises to all who believe in him. How much more awesome does that gift sound? To me it sounds so much better than the sound of the cash register ringing, or the credit card machine swiping. It also feels better to experience the free gifts of salvation than the terrible regret so many people experience in January when they realize how much they have spent, and how empty they still feel, and how much debt they now owe. 

Possessions won’t satisfy, but God offers us something better. That’s the message of Christmas, as the wonderful Harry Belafonte Christmas songs says: “And man shall live forevermore, because of Christmas day…”   

Letter on Religious Freedom

Dear .........................MP,

                                        We understand that currently there is an enquiry into religious freedoms being undertaken by an expert panel commissioned by Prime Minister Malcom Turnbull. This panel is considering the intersection of the practice of the rights of people from the LGBTQI community and the religious freedoms of many Australians, including Christians, Jews, Muslims, Jehovah’s Witnesses, Mormons, and people of many other faiths. We appreciate that the Prime Minister commissioned this panel because of community concerns about the impact of same sex marriage legislation. We know that the report is due on March 31^st and that the panel has been hearing submissions from various groups.

We recognize that the Australian people signalled overwhelmingly in the same sex marriage plebiscite that they wanted to redefine the definition of marriage to include same sex couples. Because this plebiscite was done in good faith by your government, we accept this decision, however, we also mourn it, as we believe that marriage in Australia has been systematically weakened over the last few decades and this decision of the Australian people, ratified by the parliament, is just another step in this direction. However, we are not writing to seek to overturn this decision, we have far greater concerns.

Religious freedom is an important aspect of Australian society, and I and many people would argue that without it a society cannot function in a healthy and free manner. This is because religious freedom is about much more than just allowing people to practice their religion as they see fit. Religious freedom is one small part of supporting freedom of conscience, that is the ability for people to live according to the values they believe are important, and the ability to exercise them without fear of persecution and legal harm. Many people lost their lives over the course of western history because our society lacked the wisdom to protect people’s freedom of conscience. But starting in the reformation and culminating in the enlightenment, many men and women made the case for freedom of conscience and for several centuries now we have been living in the fruit of their arguments; a free society. But now we see this freedom being etched away.  

Obviously there are limits to how people can follow their conscience, we cannot allow people to harm others physically, or to force their religious or non-religious views on others. However, we are concerned that this is exactly what some lobby groups in our society are seeking to do. There are groups that are seeking to remove exemptions for religious schools from hiring teachers who have lifestyles consistent with their stated beliefs. If these exemptions are removed this will place officials in these schools in danger of prosecution from law and therefore they would be in danger of having their conscience overridden by force and would be compelled to act against it to follow the prescribed orthodoxy of the day. This is in many ways similar to the inquisitions of the past, and we believe this is unacceptable. We have also heard of similar moves from these groups to seek to have exemptions removed from charities and other religious organizations, and we can envision a day when these kinds of law could be turned against churches. In essence we see some radical groups in our society seeking to encroach on religious freedoms as a result of the same sex marriage legislation and enforce their version of orthodoxy. We ask you to stand against this in parliament and defend everybody’s right to freedom of conscience, including those of us who would like to practice our religion without being forced to subscribe to the new sexual orthodoxy of the radical left.

We recognize that in the past our society has gone too far in how it has treated homosexual and transgender people, and we would not like to see extreme law enforcement measures brought against these lifestyles ever again, as this was unjust. However, many of us in religious and even non-religious communities are sensing the pendulum swing in the opposite direction and we ask for you to be vigilant on our behalf in parliament. But this is not just to protect those of us who are religious, we stand beside our non-religious citizens and defend their right for freedom of conscience as well, because Jesus would have us do this. As he said, “Do unto others and you would have them do unto you.”

Specifically for Christian churches we ask that you defend our right to teach what the Bible says about marriage, that it is between a man and a woman, that you defend our right to only practice marriages that are in accordance with this teaching, and that you defend the right of Christians schools, business owners and other Christian organizations to follow their conscience and practice what they believe the Bible is teaching. We also ask that you would do this for people of other faiths and people of non-religious organizations as well. We would not expect a Jewish butcher to be forced to go against his conscience, nor a Muslim congregation either. A strong society protects the rights of its citizens to disagree and still live in harmony.

