Complementarity and Culture

'When This Passing World Is Done...'

2011-07-08T00:54:00.001+10:00

Recently I was contemplating these favourite verses of mine in Psalm 73...

“…I am always with you;  

you hold me by my right hand.

You guide me with your counsel,  

and afterward you will take me into glory.

Whom have I in heaven but you?  

And earth has nothing I desire besides you…”

and as I did so, I was reminded of this beautiful hymn by Robert Murray McCheyne, this together with the Psalm, captured beautifully the sentiments of my heart and prayers.

When this passing world is done, 

When has sunk yon radiant sun, 

When I stand with Christ on high, 

Looking o'er life's history, 

Then, Lord, shall I fully know, 

Not till then, how much I owe. 

When I stand before the throne, 

Dressed in beauty not my own, 

When I see Thee as Thou art, 

Love Thee with unsinning heart, 

Then, Lord, shall I fully know, 

Not till then, how much I owe.  

Chosen not for good in me, 

Wakened up from wrath to flee, 

Hidden in the Saviour's side, 

By the Spirit sanctified, 

Teach me, Lord, on earth to show 

By my love how much I owe. 

 Oft I walk beneath a cloud, 

Dark as midnight's gloomy shroud; 

But, when fear is at its height, 

Jesus comes, and all is light; 

Blessed Jesus, bid me show

 Doubting saints how much I owe. 

When the praise of heav'n

I hear,  Loud as thunders to the ear, 

Loud as many waters' noise, 

Sweet as harp's melodious voice, 

Then, Lord, shall I fully know, 

Not till then, how much I owe.

- Robert Murray McCheyne: 1813-1843 -

“For now we see through a glass, darkly;

but then face to face:

now I know in part;

but then shall I know

even as also I am known”

- 1 Cor 13:12 -

For those who might like to hear this hymn. I highly recommend the stunning rendition by Beth Manchester called 'How much I owe', which can be found here.

'Climbing Merit Mountain'...

2011-06-24T22:58:00.008+10:00

This post was originally written by my lovely friend Jenny Franke on her blog 'A Suburban Adventure', and re-posted here with permission. Love your work Jen!

It made me reflect again on the worldly pressure to attain 'merit' for our 'good works' and 'good behaviour' that becomes so ingrained and reinforced in our thinking from early in life...and the disincentive that results when we realise it's ultimately an impossible standard to attain or maintain...

This week we went along to Campbell’s school assembly to watch him presented with his Silver Merit Award. This has taken him 18 months to achieve.

The system goes as follows:

▪ 10 “bee” tokens = 1 school award.

▪ 5 School Awards = 1 Principal’s Award.

▪ 5 Principal’s Awards = 1 Silver Award.

▪ 5 Silver Awards = 1 Gold Award

▪ 2 Gold Awards = Gold Medallion

I don’t think too highly of our school’s merit system.
It seems to me that it is skewed in favour of children to whom quiet, sensible behaviour comes easily.

When this system was introduced the staff made no apologies for the fact that it was not designed to be “equal” for all kids. Some kids would receive many awards and achieve the top levels of awards relatively quickly. Others would not. I have calculated that if it takes Campbell 18 months to reach a silver award, then he will not reach the top of the system by the time he leaves primary school.

I get that the system is about recognising and positively reinforcing “good” behaviour, and that the system is built to carry across some years to encourage consistency of behaviour. When I was at school I would have been totally into it and would have had no problems exhibiting the kind of behaviour that would have brought the bee tokens raining down.

But not all kids were like me, and my son is not like I was. He is bright, bubbly, noisy, easily distracted, very exhausting. Quiet and sensible behaviour are really really hard work for him.

Where is the incentive for kids who find “good” behaviour more of a challenge?

Campbell had pretty much lost interest in the system within a couple of weeks of its introduction last year. The “pay-offs” under this system are simply too delayed, and essentially out of reach, for a seven year old boy such as mine.

-Campbell and brother Charlie-

I’m glad because at least he is not feeling pressure to achieve something that perhaps he cannot. I am also very pleased that it has been quite some time since he told me that he spent his lunch break picking up papers to earn a bee token. Lunch times are for playing!

