churches of christ social justice network blog
Our denomination social justice network have a new blog.
Welcome to the Churches of Christ in Victoria & Tasmania SocialJustice Network Blog Site. We will post issues of social justice fromAustralia and around the world for dialogue and conversation. Staytuned.
You might want to check it out. The motions that have been put forward to get our churches to engage in thinking and action on certain issues has been outstanding from the social justice committee.
I look forward to see what their blog adds to the world 
August 1st, 2006 at 5:58 pm
The Churches of Christ in WA are taking a very different approach with their blog.
In embracing Hillsong-style theology…. they’ve also embraced the crushing of dissent - denouncing the ‘carnality’ of ‘freedom of expression’.
http://chat2gether.cocwa.org.au/2006/07/31/a-call-to-christian-communication/
“This post was written by Mike
A call to Christian Communication
July 31st, 2006
When did Criticism become a virtue?
I’m disturbed inside. I’m seeing a lot of “freedom of expression” of Christians towards other Christians. Some of it happens over the internet with blogs and other contributions. Some of it happens person to person. Some of it happens in small groups. It even happens in Churches and yes, even comes from pulpits of all descriptions.
Galatians 5:13-15 comes to mind. “You, brothers and sisters, were called to be free. But do not use your freedom to indulge the flesh. Instead, serve one another in love. The entire law is summed up in a single command: ‘love your neighbour as yourself.’ If you keep on biting and devouring each other, watch out or you will be destroyed by each other.”
I have no problem with people expressing opinions about issues in order to contribute to dialog and discover truth and understanding. Sometimes there is the need to critique someone else’s position in order to show how it isn’t true. But it seems that things have progressed beyond engaging in debate or discussion. It seems that it’s now ok to denounce other Christians, their beliefs and practices. And this is often done without any communication with the person or group whom we are denouncing. How can this be redemptive? Where is Jesus in it? When did criticism (in the negative sense of the word) become a virtue?
Paul’s instructions to the Church at Corinth can help us. It seems that there were factions in the Church and each faction held up a different leader (1Cor 1:11-12). Paul told them (v. 10) to “all agree with one another.” Later, in Chapter 3 he told them they were “carnal, not spiritual – mere infants in Christ.” And the evidence of that carnality was jealousy and quarrelling among them (3:3). And, more to the point, in 3:16, Paul says “Don’t you know that you yourselves are God’s temple and that God’s Spirit lives in you? If anyone destroys God’s temple, God will destroy that person; for God’s temple is sacred, and you are that temple.”
This is a serious message against “destroying the Temple.” It’s not about smoking or drinking or anything like that. It’s about quarrelling and jealousy in the Church. This is what destroys the Temple that God is trying to build.
I can’t help applying this word to our current desire for “freedom of expression.” We want to say what we want to say, when we want to say it. But that is carnality. We always need to remember that God has done a miraculous work in Christ – in bringing together people of different races, languages, perspectives etc. The world could not do it. Empires have tried to do this and failed. But in Christ, God has done it. And the unity of the Church is a mighty showcase of the goodness and power of God. But, our current emphasis on “freedom of expression” threatens this.
We simply must start communicating differently. More gently. More gracefully. More lovingly. More positively. More Christianly.
Can I suggest the following “questions” to be used as a filter for the expression of our opinions towards and concerning one another (whether on a blog, from a pulpit, or just in casual conversation).
Will this communication build up the body of Christ?
Will this communication maintain the unity of the body of Christ?
Have I communicated to the person(s) or group(s) concerned and expressed my critique to them and given them opportunity to respond and correct or change their perspective before I communicate mine?
Have I judged the motives of the people / groups I am writing or speaking about?
Do I have the best interests of the other person or group in mind?
Am I speaking out of revenge / wounded pride / bitterness etc?
Am I free to not communicate?
I’m calling all of us, whatever our denomination or church genre, to a higher standard of accountability in our communications. Surely this is what Jesus wants. We’re kidding ourselves if we think we can overcome the darkness with darkness. We are the light of the world. Let’s shine in the way we communicate with one another.”
August 1st, 2006 at 10:20 pm
Lance am not sure how the Vic CofC social justice blog will go- I’m with Phil and will look forward to how it goes.There is one difference between the 2 blogs;the WA one is run by staff of the WA CofC,the Vic one by odd bods around the place. Of course staff of WA will take every step to ensure theres no criticism,critique etc of what they’re doing. Big fish in small ponds are exceptionally sensitive to “freedom of expression”.
