Last post of the year

Dear one and all,

This is my last post of the year. Next year is a big year for me in that I will be:
1. Starting at a new church (St Alban's Anglican Church @ Muswellbrook)
2. Ordained at Christchurch Cathedral in Feb.

So this blog as it stands will most likely end.

With Christmas and holidays coming up, I found a great article by John Dickson in the Sydney Morning Herald, entitled Despite the Sceptics there is real truth in the story of Christmas.

Nollaig Chridheil agus Bliadhna Mhath Ur!

Australia's first saint?

Sent a letter to the SMH (Sydney Morning Herald) today about Mary MacKillop becoming Australia's 'first saint'. It most likely will not be shortlisted for publication, but writing letters to newspapers I think is a good avenue for Christians to engage with their culture. Here is the letter

Amongst all the fust and media attention about Mary MacKillop becoming Australia's 'first saint', I would like to humbly remind one and all that the Biblical definition of a saint is a person who has been made holy and this happens when a person places their faith in the person and work of the Lord Jesus. So if a person adds up all those who have trusted in Christ in Australia since 1788 to the present day, one would work out that Australia has had (and does have) quite a large number of saints already! Sorry Mary, you are not the first, nor shall you be the last!

Compassion Australia

From their website:

Compassion Australia is an international Christian Child Development and Child Advocacy ministry committed to working in partnership with local churches to foster the spiritual, economical, social, physical and spiritual development of children living in extreme poverty in over 25 developing countries. Compassion's ministry is distinctly Christian. Our child development programs are distinct in that they are: Christ-centered, child-focussed and church based.

There is a well known saying in Australia (and probably everywhere else):

Put your money where your mouth is!

Well I think there should be another saying amongst God's people

Put your money where your faith is!

My wife and I have been talking alot with our children about Christmas and how it really is an opportunity for them to think about giving to others. And we don't mean giving presents to others, but giving something that other people need. This is where Compassion is such a terrific ministry. They have a gift catalog where you can purchase a gift that make a real different to the lives of people who live in extreme poverty. So check out their catalogue - and put your money where your faith is this Christmas!

And if you are still not sure, read and mediate on John the baptisers words in Luke 3:8a, 10-14; James 2:8-9; 3:14-17

Matt Kennedy Sermon - What happens to believers when they die?

Matt Kennedy has preached a very encouraging sermon on the topic of death from 1 Thess 4:13. I found it so encouraging that I have posted it here.

"Waaa Waaa! I want my Baptism"!!!

There has been an interesting discussion going on in the Sydney Anglican Website about Infant Baptism. Craig S writes:

" On more than one occasion I've heard ordained Anglican ministers murmur that believers baptism is more biblical than infant baptism, and I've seen some Anglican churches "dedicating" rather than baptising infants."

Craig goes on to say,

" I really don't believe that Anglicans have any liberty in this area, as infant Baptism is plainly taught in Article 27 (of the 39 Articles). Beyong that I think the practice is perfectly normal. I hope the trend towards "dedications" stops, and I hope that younger clergy will grasp and apply this important doctrine with conviction. Baptise those babies!"

I think there are three possible reasons why this is happening:

1. Some Anglican clergy don't agree with it - Some Anglican clergy are not "owning" this doctrine with conviction because they don't agree with it. So the result is that they put up with it.

I have heard some say, " Well there is another denomination that they can serve in that is more in line with their conviction that infant baptism is not biblically tenable"; the most obvious being the Baptist denomination but this leads to my second reason.

2. Some Anglican Clergy are Baplican Clergy - Some Anglican clergy are the above, but have a bigger problem with the Baptist Church congregational governance.

The result is that they face two options:

a. Serve with the Baptist Church - where they can practice believer baptism, but have to put up with congregational governance.

b. Serve with the Anglican Church - where they can practice Anglican polity, but have to put up with the practice of Infant Baptism.

When they weigh up the pros and cons they feel that they can put up with b. better than a. So they choose b.

This would explain this bizzare scenario where we have Anglican clergy not believing in Infant Baptism. Anglican clergy who believe in the three-fold order of Bishop, Priest, Deacon, the 39 Articles, the theology of the BCP and the Ordinal. (Though I wonder how one can fully agree with these things and not hold to infant Baptism).

3. Some Anglican Clergy are throwing out the Baby - with the bathwater when there is nothing wrong with either. When all vestiges of Anglicanism are stripped away, when the APBA is ditched, when contextualisation is taken too far, when Anglican liturgy is given the flick, we end up with the bizzare reality of having Anglican churches that are no different from Presbyterian or Baptist churches except when it comes to polity. We end up with Generic Evangelicalism...where distinctives pertaining to a denomination are glossed over.