I understand that children need to conform to certain standards of behaviour. We expect this at home. However we do not expect perfection at home (if we did we would be sorely disappointed).

We expect and try to recognise effort and improvement over time. I also think we will need to acknowledge differences in our kids based on how easily “good” behaviour comes to them. It may well be that an achievement of 75% “good” behaviour is actually far more worthy of reward and recognition than 100% is in a child who behaves a certain way as naturally as breathing.

-Campbell and sister Siena-

My worry is that at some point he will say “why bother?” If he tries really hard but still cannot get near to the top of ‘merit mountain’, will he just give in to his strong and innate desires of chatting, fidgeting, and silliness?

I am just thankful that this year he has a teacher who is suitably no-nonsense but who rewards good behaviour by the class with an occasional movie and popcorn on a Friday afternoon. Now there is a reward that speaks the language of a child like mine!

So we proudly watched him receive his silver award because we know it’s a big achievement for him. I then promptly rewarded him with the Andy Griffith’s book “The Day My Bum Went Psycho”, which appeals beautifully to a silly seven year old, and is about what I think of the merit system anyway.

As an aside, Campbell came home today to a surprise parcel containing a Super Soaker water pistol. This was a second chance prize from a Paddle Pop competition entered months ago. Perfect for him – so much excitement abounding this afternoon. Major trouble for us!

'Surprised By Grief"...

2011-06-07T19:54:00.005+10:00

This is somewhat of an unusually personal piece for me. Never one for gratuitous self-exposure, and not naturally a person who opens their private world into the public realm (let alone the very public world of the ‘blogosphere’!) But, deciding to finally be brave enough publish this piece was provoked in part by a reading a recent article by Narelle Jarrett called ‘Grief Just Is…’ (*here) but also the thought that by posting it, it might just be of some help to others who at one time or another also found themselves ‘surprised by grief’.

I hope it does…

Recently, during the process of supporting dear friends through a particularly painful event, I unexpectedly found myself overwhelmed by a profound & besetting emotion. An emotion I could not immediately identify, but one that eventually showed itself to be a deep & profound grief. What I can probably only best describe as an acute sense of ‘missing’…

It crept silently upon me from behind, disarming me in an instant, sweeping and swamping my emotional world. A sudden, perplexing grief I’d neither courted nor coaxed with negative thoughts, disaffected grumbling, hidden resentments nor murmuring discontent.

I’d not invited it, encouraged it, nurtured it, nor desired it. But, there it was…

This overwhelming sense of loss at never having, knowing, nurturing, or tenderly loving in the Lord, my own children…

Inexplicably and without warning, there it was.

It wasn’t that at that moment, or in the days and weeks that followed I didn’t ‘know’ with absolute certainty God’s love for me, or have an unswerving confidence in his sovereignty, or a trusting belief he’d not withheld anything good from me. I did.

Likewise, it wasn’t that I didn’t ‘feel’ with a heartfelt assurance my heavenly Father’s love for me, compassion for me, that he wanted only the best for me. Not once did I ‘emotionally doubt’ that he was intimately engaged and tenderly attuned to me, to all I was thinking, feeling & experiencing. All this I knew. All this I was confident of. All this I was comforted by - deeply so. And yet, there it was…

For as long as I remember, children have always been a significant part of my world. Having raised my young brother & 3 sisters when my father became incurably ill. Having taught Sunday School, lead ‘Keenites’ on Beach Mission, trained and taught as a Primary School teacher, babysat, loved, watched over and embraced countless children of friends and church family…and yet, this void…

But, I also knew that for a single person to acknowledge such a grief, or express such a grief was not without its complications. Complications of perception, validation and acceptability…what do I mean?

Well, common responses to grief such as this have sometimes been …

- That unlike the married person, there’s no immediate ‘potential’ for children, therefore a single persons grief must surely be less acute, less distressing, less logical

- Such grief cannot be compared to the grief of someone facing infertility

- It’s a void best cured by the joy & privilege of looking after the children of others

- It’s but another reflection of the singles lack of contentment, ingratitude & lack of thankfulness to God

All responses that can be fairly confronting, confusing and alienating to tender grieving hearts already struggling to make sense of grief’s existence and validity.