We thank you for your service in parliament, and pray that you will be able to fulfil your role diligently and faithfully. We recognize that being a member of parliament is a stressful and demanding job and we thank you for being willing to do it.

Yours Sincerely

Reverend Matthew Littlefield  

How Not to Respond to a Rape Victim

Imagine you are a sixteen year old girl, you’re a bit wild and don’t mind taking risks because you like to have fun. Which means you are a pretty normal teenager. You’re interested in boys and the kind of boys you probably should date, you know the nice guys, the kind that can be dropped a million hints and still won’t ask you out, aren’t really approaching you. So, when an older guy you do find attractive approaches you, well you respond. Only it turns out he is a scumbag. After dating him for a while he decides that you are going to have sex with him and when you say no, because you are a Christian girl and you want to wait till marriage, he forces you into his bedroom violently, then forces you on his bed and rapes you. Now this is a true story a young woman shared with me recently. So what happened from here?

What you would hope had happened is that this young girl was able to go to her parents or her church, share what happened, and get the right kind of advice and help. Which would be along these lines: let’s collect every bit of evidence we have, call the police on the way to the hospital and do everything we can to protect you, and bring the violent mongrel to justice so that we can stop him from doing this again. This is what should have happened, or at least something like this.

Instead this young woman kept it all to herself for a number of days, even though she had a bruised face, because she was more afraid of how her family and her church would respond that she was of bearing this tragic burden herself. My brothers and sisters in the church, this should not be.

After a few days she finally shared with one family member what had happened? The response: ‘What were you wearing?’ This is the response, this! I was shocked when I heard that someone would actually say this. How could someone ever say this to someone they care about who has just been raped?

The advice she did get was to go speak to someone at her church? So how did that go? The response there was even less helpful. She was told those oh so wonderful words too many Christians have been told by another Christian who hasn’t got a clue: “Just pray about it.” She told this person, who was a significant female leader in the church, that she was forced into having sex. Instead of recognizing that here was a young girl who had been raped sitting in front of her who needed an adult to help her, this woman told her to pray about it! I know saying, “Pray about it” sounds really spiritual and pastoral and caring, but frankly more often than not this is Christian code for, “I don’t know what to do, or what to say, so I am going to just pass the football here.” Jesus never said just pray about it when someone has sinned against you, he never said that. He said take action (Matt 18). Sadly, this young woman took action and her church failed her.

You know what else she got from this Christian woman who was a leader in her church? Judgement, lots of judgement. In fact, she got judgement from almost every person she spoke to. Comments like well you shouldn’t have been dating him, to what were you wearing, through to unhelpful advice that showed a complete lack of care for her. Sadly, the unhelpful responses she received caused her to go even further down a bad path, which thankfully she didn’t stay on for too long.

So why did she get responses like this? Well when she was telling me this I asked her that exact question and what she said was pretty straight up: too much of the church sucks at talking about sex. I am not the first person to bring this up, many other wonderful leaders are seeking to address this. But the reason why I am writing this blog now is because this still hasn’t changed a whole lot, and it needs to. Why? Because the Church’s lack of ability to address this topic well all too often is leading to young people getting hurt and too many others making terrible decisions.

This young girl’s parents had never taught her about sex, her church which composed most of her free time never talked about it, except to say don’t do it. Indeed often when this topic came up at this church parents took off, running away with their kids to avoid those services and meetings. This is not how it should be. No matter how much we want to shelter our children, this world is going to come crashing down on them in one way or another eventually, and if you haven’t properly prepared them, but have just stuck your head in the sand hoping they’ll manage, well then its more than likely that something terrible is going to happen to your child in this arena. Even if you home school them and keep them away from every possible avenue of encountering sex, one day they will grow up and encounter the world without you. Though this young woman’s parents wanted to shelter her because they cared for he, what they actually did was fail her. Because her church was too afraid to offend people and talk about sex frankly, the church also failed her. It’s just that simple.

