Cyclone Anthony [and Friend]

When we first moved to the Burdekin, knowing it was a cyclone area, I was interested in gauging from the locals how seriously they took the cyclone threat, to know how seriously I should take it. Cyclones didn't come up in conversation very often, and when they did the locals talked about them quite matter-of-factly, about the bakery roof that blew and landed on the church roof, and then they changed subject.

I assumed from this that the locals were quite used to cyclones and that they weren't too big an issue. I was wrong. They spoke of cyclone so dispassionately not because they were trivial but because they didn't want to relive the deep trauma.

When one cyclone finally parked itself off the coast, and threatened to head our way, the mood changed. People started to tell stories of previous cyclone and the fear was palpable. Grown men, the Hairy, tattooed, biker type - openly shared how they virtually sat in the corner crying for their mummies. I don't want to make light of the situation - but blokes who I thought would be afraid of nothing, even if it was misguided bravado, would openly share of their utter terror. It certainly put the frights up me [who has no tattoos and is scared of riding motorbikes].

The stories of houses disintegrating, the screams of metal, the impaling wooden posts. Locals rightly fear cyclone. It like riding on a freight train off it's tracks, down the side of a mountain. You can do nothing. You are not in control. You can only hold onto your family and pray to God. Locals are amazed not more people have died in the past, having been through it. Many don't know how even they survived.

So with Anthony [and possible friend] hanging off our shores, and the BOM telling us they are coming - we are praying and preparing. It's good to have heard the stories of locals, as unsettling as they are, or else a Jonny-come-lately to the district could approach the threat with nonchalant fascination. They have put the fear of God into me - and that's they way it should be.

Does God bring these disasters? I don't believe so. They are a natural part of the world as it is. But they remind us of the awe-someness of God; If this is what the wind, the wind God created can do, what could God do? They remind us of our place in the world. That we are really not in control of anything. That submission and prayer should be our natural state.

Praying that people take this wind seriously, and that God keeps an eye out for us.

Angry God

Something happened yesterday.

Most of us don't like the idea of an angry God. Ideas like the wrath of God are frowned upon or ignored. Our society scorns anyone who proclaims an angry God. I've got to confess, it's not a mainstay of my preaching. But something happened yesterday.

Firstly you got to know that I an not naturally an 'angry' father. I am the soft one in our household, quick to joke and abiding in 'she'll be right'. My wife often get's lumped with the bad-cop role while I play the good-cop to our kids. I am certainly slow to anger, too slow. But when I do I can be a volcano.

So yesterday our son did what sons do [might I say, what I used to do when I was his age!]. My wife was trying to deal with it but he wouldn't swallow his pride and do what she asked. We knew his tears were only crocodile tears as he was constantly trying to hide his conniving smile - he wasn't going to swallow his pride and submit.

I was avoiding getting involved [hiding behind the fact the my wife was doing the discipline and I didn't want to cut across her and undermine her]. But after 30mins it got too much. The volcano roared. Fortunately I didn't hit my son, but I wanted to and he knew it. While I got too angry - almost immediately my son pulled his head in and got on with it.

I always shock myself with how angry I can become. But this was unsettling in another way. I'd been thinking about an angry God and now circumstances seemed to collide to say something to me. We need an angry God.

Now while I was too angry - I realised my son needs an 'angry' father earlier than I want to be one. My wife needs an 'angry' husband to back her up and support her, to show my son she has my authority behind what she is asking. My son needs an angry father to feel safe and secure [more on that later]. In the same way, we humans need an angry God.

Angry, is not perhaps the correct word with all it's negative connotations. Perhaps the word is Awesome, awe-full. We don't want an awe-full God, because an awe-full God makes us swallow our pride, pull our heads in, and admit how stupid we are.

Kinda like we think, when we meet God we will have a few choice words with him about life. But I think, when we meet God it will be like finding ourselves in a hungry lion's cage. We will quietly soil our pants, fall on our knees and pray for mercy. All our bravado and pride will evaporate in a moment.

Our society needs to understand that we have an awe-full God to humble us, because for some, they will never pull their head in and do anything like the right thing until they know that there is an awe-full God in the heavens.

I noticed something similar as a boy growing up. One time my younger brother provoked my mum, in the presence of my dad [whom I get my temperament from] until my dad became the volcano. Once that happened my brother was satisfied. I observed and thought, this is absurd. My mum had been a volcano all morning, but once my dad got there, he submitted [there were no smacks or anything].