Though I dislike the way psychological ‘labels’ often have a nuance that almost ‘clinicalizes’ the human experience, categorizing issues into neat boxes potentially diminishing their importance, the term sometimes given to grief like this is - ‘disenfranchised grief’.

The concept of ‘disenfranchised grief’ was originally described and articulated by Prof. Ken Doka. Doka defined this kind of grief as:

“… grief that persons experience when they incur a loss that is not, or cannot be openly acknowledged, socially sanctioned or publicly mourned."

A ‘disenfranchised’ grief may happen when the real impact and significance of some events are missed or ignored, either by the person experiencing them or by those around them.

For example, natural, appropriate and rightful grief may go unrecognized, unexpressed or unacknowledged in these kinds of instances:

* Infertility grief during the onset of each menstrual cycle

* Miscarriage

* Termination of a pregnancy

* Children’s grief

* Singleness & childlessness (a double acuteness)

* Birth mothers as they adopt out a child

* Adopted children grieving the loss of biological parents

* When a Christian couple divorce or separate

* Death of an ex spouse

* Break up of a de-facto relationship

* A missing person

* Death from Aids/HIV

* Family & friends of ‘a suicide’

* Retirement

* Unemployment

* Death of a pet

Note: Some of the griefs listed will have lifelong effects, and therefore there is lifelong grief.

Doka reflected that in many of these instances, an individual may have an intense personal experience of loss, a loss that may not be validated by family, friends or society. They may not be offered "the rights of the grieving role - such as a claim to social sympathy and support, or other compensations such as time off, or diminution of social responsibilities”.

Compounding the particular grief may be dismissive and hurtful sentiments or statements, such as - “You’re still young, you can have another baby.” “Be glad you’re still alive.” “You need to learn contentment.” “You’ll find another partner.” “If you had to get up 3 times a night to a crying baby you might feel differently.” “It was only a dog!”… Ill thought out comments such as these can only serve to intensify the person’s sense of emotional and social isolation and invalidation.

Because of this lack of social recognition, Doka suggests this disenfranchised grief can become hidden, suppressed or internalized by the grieving person. This "hidden-ness" can paradoxically increase the reaction to loss, intensifying emotional reactions; intensifying feelings of anger, guilt, isolation or powerlessness, resulting in a more complicated grief response.

Sometimes it may actually be the grieving person themselves who disenfranchises the grief. They may feel awkward about it, embarrassed, or anxious that the feelings themselves may not be seen as appropriate or acceptable, either to themselves or to others.

There may also be conflict with informal, or subtle, cultural expectations about how such a grief can, or should be expressed…

“… if an individual has internalized societal norms about which loss can be grieved and how it can be grieved, and then finds him or herself grieving a loss not formally sanctioned, there can be psychic pain internally including guilt or shame.”

Doka suggests an important factor in the resolution of this kind of grief comes about through both social legitimization and loving emotional support from friends and trusted confidants. Support, not only for the reality of the loss, but for the validity of the grief and of themselves as legitimate grievers.

"Because loss entails a loss of self-validation,

the starting point for recovery is the validation of the loss itself."

A wise friend Keith Condie, once said - ‘all emotion must be felt’. That must sound like a peculiarly obvious statement to make, but what I think he meant was, emotions don’t change, dissipate or fail to exist just because we ignore them, deny them, suppress them or try to displace them. Emotions must be felt before they can be processed.

Any attempt to circumvent that reality is not only unwise, but it’s also emotionally, psychologically and spiritually unhealthy.

For the Christian believer, we also take confidence from, and enormous comfort in, knowing the God who ‘sees all and knows all’. The one from whom nothing is hidden, nothing unknown, nothing not understood, nothing uncared for (Ps 62:5-12, Lam 3:31-33, 1Pet 5:6-7).

Our Lord, who lovingly and constantly searches our hearts, deciphers even what we deem as the most irrelevant of thoughts, the one who hems us in behind and before, and strengthens our fragile spirit (Ps 28:7-9, 119:28, 139). The one with whom there are no labels, just love…just grace.

In the beautiful words of the Psalmist:

“The Lord is my strength and my shield;

My heart trusts in him, and I am helped.

My heart leaps for joy

And I will give thanks to him in song.”