As a Reformed Anglican I would agree with the fact that Reformed-Evangelicalism transcends Anglicanism (as it does all denominations), but not at the expense of what defines and destinguishes Anglicanism from other denominations. Perhaps this sacramental paucity is indicative and symptomatic of this 'generic Evangelicalism' that appears to becoming more evident in the diocese next door.

If this is the case, it would also explain why more younger Anglican laity have little understanding of Anglican distinctives (i.e. the sacraments, the Prayer Book, the 39 Articles, even church membership). Perhaps what is needed is a renewed discussion and understanding of the what makes the Anglican church different from the Presbyterian and the Baptist Church and as a result there would be a renewed enthusiasm for the sacraments , the Prayer Book and Anglican liturgy.

Advent Bible Studies

I have just discovered some terrific resources for Advent. Rev David Rogers-Smith (of the Tasmania Diocese) who was one of my lecturers from my SMBC days has produced some studies based on the Lectionary for Advent. They can be downloaded from the Tasmanian website or below:

• 29 Nov 09
• 6 Dec 09
• 13 Dec 09
• 20 Dec 09
• 27 Dec 09

Evangelicals on the Canterbury Trail

In my blog's earlier version, I blogged about the High Church/Low Church Paradigm and how I felt that this paradigm was a false dichotomy - that it is possible for a person to be a Reformed Anglican who operates out of a high church tradition. Which is why I found this book Evangelicals on the Canterbury Trail to be such a helpful and enjoyable book. The book is about why Evangelicals are attracted to the Liturgical church. (Though the author's definition of Evangelical does seem to mean the fundamentalist type).

What I foung most helpful was the author's conclusion about how Evangelicals can contribute to the Anglican Church (of the liturgical ilk). He writes:

...evangelicals bring to the liturgical traditio these strengths - the sense of personal conversion to be orthodox, an attachment and love for the Scripture, and a sense of mission...these strengths combined with the six drawing cards of the liturgical church (mentioned in previous chapters - a sense of mystery, Christ-centered worship experience, a sacramental reality, a historical identity, a feeling of being part of Christ's entire church, a holistic spirituality) make for an unusual church in which the best of the evangelical tradition and the liturgical tradition are brought together.

Thanks to Matt Kennedy for mentioning this book on his church blog. Here is a fair book review from Reformed Worship.

For more on corporate worship see also Strange Fire.

Driscoll on adolescence

Recently I was listening to a sermon by Mark Driscoll (@ Mars Hill) and he said a very good thing about adolescence. Although I think he was stretching his exegesis, his comments as they stand I think are a very helpful critique of adolescence and pop-culture.

The Latest from the Grumpy

Here is the latest from my favourite Grumpy Old Bishop. It is a response to a talk that one of our Aussie politicians gave about God. In my view it was the same ol same ol - his God is the god of tolerance. It reminds of what G.K Chesterson said:

“Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions.”

If a person really believes in a god of neutrality then he stands for nothing, believes in nothing and argues about nothing.

Hockey's speech was so contradicting, I could not resist commenting on Grumpy Old Bishop's post!

A New Anglicanism (Part II)

Michael Jensen's post - A New Anglicanism is now doing the rounds on Stand Firm (which is an American Anglican website). See what our American brothers and sisters have to say.

A New Anglicanism

For those few people in the world who read this blog (probably less than those who can pronounce its name - which is not that many any way sadly), I posted about a great post that Michael Jensen wrote on his blog about the lack of Anglican identity in the Diocese in which he serves (Sydney Diocese).

Well Michael has posted this same piece on the Sydney Anglican website. It will be interesting reading the responses from people and also to see if anyone else outwith Sydney contributes.

Reformed and High Church

Matt Kennedy is an Anglican Priest in the States who I find very encouraging. Although I have not met the man personally and have only had conversations with him via email. He is a great encouragement to me for the following reasons:
1. He is man who stands firm in the faith regardless of the consequences.
2. Matt is theologically/doctrinally speaking, firmly evangelical (in the Reformed tradition) but liturgically operates out of a "high church" tradition.
3. Is very faithful at preaching God's Word.

Being a Reformed Anglican who also serves in a diocese that largely operates out of the high tradition I praise God for guys like Matt Kennedy - who are living examples of the fact that one can be a Reformed Anglican, into expository preaching and operate out of a High Church tradition.