I can only suspect there is something going on subconsciously. Whether we like it or not the father is generally seen as the protector of the family. If someone attacks our family we expect that Dad will defend us. If the kids think 'this father couldn't bash his was out of a wet paper bag', how safe will they feel? My brother wanted boundaries, my brother wanted to know my dad was 'awesome', my brother needed to know Dad could defend us, so he could feel safe.

We need an 'angry' God to feel safe. If our God can't protect us, if our God can't defend us, if our God can't ensure justice, can he really be God?

I know from my teaching days that kids need an 'angry' teacher at times. Not simply an angry teacher, but they crave boundaries, they need someone with 'awe' to inspire them to be good and to work hard. I also know from teaching that you must be angry before you are angry. Once you are angry it's too easy to loose control. Something I'm reminded as a parent.

God says, 'I punish to the 3rd and 4th generation, but bless to the 100th.' God is an 'angry' God, but his mercy and love are times 300. God majors on mercy and minors on anger - it's good to know. But if we forget their is an awe-fullness to God I think we forget who God is, and we forget who we should be.

Ban the Burqa

The conspicuous presence of the burqa, a distinctive religious garment that unashamedly proclaims a particular religious position in the public square, has provoked an interesting response in the Western world. Many want to ban it.

The move to ban the Burqa seems to me to be an admission by the Western world that we have no answer to the Muslim religion. The wearing of the burqa is a direct challenge on our 'Western, liberal, Christian, democracy', a statement saying that we don't think it's all it's cracked up to be. A response that says 'ban it' seems to be saying, 'we have no better answer.'

If we truly believed that we have a wonderful and compelling way of life in the West [liberty and justice for all] then what have we got to fear? After a time here the Burqa wearing people's will be convinced to join us. I understand there are at least some going the other way joining the Muslim religion from the Western world-view.

This debate seems to unmask the reality that a secularised West has nothing compelling to offer, no good news, once the sales are over [except perhaps as a safe haven to practice their religion]. So instead, 'we must force them to be like us', or get them out of sight so we don't have to be confronted with our own society's spiritual poverty.

I think this is a timely challenge to our Western culture to rediscover and take seriously the compelling good news that created our society, otherwise our society will be quite rightly 'consumed' by another that knows who it is.

It is also a timely challenge to the church to reconnect with the compelling good news of the gospel, and not be afraid to proclaim, and be it, in the public square.

Disappointed with Getup

Recently driving through Brisbane I was confronted with 'GetUp's' abortion Billboard.

When Getup first appeared in my inbox I thought it was a great idea. Change public policy from the comfort of my computer chair, grassroots movement doing something about issues. People listening to the average person. I signed up and clicked support. But the longer Getup has gone on the more disappointed I've become with them.

I thought they were a thinking persons group. I thought they would understand the complexity of issues, encourage discussion and listening. I thought they would represent average people. Unfortunately they have turned into a knee jerk, black and white, shallow activist group for one side of the debate - as their billboard shows.

Now perhaps we can't expect more - activism demands you take an extreme position, that you shock and confront to make a point - but this is exactly what I hoped Getup wouldn't be - more of the same. I thought they promised to be an activist group for the thinking person. I long for an activist group that is about nuance and thinking and promoting understanding and the middle way!

This billboard shows a shallowness towards the abortion debate. It says to me that they don't understand that abortion is not a simple yes/no, good/bad issue. Don't they understand that abortion hurts. Firstly the embryo - of which we were all one at one time. It distresses mothers who are forced to make such a huge, huge decision. It effects staff who are involved in the process. To think it is as simple and dispassionate as eating a sandwich is just unconscionable.

That's why we have 'mixed up laws'. Laws that don't give a blanket ban or blanket permission. We can all think of extreme positions where we would, or wouldn't - but that doesn't represent the majority of situations.

I think 'Getup' have missed the mark with the average Aussie. Yes we want to show compassion on mothers finding themselves in terrible predicaments, but we don't want it to become consequence free - because it isn't. A society where abortion is done as easily as waxing, now that is a society that has lost it's moral compass.

Getup have taken a position and lost me.