August 2nd, 2006 at 12:52 am
The WA CofC’ers will have to join the rest of the human race one day….so it may as well be now…
August 2nd, 2006 at 9:58 am
Actually this is a really interesting topic which I might elevate if I get around to it - where is the balance between being open, honest and allowing critique as against the sorts of (wholly admirable) thoughts set out above?
Our commenters on this blog (including Lance) often fall fairly and squarely in the “open, honest and allowing critique” camp and we (Phil and Dan) have copped a lot of flak in the past for allowing this sort of criticism of other churches. What is the appropriate balance?
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:07 am
It is difficult isn’t it? I actually see some truth in what that guys says. But the same Jesus that tells us to love one another called the church leaders of His time, sons of their father the devil, among other things. Now I am no Jesus, and as far as I know, neither is anyone here, but if Jesus confronted the hypocricy of the religious rulers, should we not honour His example by doing the same? Is it sometimes the purpose of posts here, not to change the others, but to offer a legitmate challenge to abherant teaching and behaviour among our leadership? Can it be done lovingly?
Well Lance made a real good point when I was speaking with him. He said, “when I was nice, everyone ignored me, now they are forced to either deal with what I say, or make a move to deny it, atleast they are talking” Now that was a rough paraphrase, if I am wrong with the basic sentiment please correct me Lance.
I am just not sure. SOmetimes I feel a bit icky after being on here too much, but other times I feel like I am doing good.
just not sure
I am getting pretty fired up again however
rev
August 2nd, 2006 at 12:42 pm
It is the unfortunate reality in the Christian world..and in dealing with pastors in particular…that if you make your case nicely and politely to them..they will ignore you.
I can’t think of any better example than sexual abuse victims within the church…who for decades were quietly making their case and getting nowhere…and it’s not until they started embarrassing the church in the media…and threatened to send the church broke through litigation…that pastors and church leaders have ’seen the light’.
A more current example is the debate/discussion within the Uniting/Anglican churches about the role of gay people.
No-one with any power or any influence within the church has any intention of changing their mindset whatsoever…..the best they can do is put out patronising statements (they can’t even verbalise it….they have to labour on paper for weeks to come up with something half-decent) …patting us on the head..saying…’yes..we know it’s difficult for you but suffer in your jocks..in Christ’s name.’
Divorce and remarriage teachings in churches have been changing…not through polite dialogue…but through sheer weight of numbers of str8’s getting divorced and re-marrying.
But this notion that a church leader/pastor will budge on their position because you have a polite conversation with them over some Ovaltine is just pure science-fiction.
Phil Baker, when threatened with the inevitable likelihood of change, actually pulled out of a potential polite discussion with Lionfish…
Please, please, give up on this idea that a pastor is actually listening to you when you talk to them.
You have to find a way to MAKE them listen to you….you have to force the issue…..otherwise they WILL fob you off.
That’s just church life…as we know it.
August 2nd, 2006 at 2:43 pm
With some exceptions, I have changed my positions on many things without being yelled at and embarassed.
rev
August 2nd, 2006 at 3:33 pm
The exceptions tend to prove the rule.
I’ve been discussing this with hamo over at http://www.backyardmissionary.com/2006/08/the-wca-summit-part-ii.html he doesn;t think his back tracking is anything other than being gracious - and in line with his friend Mike whom Lance posted up top a bit.
In Marxist thinking there is the notion of Dialectic which takes two opposing points of view and comes up with some form of synthesis (not quite the same as middle ground). The point is that without the oposing points of view being freely expressed there can be no synthesis.
There is tre call by Mike for us to be more lvoing and Christlike in our conversation with oneanother but as Lance quite rifghtly points out - nobody listens when your nice about it. Rev is right also in saying that not everyone needs to be abused to be ebncouraged to listen.
However there are some groups of people who Christians find it very difficult to listen to. I think it is because they “offend” our middle classs sensibilities; and middle class is exactly what we Christians are for the most part.
Jesus tried to pull the life of faith away from the middle class and I think that when we hear people shouting and screaming and being rude - that it is a call from God to tear our selves away from middle class perseptions of what’s the Christian way to communicatre and start listening to the “Oclos” the crowds clammering to be heard!
August 2nd, 2006 at 4:31 pm
One of the reasons why I go to a special effort to swear..and swear colourfully on Christian blogs and forums…..is that pastors and church leaders are always standing up and saying…’oh…we’ve got to do more to reach out into the community…..oh we’ve got to to do more to reach out into the world’……but whenever they’re confronted by a real live person from ‘out there in the world’ who says…’fuck..cunt….poop…bum…’ or whatever…and burps and farts and plays with his old fella….then they ‘moderate’ them…and just retreat back inside their Christian cubby-hole…until the ‘worldliness smell’ has disappeared.