Here is sermon by Matt - Assuming the Best 1 Thess 2:17-18

USA enters the Book of Judges

Actually, it did this years ago. It seems more obvious than ever now with President Obama passing a new bill signed the "Matthew Shepard and James Byrd, Jr. Hate Crimes Prevention Act" into law on Thursday, fulfilling a campaign promise and handing the gay rights community one of its most sought-after achievements. (H/TAlbert Mohler said this about it):

The bill, named for two men killed in vicious attacks, extends the definition of federal hates crimes to include attacks "based on a person's race, color, religion, national origin, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity, or mental or physical disability."

Referring to Matthew Shepherd and James Byrd, the President said:
It's hard for any of us to imagine the mind-set of someone who would kidnap a young man and beat him to within an inch of his life, tie him to a fence, and leave him for dead. It's hard for any of us to imagine the twisted mentality of those who'd offer a neighbor a ride home, attack him, chain him to the back of a truck, and drag him for miles until he finally died.

Those words are eloquent in exposing the deep evil that resides in far too many human hearts. If anything, the President spoke too cautiously. It is not only "hard" for any morally sane person to imagine the mentality behind these attacks, it is and must be impossible. Such crimes of violence against any human being should and must be prosecuted to the fullest extent ofthe law. But defining these crimes as "hate crimes" shifts the legal issue from the criminally violent act itself to the thoughts and intentions of the criminal. This is a dangerous and unnecessary step, for the very idea of a hate crime requires the government to play the role of psychiatrist and also requires a list of those who deserve special protections. How can government stop the extension of that list? If criminalizing hate is legally justifiable, should not every citizen be granted these same protections?Even more ominously, the logic of hate crime laws inevitably leads to the idea of laws against what is defined as "hate speech." It is not fair to suggest that this specific legislation includes a hate speech provision. It is fair, however, to sound the alarm that very important rights involving the freedom to speak openly against homosexuality, for example, are now at far greater risk.

One last things: President Obama's comments are very chilling:

This is the culmination of a struggle that has lasted more than a decade. Time and again, we faced opposition," said the President. "Time and again, the measure was defeated or delayed. Time and again we've been reminded of the difficulty of building a nation in which we're all free to live and love as we see fit."

1. Everyone does what is right in their own eyes. Take this comment to its logical conclusion...where does it stop? Who decides what is right living or what is fitting? Well the answer is the individual.
2. Everyone is free to live and love as we see fit - except for Conservative Christians.Dr. Gary L. Cass of the Christian Anti-Defamation Commission offered these strong words: “In other nations, like Canada, where hate crime laws have been enacted, it is Christians, specifically conservative Christians who hold to the historic Christian faith and it’s values, that become the object of institutionalized, governmental hate. Christians who dare to tell the truth about the social, moral, spiritual and health consequences of illicit homosexual acts are accused of hate speech and intimidated into silence with threats of fines or jail. In the UK this is the case. Conservative Christians who uphold the Bible's ethics, values, sexual mores are being prosecuted and jailed for committing "hate crimes".

Christians in the USA will now cop it. I wonder when Christians in Australia will have their turn.

Links:
A Dark Day for American Christianity
Free to Live and Love as We See Fit

Stand Up and Stand Firm

Here is a rather scary video of what is happening in the UK.

Sheer Lunacy

More Sheer Lunacy from the UK!.

Episode I
This time an English grandmother is hunted down by the police for daring to question a homosexual pride march. The terrified 67-year-old was questioned by police over her complaints to a local council about the march.
Here is how the Daily Mail reports the story:

"After witnessing a gay pride march, committed Christian Pauline Howe wrote to the council to complain that the event had been allowed to go ahead. But instead of a simple acknowledgement, she received a letter warning her she might be guilty of a hate crime and that the matter had been passed to police. Two officers later turned up at the frightened grandmother’s home and lectured her about her choice of words before telling her she would not be prosecuted.”

The article continues, “Mrs Howe, 67, whose husband Peter is understood to be a Baptist minister, spoke of her shock at the visit and accused police of ‘ wasting resources’ on her case rather than fighting crime. ‘I’ve never been in any kind of trouble before so I was stunned to have two police officers knocking at my door,’ she said. ‘Their presence in my home made me feel threatened. It was a very unpleasant experience. ‘The officers told me that my letter was thought to be an intention of hate but I was expressing views as a Christian’.”