(Ps 28:7)

As for me may I be like Job, who in the face of great grief and those doubting God’s goodness towards him, exclaimed with trusting heart, “shall we accept only good from God and not trouble…may the name of the Lord be praised!” (2:20, 1:21-22). May I learn to view all of life’s griefs and challenges through those same ‘eyes of faith’, and with the same hope, same assurance, and same yearning that declared…

“ I know that my Redeemer lives,

and that in the end he will stand upon the earth.

And after my skin has been destroyed,  

yet in my flesh I will see God;

  I myself will see him with my own eyes—I, and not another.

  How my heart yearns within me!”

(19:25-27)

My hope, my comfort and my strength rest, not on marriage, not on children, not on things that are passing, but on Him (1Cor 7:29-31, Phil 3:13). As I turn my eyes toward Jesus, and look full in his wonderful face, the things of this earth “grow strangely dim, in the light of his glory and grace.”

The deepest validation for any believer, for THIS believer, is being known and loved by the one who is never surprised by our grief, whatever it is, nor ever distant from it. He that never fails to bring us great joy, even amidst great sadness (2Cor 6:10, Neh 8:10).

My Photo Culture: 'Let There Be Light...'

2011-06-05T16:12:00.003+10:00

This 'photo culture' post is of a wonderful Friday evening spent feasting on the spectacular beauty of 'Vivid Sydney' , a festival celebrating light, colour and the boundless creativity of the human mind!

A brilliant winter evening soiree on the stunning foreshores of Sydney Harbour...

The Rocks...

-the Art gallery-

- Cadman's Cottage -

‘Raising The Fruitful Child’: Complementarity and Family

2011-05-27T10:06:00.008+10:00

My 'guest blogger' today is my friend Wendy Lin. Wendy has kindly contributed this very helpful piece as part of my on-going series - 'Complementarity and Family'. Thank you Wendy!

When I think about which parts of Scripture have greatly impacted our family relationships, there are many parts I could choose from – great promises of God for salvation, the assurance that grace alone by the blood of Christ has saved us, how God’s love has changed us, and many more.

However, when Sarie asked me to write this piece, the one verse that kept coming to mind was Galatians 5:22-23a:

“But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, patience, kindness, goodness, faithfulness, gentleness and self-control.”

-Matthew, Zoe & Amy Lin-

I have always loved this verse, since my early days in the faith – it seemed to cover all aspects of the Christian life. It was a goal to aim for, even if I knew I failed. Now, as a parent, I find these descriptions now on my tongue, more than they ever were before.

Since the children were born, my regular prayer point – both for my own personal prayer, and for anyone who prays for me – was that I would be more a patient, kind and gentle mother. This is from someone, who at one point, would have thought she really was a rather patient, kind and gentle person! Boy, did having children ever cure me of that delusion!

I find parts of this verse ringing in my ears regularly. That is for many reasons:

- even at the moment, Geoff, my husband, is preaching through the fruit of the spirit, and I have enjoyed listening to his sermons, and being challenged about my own ‘fruitiness.’

- we listen to a lot of kids’ Christian music in the car – Colin Buchanan has this verse as a memory verse on ‘Boom Chicka Boom’ and he has other songs about self-control, etc. Also, the ‘Sovereign Grace Kids CD’ .To Be Like Jesus, focuses on the fruit of the spirit.

I suspect sometimes the message is more for me, than them!

I now purposefully use the ‘fruit of the spirit’ words to encourage my children in godliness:

o ‘It’s lovely to see you being kind to your sister’

o ‘I know he was annoying you, well done at being self-controlled and not fighting back.’

We try to use these terms to challenge their expectations of the world around them. My girls love to think they are pretty. They put on a new dress - ‘I look pretty’. I do their hair a special way and they say ‘now, I look beautiful’. While we affirm that yes, they are beautiful, what I find myself saying again and again is “You are beautiful, and you are beautiful because you have a kind heart.”

When my son struggles to tame his anger, we can talk about self-control. We talk about how it’s OK to feel angry and upset, but we still have to be self-controlled about how we express it.

As I’ve thought about it though, it’s easy to focus on some fruits of the spirit rather than others and some fit more easily into conversation – kindness, gentleness, patience and self-control, for example. We use them to define expectations of behaviour in our kids.