We can’t avoid the topic of sex, otherwise we are going to have more tragic stories like this young woman’s. If she had been educated on this issue properly then she may have never been in a situation where she had to navigate the sexual maze with nothing but her own intuition about what was safe and what wasn’t. If her church had spoken more frankly about sex then maybe she would not have got such terrible responses from the people she went to, all of which were in the church. I mean come on, how can anyone with a proper understanding on what the Bible teaches about sex and grace, ever think that it was right to judge her like this? How many other young women are too afraid to come forward and talk about how they have been abused because they fear being judged?

This is not how anyone should have ever responded to a young woman who has been raped, especially in the church. What she should have received instantly was compassion, because Christ would have us be compassionate to the downtrodden (Matt 9:36). She should have also received understanding, because she was the victim, not the perpetrator. She should have immediately known that the leadership in the church were going to act on her behalf, and help her take steps to get protection and justice. She should have known that they would do all that they could do to keep her safe from the mongrel who had harmed her. She should have also known that this church was going to do all it could to educate their young people how to navigate the world of sex, because it is real and they will encounter it one day. It is better for our children to encounter it armed with good information, rather than be thrown to the wolves to work it all out for themselves.

Let me finish this blog post with insight from the Proverbs. Look at what David taught to Solomon, and then Solomon in turn passed on to his children:

“5 My son, pay attention to my wisdom,

    turn your ear to my words of insight,

2 that you may maintain discretion

    and your lips may preserve knowledge.

3 For the lips of the adulterous woman drip honey,

    and her speech is smoother than oil;

4 but in the end she is bitter as gall,

    sharp as a double-edged sword.

5 Her feet go down to death;

    her steps lead straight to the grave.

6 She gives no thought to the way of life;

    her paths wander aimlessly, but she does not know it.”

(Proverbs 5:1-6).

But when did he start teaching this to him? Well Solomon tells us:

“4 Listen, my sons, to a father’s instruction;

    pay attention and gain understanding.

2 I give you sound learning,

    so do not forsake my teaching.

3 For I too was a son to my father,

    still tender, and cherished by my mother.

4 Then he taught me, and he said to me,

    “Take hold of my words with all your heart;

    keep my commands, and you will live.”

(Proverbs 4:1-4).

David taught this to Solomon when he was still tender in his mother’s eyes. In other word’s at a tender young age. This is significant. The Bible teaches us to have difficult conversations about the nature of the world with our children from a young age. To prepare them, to help them be wise.

Let’s follow the wisdom of the Proverbs both in the Christian home and in the church to appropriately teach our children from a young age how to protect themselves and think safely about sex. They will encounter issues in this world, let’s make sure they are well armed to face them. Let’s also make sure they do not fear our judgement when either they stuff up or someone harms them. Like Jesus did in his day, we should respond to those who have been sexually exploited with grace and mercy, and help them find the refuge and help they need. 

The Great Betrayal

We are seeing a lot of changes in our world today. When was the last time you wrote a letter? When was the last time you took a call on your home phone, or made one? Most likely the last time you used your home phone was to help find your mobile phone. Have you noticed how few young people there are on Facebook these days? That’s because they are on Snapchat, Tumblr, Reddit, Tinder or some other service that I haven’t heard of yet, because I’m over 30, and not a youth pastor anymore. Things are changing more and more, some things for the better, some for the worse.

One thing that has changed for the better is how connected we are to the rest of the world. We can know about riots at the G20 summit in Germany as soon as they have happened, or the target of the US President's latest tweet. Just as quickly as we can know what the score of NRL games were on the weekend, without even turning on the TV. We are uber-connected. But this connectedness has enabled us to be saturated by so many different messages in this world today. So many different causes, so many different noble fights and not so noble fights. It’s hard to know when to plug in and when to shut it all out. We can see how people are thinking, more and more, both at home and abroad, and there is one thing I am seeing more and more that I think is going to be devastating for the Church. I call it The Great Betrayal.

Before I explain it, let me say that I won’t be surprised if persecution eventually comes in state form, or some other form, to churches in the West, and even Australia. We have had it really good for a really long time, and Jesus told us to expect opposition. Mostly we have not been opposed in the West, but rather competed with, and not just by other religions, but by malls, TV, movies, and all kinds of fun and distracting things. This has made us a bit lukewarm, and complacent. It’s easy going most of the time for a Christian in Oz, and besides the occasional mocking or individual persecution at school, or in the work place, we have had it very good here. But I am not the first person to see that this is changing and this change could accelerate quickly to full blown persecution eventually, maybe even soon. I hope it doesn’t happen, but again, we were promised opposition by Jesus.  