Episode II:
Another frightened elderly couple was interrogated by the police for an hour and a half for engaging in treasonous acts against the state. Their crime? They actually had the audacity to want to place Christian tracts alongside of homosexual literature. Here is how the press ran that story:
“A retired couple were questioned at length by police after complaining about a council’s gay rights campaign. Two officers arrived at the home of devout Christians Joe and Helen Roberts to ‘educate’ them out of their belief that homosexual behaviour is wrong. They were interrogated for 80 minutes about ‘homophobic’ views expressed in a phone call and letter in which the couple asked if Christian literature could be displayed alongside gay rights leaflets.
“Saying their actions were close to ‘a hate crime’, the officers warned Mr and Mrs Roberts they were ‘walking on eggshells’. Mr Roberts, a 73-year-old former carpenter, said last night: ‘There must be better ways for them to spend their time. I have never been in trouble with the law.’ The inquisition in Fleetwood, Lancashire, is the latest in a series of incidents in which police have acted against those who oppose the gay rights lobby.”

For every single Christian action there is an unequal opposite spiritual reaction. Christian persecution is unequal, it is irrational, it is illogical...it is Sheer Lunacy!

So congratulations UK - you have once again been awared the Sheer Lunacy Award for the 5th time in a row!

Interview with a Bishop

Here is an interview with Archbishop Peter Jensen on the ABC's Compass.

Battle of the Bishops

Just watched tonight's edition of Compass on ABC-TV at 9:40pm AEDT entitled ‘Battle of the Bishops’.

It“follows the head of the Anglican Church in Nigeria as he leads a boycott of the once-a-decade Anglican leaders meeting in London, to hold a rival summit in Jerusalem. Archbishop Peter Akinola and other disaffected Anglicans want to “restore traditional family values” and remain “faithfully committed to the scriptures”. Will this split the church in two?” Sixteen months after GAFCON, how will it be portrayed? Since people may be discussing it tomorrow, it’s worth having a look.

Well I had a look and the four things came through very strongly:
1. The presupposition that Scripture has no intrinsic meaning and that whatever views one has on the meaning of Scripture it comes down to one's interpretation. When it comes to God's Word, the reader is not the author, yet this presupp implies that the reader is.
2. The battle that is being waged in the Anglican Communion is not about sexuality but is really a battle that lies in the context of a bigger battle - the age old battle - the Battle of the Bible and its authority.
3. The BBC reporter refered to one verse from Leviticus regarding homosexuality and did not refer to any other passages of Scripture. His approach did seem rather one dimensional.
4. Sadly I though Bishop Akinola was not that clear on his position. I wondered if his view was strong because it matched his culture because his engagement with God's Word was not that obvious.

Every Christian faces a choice when they encounter God's Word. We can either:
a) Filter/critique/interpret the Bible through the grid of culture
b) Filter/critique/interpret culture through the grid of Scripture.

If God's people do the former then they will make the mistake that the Church has made too many times throughout her history. It will accomodate to culture when it should resist and/or it will resist culture when it should accomodate and it won't even be able to tell the difference. The result will be a church that is indistinguishable from the world, a church that has more correlation with the time of the Judges where everyone did what was right in their own eyes and it will be a lampstand that God will remove from its place. It's power to witness and proclaim the gospel will vanish.

All Roads Lead to Rome?

The answer is no, but it seems that apparently the Canterbury Trail soon will. The RCC has opened the doors for disenfranchised Anglicans (as a result of revisionists stance on sexuality) to enter into full communion with the Roman Catholic Church. (H/T Damian Thompson - Telegraph.co.uk) - Pope Benedict XVI has created an entirely new Church structure for disaffected Anglicans that will allow them to worship together – using elements of Anglican liturgy – under the pastoral supervision of their own specially appointed bishop or senior priest.The Pope is now offering Anglicans worldwide “corporate reunion” on terms that will delight Anglo-Catholics. In theory, they can have their own married priests, parishes and bishops – and they will be free of liturgical interference by liberal Catholic bishops who are unsympathetic to their conservative stance.There is even the possibility that married Anglican laymen could be accepted for ordination on a case-by-case basis – a remarkable concession.

Interesting, an Anglican Church of Australia spokesman (who is not named) said the decision was unlikely to cause "more than a ripple" in Australia. The spokesman also stated:

"It's a move to make it, culturally, a bit easier for Anglicans to move (to the Catholic church), but there are still major doctrinal issues between the two churches that someone would have to get over," the spokesman said.

Talk about an understatement! Since when was the protest against Rome over? Has the RCC changed its position on justification, the mass, Mary, authority of Scripture? While some measure of reform did result from Vatican II council, the RCC officially is still very tridentine in its theology, the anathemas against those who disagree with Rome are still in place. The RCC has the same heart, it has merely had botox injections to change its appearance. Perhaps this move by Rome says more about the Anglicans who will join her than it does about Rome. After all, if Anglicans are feeling disenfranchised about the ordination of women, openly gay clergy and same-sex blessings, they could always stay with the Anglican Church and join the FCA.