However, what about peace? Joy? Faithfulness? Goodness? How to teach these to our kids?

The same way we teach everything, we model it ourselves. As we continue to try to live our lives in a ‘manner worthy of the gospel’ (Phil 1:27) it can be our hope and prayer that our children will see and learn from us. We can talk about being thankful for the things around us – that Daddy is paid to talk to people about Jesus, that we have a house to live in and food to eat. Does that correspond to joy? I hope it will, and that our attitude of expressing thankfulness is a joyful one.

If I were to think about each of the fruits of the spirit and how I want to model them to my children, perhaps they might be these:

- Love – that they always know & believe that they are loved. By God and by Geoff and I. To tell them often that we love them and that God loves them.

- Joy – for them to know that we have joy in the promises of God, whatever our circumstances. That we speak more of being joyful. That we are thankful for the many blessings of God and we talk about it.

- Peace – that loving others is more important than winning the fight, or standing up for our own rights.

- Patience – that we are patient with them, and we listen.

- Kindness – that we speak kindly, not quick to raise our voices, but calmly. To each other, to the children and to others.

- Goodness – that we always try to point out the good in a situation, and that we look for the good in others.

- Faithfulness – that we have an ongoing committed faithfulness to following Jesus and God’s word, and giving it priority over everything else. But that we are also committed to keeping the promises we make - to everyone. If they see us always keeping our word and valuing honestly – I think an understanding of faithfulness grows along with that.

- Gentleness – in some ways this seems like a mix of patience and kindness, perhaps it adds an element of touch? That we touch the children gently – give them cuddles and hugs and we speak gently, rather than harshly.

- Self-control – this can cover everything – self-control in our speech, our actions, our attitude, the way we manage our lives.

By no means am I saying we do all this! This is more like my own ‘wish list’. There is nothing like caring for children to point out your own sinfulness, your pride and your selfishness. At the same time, caring for them has instilled such a desire to teach them of God and to live a life that is worthy of the gospel. By God’s grace, as we continue to try to live godly lives, it’s our prayer that our children are also learning to do the same.

-Wendy & Geoff-

Grief Just Is...

2011-05-19T22:11:00.003+10:00

My 'guest blogger' today is Narelle Jarrett. She ministers as the Archdeacon for Women's Ministry in the Sydney Diocese.

Thanks yet again Narelle for your wonderful wisdom, insightful teaching and godly example.

I have written this in response to an article on 'singleness' that I read on the web this morning. Unfortunately I've since lost the link and haven't been able to track it down again. The article was largely exhorting singles to be 'content' and not 'self-pitying' or 'complaining'.

Here is my comment to the writer of that article.

"Thanks for your article on this topic. However I wonder if you move too quickly to the resolution of 'trusting in the Lord and the wonderful promises of the resurrection' and, consequently, haven't given any time to reassuring singles that what they suffer is 'grief', that grief in singleness is OK and that grief refuses to be dealt with by logic.

Grief demands to be recognized and allowed to be what it is - an uncontrollable emotional response - sadness - in the experience of a great loss.

No one chooses grief - it just is.

It sweeps across us unexpectedly, it catches us by surprise and it refuses to disappear just because we want it to.

It demands acknowledgement, it demands that we pay attention. That is why it is so cruel when we are called to 'trust God and get on with serving'.... In most instances we are in fact already doing just that.

We have been trusting God throughout our lives and the sudden onset, or the re-emergence, of grief doesn't mean we have stopped trusting God. Rather, it is the demand of our emotions to us, to pay attention to what is happening inside us - that we are grieving.

It is only as we allow ourselves to grieve and talk with God about our grief that ultimately we will recover our equilibrium and find our settledness again. As with all grief, it is beyond our control.

Because the griefs of singleness and of not having children are so deep, so real and so totally right, they can't be dismissed or dealt with by anything other than allowing ourselves to grieve. Grieving with the friends who understand and who don't imply we are being self centred or self-pitying or even that we're doubting God's goodness. Such hurtful and totally inappropriate, even cruel responses to women and men in grief, do not help. In fact they add to the isolation and loneliness of grief.