But what I think a lot of believers haven’t seen coming, and maybe don’t expect as much is The Great Betrayal that is about to come, if persecution starts to heat up. You see I think that one of the main places from which Christians will be targeted and exposed, is by some of their very own brothers and sisters in the faith. I have already seen signs of this. Let me give some examples.

How many of you saw all the kerfuffle in the US over wedding cakes for same sex weddings? Many opinions were given from different perspectives. Some said, ‘let them eat cake!’ Other said, ‘No.’ But what concerned me was the number of ‘Christians’ who were delighted to see their brothers and sisters in the faith lose their business for taking a stand on marriage. These progressive Christians took an even more hard line stance, if you don’t play by the world's rules, you should be punished. They labelled their fellow believers as bigots for defending the historical Christian view of marriage and some even delighted in seeing the trouble this brought these believers. This should not be.  

Another example I saw was during the federal election last year. There were many Christians who believed that Manus Island, and Nauru, should be determining factors for Christians who voted. Now please don’t misunderstand me, I think our government must balance security and justice for the sojourner (refugee). This is a complicated issue. But I saw multiple, mostly young Christians say that they were going to happily vote for a particular political party, who had hard line stances that would restrict the freedoms of Christians, but shut down these facilities. Even though they knew this might lead to persecution for their brothers and sisters, they were ok with this. They were still willing to put this issue ahead of the potential safety of people they say they share faith in Christ with. 

Another example, which really disappointed me, was a discussion I saw on personal boundaries for male ministry leaders. I saw many, who would claim, and likely were genuine believers, condemn leaders who put into place boundaries which separated them from one on one private meetings with people of the opposite sex. Never mind that these leaders have well established reasons for such boundaries, still the men especially, were accused of being sexist, and disempowering of women, because in a male dominated profession like the pastorate these boundaries limit access for women. My issue wasn’t so much that some people disagreed with these boundaries; because personal boundaries are just that, personal. My issue was that instead of a discussion over what best enabled someone to remain holy in their conduct, men who practiced such boundaries were accused of simply sexualizing women and insulting men. It became about gender politics. It was mentioned that after all the world doesn’t follow such rules in business, and social interactions, and they make it work…can’t the church do the same (I would argue the world has caused itself a lot of trouble with a lack of boundaries).

All of these examples have a common thread, a disturbing thread. There are many believers out there who would more quickly ally with the causes of the world than fellow believers. Of course many think they are doing God’s work, and maybe I am the one who is wrong here on these issues, though I am willing to defend my positions. But what I am not wrong about is that there are massive divides in the church over social issues, and for many us, we see more and more of the church becoming like the world in how it thinks, and the issues it tackles. Since when did the Apostle’s mission line up with third wave feminism, or the modern identity politics movement? I really hope I am wrong, but as persecution heats up I think we are going to see more and more people who consider themselves parts of the church betray their brothers and sisters for the causes of the world. Or at least, be willing to sacrifice the livelihood and safety of their brothers and sisters in the faith for what they see as a cause of justice.

I call this The Great Betrayal, because I think many Christians don’t see it coming, but the signs are there and its effects will be great. Already many believers compromise on long held traditional beliefs like eternal hell, one man one woman marriage, and even the substitutionary atonement, among others, to stay in good with the world. I think many of these ‘believers’ are more than willing to sell out their more traditional brethren who hold these beliefs and others as non-negotiable. After all our views are considered more than controversial in today’s culture, in one instance an American politician just recently called traditional Christian views on hell dangerous.    

Again I hope I am wrong, but didn’t Jesus say: “34 Do not think that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I have not come to bring peace, but a sword. 35 For I have come to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. 36 And a person's enemies will be those of his own household. 37 Whoever loves father or mother more than me is not worthy of me, and whoever loves son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me. 38 And whoever does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. 39 Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it” (Matthew 10:34-39).

Perhaps Jesus meant this to apply to the household of faith, as well as the family? I hope I am wrong about this, but the signs don’t look good.