I’ve just done it again on the WA Churches of Christ blog…and the reactions of the knobs in their ergonomically-friendly offices in Control Secret Headquarters were yet again…just priceless….(although ‘otherendup’ saw me coming ..and tried to warn them that they needed to have thicker skin….but nup…..didn’t work).
A message to church leaders - piss or get off the pot….when you talk about ‘reaching out into the (real) community (not the community that you imagine it to be…busting a nut to break down the door to get into your Hill$ong/Willow Creek-style church services.)
August 2nd, 2006 at 4:46 pm
Lance, apologize at once for your filthy language young man!!!
It is sad when the church judges me conformed to the world because I use naughty words, yet they are clean and pure when they have taken the body of Christ into the idolatry of consumerism.
rev
August 2nd, 2006 at 5:30 pm
I’m with Lance and the rev.In a nearly fifty year ministry I’ve been formally reprimanded on 2 occassions- one when I was reported in the press as describing some church service as bloody boring(this was thirty years ago and bloody was a very naught word rev), and the other when with others I exposed this year some church leaders for accepting a freebee travel to Israel from one of the most political partisan jewish lobby groups even in the jewish community.The clip across the ears in the latter case was all about writing about it, rather than any concern about church leaders accepting freebees from political groups.
Always run a mile when church leaders begin lecturing about being more christian or “freedom of expression”, it usually refers not to them but to the “others”.
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:14 pm
Mmm. This does help me understand where others are coming from.
I do have a sense of unease when the guns figuratively blaze toward “the little people”… sometimes I feel like visitors to Signposts get carved up for offering a different opinion, and I think there’s a place for caution and grace. I know I was once a young, ignorant fool… now I’m a middle aged ignorant fool… but less ignorant than I once was. There but by the grace of God go I…
The Marxist dialectic is interesting… but I also think that people can learn just as well by being led a step at a time from where they are to another place. And abuse / attack can simply create resistance and entrench people in their own opinions… it can make them unwillling to take an intellectual journey with you.
It’s another matter when those in high positions of leadership lead others to error… by all means, let the guns blaze. They need to hear the prophetic voice. Hearing criticism and receiving it with humility should just be part of the territory for those with a call to leadership… it’s one of the costs of leadership, but it’s also fertile territory to grow in character, wisdom and grace.
Jesus reserved his prophetic blast for leaders and those in positions of power… but he was usually much gentler with “ordinary” folks.
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:41 pm
I did read the blog Sadly !!!!! couldnt help but leave a comment. Scarey stuff
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:45 pm
Reminds me of that speech Tony Campolo gave, commencing with:
“I have three things I’d like to say today. First, while you were sleeping last night, 30,000 kids died of starvation or diseases related to malnutrition. Second, most of you don’t give a shit. What’s worse is that you’re more upset with the fact that I said shit than the fact that 30,000 kids died last night.”
So, so true.
Rev, I like your post at #5 - I struggle with finding a balance. There’s part of me that looks at some churches and thinks, “they’re part of the body too, and hey, my friends are getting a lot of out of it”, but then there’s another part that thinks “nah, screw that. The fact that they do *some* good stuff and *some* people get something out of it doesn’t justify the fact that they’ve completely sold out on the tough stuff in the Gospel, or the fact that I know X, Y and Z who’ve been completely destroyed by that community…” I really don’t know how to balance my desire to build bridges and relationships with my anger at injustice and what I perceive to be a distortion of Christ’s message.
August 2nd, 2006 at 7:47 pm
And Janet, yes, I like your post at 12 - that’s the best I’ve been able to come up with…I am gentle with most, but those who are in positions of power I am far less gentle with. After all, it’s often them that are benefiting from the system they’ve set up around themselves…
August 2nd, 2006 at 10:52 pm
“Reminds me of that speech Tony Campolo gave, commencing with:
“I have three things I’d like to say today. First, while you were sleeping last night, 30,000 kids died of starvation or diseases related to malnutrition. Second, most of you don’t give a shit. What’s worse is that you’re more upset with the fact that I said shit than the fact that 30,000 kids died last night.”
So, so true.”
I made that exact point …(using the word ‘fuck’ instead of ’shit’ on the WA Churches of Christ blog)..and they deleted it…..(I’m not surely anybody really gives a shit anymore about the word ’shit’….we’ve moved a long way from Alan’s ‘bloody’.)