It is true that God binds up the broken hearted and He does that as we are allowed to express the grief we feel. As with all grief there is no timetable for recovery. Grief just is.

How good it would be if preachers began speaking of the reality of this grief and affirmed the single in the reality of their grief and prayed for them.....without any tag lines like 'and help them to serve you Lord and to find their contentment in the wonderful opportunities you give them for serving'. I have never yet heard a preacher speak to discontented marrieds in such terms. Nor do we imply that marrieds are being self centred or doubting God's goodness.

I know singleness from the inside; I serve the Lord with a glad heart. I've been an adult single for over 50 years; I've learned to grieve and to live with what is an extended grief. I've learned to allow myself to be a human being, and I've also learned that servant hearted women who are single need to be set free to grieve. In such a context of loving concern there is great comfort and support.

And finally, if anyone is worried about this, you can be sure that God will look after growing us to Christian maturity in His time and in his way for, each one of us is very important and precious to Him, and He loves us dearly".

“We always thank God for all of you, mentioning you in our prayers.

We continually remember before our God and Father your work produced by faith, your labor prompted by love, and your endurance inspired by hope in our Lord Jesus Christ”.

-1 Thess 1:2-3-

Dylan, Dusk And The Sea...

2011-04-30T21:19:00.020+10:00

Today ends a week marked by three great loves...this day, a sublime afternoon spent by the sea, idly whiling away the hours ‘til the warm light of the sun drifted its way into the soft quiet glow of dusk. And earlier, a long awaited evening with what I can only describe as 'THE' quintessential balladeer known to modern man - the legendary Bob Dylan!

These photographs, coupled with the poetic rhythms of Dylan, are a celebration of those three loves…

"Oh the time will come up

When the winds will stop

And the breeze will cease to be a'breathin'

Like the stillness in the wind

Before the hurricane begins

The hour when the ship comes in

And the sea will split

And the ship will hit

And the shoreline sands will be a'shakin'

And the tide will sound

And the waves will pound

And the morning will be breakin'

Oh the fishes will laugh

As they swim out of the path

And the seagulls will be a'smilin'

And the rocks on the sand

Will proudly stand

The hour that the ship comes in

And the words that are used

For to get the ship confused

Will not be understood as they're spoken

For the chains of the sea

Will have busted in the night

And be buried at the bottom of the ocean

A song will lift,

As the mainsail shifts

And the boat drifts out to the shoreline

And the sun will respect

Every face on the deck

The hour that the ship comes in

And the sands will roll

Out a carpet of gold

For your weary toes to be a'touchin'

And the ship's wise men

Will remind you once again

That the whole wide world is watchin'

Oh the foe will rise

With the sleep still in their eyes

And they'll jerk from their beds and think they're dreamin'

And they'll pinch themselves and squeal

And they'll know that it's for real

The hour when the ship comes in

And they'll raise their hands

Sayin' "We'll meet all your demands"

And we'll shout from the bow "Your days are numbered"

And like the pharoah's triumph

They'll be drownded in the tide

Like Goliath they'll be conquered"

'When The Ship Comes In'

- Bob Dylan-

(Ironically, the name ‘Dylan’ in Welsh actually means- ‘great sea’)

'PERFECT'...

2011-03-30T18:17:00.010+11:00

I’m a great fan of ‘Pink’s’ music, an unabashed confession that may come as a surprise to many because her lyrics, apart from the occasional spattering of profanity, can also be quite raw and confronting. Whether it’s her straight talking commentary on political ideology in ‘Dear Mr President’, or her painful, and often self-revealing reflections on societal dysfunction, relational discord or marital breakdown in songs like ‘Stupid Girls’, ‘Family Portrait’, and ‘I Don’t Believe You’.

Apart from great rock music, that’s exactly what I like about her. She doesn’t avoid the ‘uncomfortable’. Her music doesn’t lean towards an insipid romanticism or an anaesthetised placating of the sensibilities, but speaks honestly, bluntly, and often insightfully about the struggle of living as imperfect people in a far from perfect world.

In her words…

“My favorite books, art pieces, films, and music, always have something jarring about them. I want art to make me think.

 In order to do that, it may p**s me off, or make me uncomfortable.

That promotes awareness and change, or at least some discussion.  