Evil People

Not that long ago there were litmus tests in the church [and since church was important back then, society too] that declared whether a person was righteous or evil. The tests were, swearing, smoking, tattoos, drinking, gambling, sex outside marriage - that sort of thing. Indeed this showed a very shallow and judgmental church - as long as you didn't drink, smoke or swear you were a good person - otherwise you were evil and to be scapegoated. [My how things have changed!]

Jesus talked to the religious righteous of his day about the more important issues being justice, mercy and faithfulness; not majoring on the minors. Learning to show grace and forgiveness, while maintaining high values. [Matt 23:23]

With the sidelining of the church in our society, a new breed of self-righteous high priest has arisen, with the same shallow way of operating. Today the new litmus tests to determine righteousness or evil are issues like gay marriage. If you are for it, you are righteous, if you are against it you are evil, prejudged and easily dismissed - indeed, search your feelings after reading this, if you don't want to read on perhaps you are the new breed!

What distresses me most about this debate is the polarity on both sides, the shallowness of the debate and that the old mistakes of the church are being made by the new moral police. If you are against gay marriage you are obviously homophobic, backwards, ignorant, a religious bigot, prehistoric. There is no chance to enter a cordial debate, to look at nuances and shades of grey. The issue is black and white, the litmus test of good and evil. [This is true of the other extremist position too - 'you must be against it!'] Such a shallow, black and white, simplistic situation is what is most disappointing to me.

Meredith Resce came upon this type of black and white debate as a Family First candidate in South Australia at the last federal election. She went to a 'question the politicians' event organised by the local Uniting Church. She knew it was coming - 'do you support gay marriage'. These good church people had already pigeoned holed her and judged her, dismissing her before she began - she was against it [political suicide in this liberal church]. They wouldn't listen to her reason's why. She has many good, close gay friends who are willing to openly talk about it and listen to her 'grey'. But she was judged, juried and executioner-ed - scapegoated as one of those evil people.

There are very few truly evil people in our society - just people; a complex mix of good and evil, weeds and wheat growing in the same field - whom God will sort out at the end [Matt 13:24-30]. We have this strange, human, 'Die-hard' desire to scapegoat the evil people. If we do society will be saved!

Strange thing, because there was one guy was was scapegoated by society at the time - and we believe he does save us, not because he was evil, but because he was good.

East and West

Every 6 months or so a Muslim country makes headlines in the West for being about to stone a lady caught in adultery or the like. We in the West think this is terrible! How inhumane, uncaring, horrible and terrible these Muslims are! So we begin a campaign to put pressure on them to free this innocent lady. The lady somehow becomes a virtuous woman caught in a terrible situation. 'We need to teach these people to be civilised, merciful, compassionate.'

From the Muslim perspective though, they find a lady caught in adultery and they think this is terrible. Adultery to them [and the Bible] is an attack on family, an attack on marriage, an attack on everything that is sacred and civil. They must act so that adultery and divorce and family breakdown don't become rampant and destroy everything they hold dear - so it doesn't destroy civilisation, she must be an example! Suddenly the West gets involved screaming 'set the adulterer free!'

The Easterner's think, 'What kind of people are these Westerners? Don't they understand that adultery is a cancer that will destroy marriage, family, society? Here they are condoning adultery, celebrating adultery, making a hero of the adulterer! If they do this what will society become?' Then they look at our society and see sky high divorce rates, porn everywhere, family breakdown and they conclude, 'this is what will happen!' We don't want to become that! We want the opposite!'

We think they must be terrible people for wanting to stone the adulterer - they aren't, it's because they are trying to be good people they want to stone the adulterer.

They think we must be terrible people for wanting to free the adulterer - we aren't, we want to show mercy and forgiveness [although more and more in our society do want to celebrate adultery!]

We don't get each other at all. The West needs to approach such issues completely differently. We need to say, 'You are right, she has done a terrible thing! Adultery is bad - we should know, we're suffering the consequences of it! You need to punish her! BUT, we have learnt that death is perhaps too extreme a punishment. What if it was your daughter, or your mother, - and can any of us claim total righteousness? We have learnt from Jesus, to give people a chance at a second chance. Yes there needs to be punishment. She is not a hero of freedom and liberty - she is a sinner. How can we work for her salvation, but also remind people that adultery is not good, not good at all.'

Isn't this Jesus' approach? 'Does no one condemn you? Then neither do I, but go and sin no more.' Jesus maintains incredibly high morals, but also showed incredible mercy.