Related Articles
Pope's gambit could see 1,000 quit Church of England
Desperate bishops invited Rome to park its tanks on Archbishop’s lawn
Pope Benedict clears way for Anglican holy union
ANiC responds to Vatican announcement
Rome welcomes unhappy Anglicans
Joint Statement by The Archbishop of Westminster and The Archbishop of Canterbury

Discernment - The Christian's Missing Weapon (Part III)

Benny Hill...oops...Benny Hinn is a conman, false prophet and is going to the hot place (unless he repents).

I am gobsmacked that so many people buy into the tosh that he shovels at people. Here is a report from someone who went to a conference in the UK.

By their fruits you will know them!

Anglican? or Albanach?

Now this is something that I would like to see! Bishop...??? Could we...?

Mega-Holocaust of our Time II

By James Tillman, LifeSite News

A new report by the pro-abortion Guttmacher Institute, entitled "Abortion Worldwide: A Decade of Uneven Progress," points to the fact that over a billion abortions have been committed, say pro-life activists.

The report found that the annual number of abortions have declined over the period from 1995 to 2003. Nevertheless, the Guttmacher Institute said that in 2003 approximately 41.6 million abortions were committed worldwide.

On average, this works out to more than one death by abortion for each second of the year. Since abortion has been available since before 1970 and very widely available since 1980, pro-life activists are saying that, even by a conservative estimate, the total number of preborn children to have been killed by abortion is likely in excess of one billion. If 40 million children per year were aborted since 1980 that would already make for 1.12 billion preborn babies killed.

"There simply isn’t anything close," said Stephen Phelan of Human Life International. "Over the many years since this has become a practice, even legalized in many countries, you’re over a billion.""There’s definitely nothing to compare. The closest thing you’d get to it would be the atheist, socialist dictators of the 20th century; and even they, in their gruesome efficiency, were only able to kill somewhere between a hundred and a hundred-seventy million people. … There’s no comparison."

Those figures are horrifying! It truly is the mega-holocaust of our time.

The Mega Holocaust of our Time

Abortion is the unseen mega-holocaust of our Time, and contrary to popular opinion abortion is not a 'complex issue' nor is it a 'religious debate'. In todays' Sydney Morning Herald is an article about a woman who has had 15 abortions in 17 years (and describes her self as an 'abortion addict') who has released a book, Impossible Motherhood.

To say that I found this article to be disturbing would be an understatement, however what I found most chilling (and evil) of all was how her abortions effected her pro-choice views.

"It hasn't made me less pro-choice ... it's just that I understand and feel the weight of the privilege we have in exercising our right to choose."

Come Lord Jesus!

Grumpy Old Bishop

Have a look at this bloke. Seems like a friendly sort of fella doesn't he? Well...here are three facts about him that you can't tell from the picture.
1. He is Grumpy! (He does not look it)

2. He is Old! (He does not look it, well...ok he does a wee bit...but he does not look that old. My Dad is 67. That is old a wee bit more. My Nan is 92 - that is old. )

3. He is a Bishop! (I know! I know! No vestments, so he is a naughty bishop!)

For those who don't know him, his name is Robert Forsyth. He lurks in the diocese next door, across the river (I am in the Newcastle Diocese) Bishop Robert to his credit admits to being Grumpy, Old and being a bishop. All three! Anyway he has a column called Grumpy Old Bishop. It is one of my favourite things to read. The latest rant from him is on the public reading of Scripture. He states:

I may just be overly grumpy, or old, or a bishop at this point, but I do think it is time to recover what we could call the catholic identity of our churches by making the public reading of Scripture the profound and effective moment as we are gathered together.

Absolutely GOB! You tell em!!!!
Here is his post.
And HERE are all of his posts!!!!

p.s One of my Great Great Grandmothers was a Forsyth. We could be cousins! Poor me!...actually poor Bishop!!!!!

What does it mean to be Anglican?

The question of 'What does it mean to be Anglican? has come up again. This time Mark Thompson, who is the head of Theology at Moore College is tackling this question on his blog. He says this:

What we need is a vigorous and informed discussion of Anglican identity, one which explores why the Anglican heritage is worth promoting, protecting and joining in the twenty-first century. In order to get the conversation going, I'd like to suggest that Anglicanism that is true to its classic identity is Catholic, Protestant, Reformed and Evangelical and that there is something entirely worthwhile about each of these dimensions.

I am looking forward to reading this conversation!

Other links
Sydney's Identity Crisis

A New Anglican Vision

Why Being Anglican Matters