August 2nd, 2006 at 11:18 pm
My comment is awaiting moderation at the CoC Blog.
August 3rd, 2006 at 9:28 am
At the tender age of 17, I was quite impacted by Rowland Croucher speaking about how a good measure of your emotional maturity is how you handle criticism.
I’ve tried to see criticism ever since as an invitation for growth and reflection. And even when copping criticism that is unfair, harsh and ill-informed, I always find there is something to learn from it… in the way I communicate for example. It’s never enjoyable… but it is a gift. One learns very little from a pat on the back.
This is a world away in mindset from the “don’t touch the Lord’s anointed” kind of rubbish. There’s no personal growth to be found there.
Back onto the WA website matter… I wonder whether a factor in the decision re. swearing is wondering how many office man hours will have to be devoted to responding to letters containing lots of bible verses written by outraged older folks… computer literate enough to find the C of C Conference website, but not broad minded enough to accept that level of freedom on an official church website!
I’m all for freedom of speech myself, but I understand this is might be a potential administrative headache. I have the vibe the average C of C member in WA is more conservative than in Vic.
August 3rd, 2006 at 9:57 am
Janet, I think that is true - an official blog like that has to be more careful. I remember having a discussion at a board meeting once about the first time the social justice committee proposed a web forum - there was great concern that opinions posted would be seen as being endorsed by the organisation even if they were not.
My response is that I think that moderation is sometimes perfectly valid (which is where I would probably part company with Lance’s view of things). I think that some Christian blogs and sites have a responsibility to moderate and that there are clearly disadvantages to allowing generally unmoderated discussion. And I think that blog owners pretty much get to make their own decisions on that - so I have no quarrel with anyone who moderates comments or bans commenters who breach their rules.
To be fair to the wacoc, I just went and read the comments thread from the cited post and there seem to be plenty of comments with bad language and similar which have been posted (presumably after being approved by the post owner).
As a side note, I think that if a blog or website owner’s issue is JUST language (particularly if you are moderating comments), then the appropriate solution is to blank or edit the bad language and leave the comment, particularly if you had a stated policy that you would do that.
August 3rd, 2006 at 10:35 am
Well that’s just great. I’ve never heard so much in all my life. If you want to moderate my swearing then I’ll well never post to this of a blog ever again. you all.
In the love of Christ
August 3rd, 2006 at 10:37 am
Oh that sucks…I put spaces where there were supposed to be swear words and they just dissappeared…makes me look silly. Here’s how it was meant to look:
Well that’s just _______ great. I’ve never heard so much ____ in all my life. If you _____ want to moderate my swearing then I’ll _______well never post to this ____ of a blog ever again. ____ you all.
In the love of Christ
August 3rd, 2006 at 10:38 am
that’s better
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:42 pm
See, if it were me, I would change all the swears to words that my mother would use, so it would become
I bet Lance would stop using swears if he kept having comments edited to have him say “gosh” and “bother”. It would harm his street cred.
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:44 pm
Gosh oath it would.
August 3rd, 2006 at 3:57 pm
damn str8….I mean darn tootin!
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:00 pm
Bullshit.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:12 pm
stop it Lance stop it - your words can be so cruel sometimes.
I’ve been partying onwith Hamo and his friends over his back down - I just don;t get it - his origianl post wasn;’t rued -just str8 talking - and yet he feels he needs to apologise for causing offence to people who are ripping otrher folks off - am I crazy or as Hamo says do i just not get the point?
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:18 pm
Thanks Dan… your comment is helpful. It behoves (my lecturer uses that word so I like to pinch it) organisations which sponsor blogs to place somewhere boldly that the comments posted may not be the official view of the organisation.
Still… the capacity of others not to read these things can be remarkable… hence the choice to “moderate content”.
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:25 pm
So…if ‘Harry from Innaloo’ posts a response at the news.com.au website …solemnly declaring ‘all tadpoles come in chocolate, strawberry and rum & raisin’ in response to an article about underworld crime in Melbourne….then news.com.au readers automatically think….’OMG….Rupert Murdoch believes all tadpoles come in chocolate, strawberry and rum & raisin…I can’t believe Rupert and his News Limited subsidiaries believe that……what an irresponsible view for Rupert and News Limited to take…’?
Ummmm…I think your average reader ..even a brain-dead Christian…. can tell the difference between a ‘normal churchgoer’ and a gay troll like me……
August 3rd, 2006 at 4:45 pm
Oh my goodness…Dan and Phil believe that all trolls are gay!!!
I’m telling mike at chat2gether, he’ll konw what to get me to say.