Essentials
By Whose Authority?
- Details
- Written by: Peter Smith
Peter Smith summarises a talk he gave at the February 2014 QLD EFAC Meeting in which he gives reasons why we should keep on contending for the faith we have received.
Introduction
Over in Western Australia the Perth Anglicans are divided over matters of human sexuality. The attempt to affirm same sex civil unions at the previous two synods is no minor issue. Although the media narrowed in on the homosexual issue there is a deeper concern about the nature of Anglican authority. Is the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ our supreme authority OR are we at liberty to determine our own identity and set our own agenda according to human reason? In other words, are we members of God’s holy, catholic, apostolic church ruled by God’s word or are we a human invention, a creature of our own thoughts and no church at all?
Since the re-formation of the Church of England in the sixteenth century there have been numerous stoushes about the nature of Anglican authority. The newly reformed church under Cranmer rejected the Roman Catholic Magisterium. 1 In doing so, “They understood that they were restoring the church to its catholic and apostolic character and not replacing it with something new. For them the phrase ‘Reformed Catholic’ was a tautology.”2 Cranmer, under Edward VI established the Bible as the ultimate authority for resolving disputes and determining the life and health of the church.3
Under Cranmer, God’s word written, both Old and New Testaments, read in the Anglican way of OT promise and NT fulfilment in the gospel Christ, became the supreme authority. Cranmer, like Hooker who came after him, was not so naïve as to say “no authority” but the Bible. He understood that an honest reading of Scripture required humble submission to the authority triad of Scripture, a careful reading of tradition and the exercise of human reason (ascending rungs of a ladder with the Bible as the top rung or supreme authority).
Punk Theology
- Details
- Written by: Peter Corney
Peter Corney reflects on his youth and the present and comes up with a New Theology
Punk Rock was created in the UK by the Sex Pistols in 1975 with Johnny Rotten, joined later by Sid Vicious; they were closely followed by another creative Punk band The Clash. They took the rock scene by storm and created a whole new wave of music that was a vehicle for a radical form of political dissent from the establishment. Their concerts often ended in a riot! They also inspired new styles in dress and fashion. Later this was followed by Punk art, Punk poetry and even Punk film such as the classic “The Decline of Western Civilisation.” They were anti-establishment, anti-authority, anti-capitalist, nonconformist and iconoclastic. They were for freedom, equality, direct action and free thought, opposed to selling out to the dominant culture.
The name and image has been hijacked now by all sorts of alternative and New wave arts and social movements who want to challenge the established artistic or cultural scene. There is even a self-styled “mystic Punk-art collective” called “Punkasila” based in Jakarta of all places that is to perform in Melbourne soon.
As someone who survived the 70’s it occurred to me that some contemporary theology could be described as “Punk Theology” - iconoclastic, rejecting the historic tradition and anti-authority. But where it differs from authentic Punk is that strangely it is not opposed to selling out to the dominant culture, a strong theme in genuine Punk. In fact much contemporary liberal theology is accommodationist – reducing and adapting the Gospel to the prevailing culture and its plausibility structure- what it finds easy to believe and is congenial to its morality. Despite its radical pose it is oddly intellectually provincial, reflecting the attitudes and values of its times. Rather than offering a critique of the contemporary culture and its values from the foundation of the historic faith it does the opposite. A visit to a “Progressive Christianity”, “Progressive Spirituality” or “Emerging Christianity” website will be enough to reveal how un-Punk much contemporary liberal Christianity has become. Alternatively read Ross Douthat’s very insightful book “Bad Religion” (Free Press 2012).
Rethinking Reaching Australia Part 2
- Details
- Written by: Glenn Hohnberg
Glenn Hohnberg continues with his challenge to our thinking and practice of evangelism in this second part of last years Mathew Hale Library Lecture.
We are not reaching Australia with the great news of Jesus. 2012 McCrindle Research showed that despite Australia's population doubling since 1966, one million fewer people go to church now than in 1966. Even considering the dead nominalism that may have existed in the 1950-60s, this ought to be very confronting.
Why are we failing to reach Australia? In the first part of my article I boldly proposed two 2 major reasons why this is so. First, we focus our evangelism on our local, geographic neighbours, the people we live near. Due to the cultural changes of the last thirty years, these are the people we almost never see. While focusing on them we neglect those that we see every day at work.
Second, our churches, the centre of Christian life and thinking, devote very few resources to adult evangelism. And so adult evangelism doesn't succeed, thus perpetuating a cycle of not discipling and training in adult evangelism.
Perhaps things are harder now than they have ever been. However, the most crucial things have not changed and these should give us great confidence in trying to reach Australia.
Ascended Fullness
- Details
- Written by: John Yates
John Yates writes under the conviction that the ascension is one of the most neglected of all Christian doctrines. This brief article is written under the conviction that the ascension is one of the most neglected of all Christian doctrines. As a doctrine concerning the life of Christ its implications for our perspective on the nature of the Church and Christian ministry are numerous. Perhaps the lack of teaching on the ascension derives from the fact that apart from brief descriptions provided by Luke (Luke 24:50-52; Acts 1:9-11) the translation of Jesus to heaven is simply assumed throughout the rest of the New Testament (Acts 2:30-33; Eph 4:8-10; Heb 10:12).
Whatever the reason for overlooking the ascension, it is the pinnacle of the redemptive purpose of the Incarnation, the “taking of humanity into God” (Athanasian Creed). Unless Jesus returned to the heavenly glory he had with the Father before the world was made (John 17:5) we could never be “partakers of the divine nature” (2 Pet 1:4). My hope is that by focusing on the ascension we will be more deeply grasped by “the immeasurable greatness of his power towards us who believe” (Eph 1:19-20).
Essentials - Winter 2014
- Details
- Written by: Chris Appleby
Essentials Winter 2014
Who was that Masked Man?
- Details
- Written by: Ben van der Klip
Ben van der Klip sheds light on an interesting aspect of the letter of James.
The aura of mystery surrounding the Lone Ranger left people asking, ‘Who was that masked man?’ An aura of mystery also surrounds the identity of the rich person in James 1:9–11; is the rich person a Christian or an unbeliever?1
A literal translation of the Greek of James 1:9–11 would look something like this:
9 And let the humble brother boast in his high position, 10 but the rich man in his humiliation, for like a flower of grass he will pass away. 11 For the sun rises with the scorching wind and withers the grass and its flower falls away and the beauty of its face perishes; likewise also the rich man will disappear in the midst of his activities.
There are a number of exegetical issues tucked away in these verses, but I will focus here on the issue of the rich person’s identity. The question of the rich man’s identity arises because James doesn’t explicitly identify the rich man as a ‘brother’.2
Reflections on Contemporary Anglican Worship
- Details
- Written by: Peter Smith
Peter Smith challenges some aspects of contemporary worship and commends Cranmer’s way of encouraging the faithful.
The Anglican Church of Australia has undergone a profound liturgical revolution since the turbulent days of the 1960s.1 Whole dioceses and local churches right across Australia have been working towards more meaningful forms of corporate worship. For most, the innovations are driven by a desire to make the experience of church more engaging.2
Sadly, much of what passes for vitalAnglican worship today would be described by our Reformed Anglican forebears as Arian or Pelagian. Rather than helping people to feel good, the effect of many of the new service forms undermines Christian assurance. What is more disturbing is that churches once proud of their Anglican heritage have swept away the Reformed Anglican liturgical heritage. A style of worship that reflects the doctrines of the medieval church period is flourishing today, including dioceses that pride themselves as orthodox.3