That’s my intention.  

You can't move mountains by whispering at them”.

And I think it’s Pink’s audacious attempt to ‘move mountains’ through music that accounts for her extraordinary popular appeal today. Her latest song - ‘F**Kin Perfect’ is certainly no exception to this hard-hitting rock mantra. Confronting to say the least, ‘Perfect’ canvasses the ugly reality of bullying, alienation, self-loathing, self-harm, and suicide that appear all too common in the lives of young women today.

I must say I found the song, and particularly the corresponding video profoundly unsettling, not just because of its deeply disturbing content matter, but also the sadness it evoked in recalling the countless faces of young women I’d pastored who struggled with everything from low self-perception, gnawing self-doubt, anxiety, depression, eating disorders and persistent and deep seated feelings of self-hatred.

Listen for a moment to the lyrics (or for those brave among you, the enclosed censored version of her video).

“Made a wrong turn, once or twice

Dug my way out, blood and fire

Bad decisions, that's alright

Welcome to my- silly life

Mistreated, misplaced, misunderstood

Miss -'No way, it's all good',

it didn't slow me down

Mistaken, always second guessing, underestimated

Look, I'm still around

Pretty, pretty please, don't you ever ever feel

Like you're less than f*n' perfect

Pretty, pretty please, if you ever ever feel like you're nothing

You're f*n' perfect to me!

You're so mean, when you talk about yourself, you were wrong

Change the voices in your head, - make them like you instead

So complicated, look happy, you'll make it!

Filled with so much hatred...such a tired game

It's enough! I've done all I can think of

Chased down all my demons,

I've seen you do the same

…Done looking for the critics, cause they're everywhere

They don’t like my jeans, they don't get my hair

Exchange ourselves, and we do it all the time

Why do we do that?

Why do I do that?...

Some might right-off ‘Prefect’s’ life narrative as yet another gratuitously sensationalist rock vid, aimed to shock and self promote. But the truth of the song to life as I’ve found it for many young girls (and not a few older women) who carry the scars of emotional and psychological distress depicted here, resonates. To quote one young listener…“Its sad. Cause this is basically my life, made into a music video”.

And if statistics, or the plethora of ‘confessional’ internet forums are an indication, it seems that many would agree with me.

We know from the Australian Government’s ‘Response Ability’ website that…

“The prevalence of self-harming behaviours has increased. In 2005-06, there were 7,299 hospitalisations of young people due to intentional self-harm - a rate of 197 per 100,000. The increase was greater among females (51% compared with 27%) with the female rate consistently twice as high as for males.

In the 2007 National Survey of Mental Health and Wellbeing, 1.8% of males and 2.7% of females reported having experienced thoughts of suicide in the previous 12 months.
Extrapolating to the whole population, that’s an estimated 146,000 men and 222,000 women.

And, if those sobering statistics aren’t enough to rattle the senses, read these chilling self- revelations from the - ‘I Battle Self-Hatred’ website…

Every day I look at myself and feel sick…I've self harmed in many ways…I hate the way I look. I hate my stomach…I hate my stupid head problems…I hate the way I never seem to be able to say the right thing…I hate the way I never seem to be able to keep friends or get along with people.” - Popkins –

“People are weird with me. I get a lot of attention and told I ‘m pretty, but lots of people don't seem to like me. I feel like I don't really connect with others… I always feel like people don't want to include me in their conversations.

Instead of thinking it's their problem, I internalize it to think - there must be something wrong with me. I start thinking of myself as a worthless loser with no friends. In turn, I try so hard to please everyone but they end up using me and disrespecting me more because I have no back bone”. –’ Patchworkofmistakes ’-.

'Perfect’ starkly echoes the sentiments spoken of here, those moments feeling “mistreated, misplaced, misunderstood” that threaten to undo us. And the futile pretence of adopting a “Miss – ‘no way, it’s all good” attitude that cripples all genuine honesty, and ultimately leaves us void of any meaningful resolution to our growing sense of failure or alienation.

The song not only portrays our struggle to surmount these mistakes and challenges in life, those “wrong turns” and “bad decisions”, but more importantly, it profoundly captures our seeming incapacity to conquer the destructive drives and negative self-talk that flow from them. The “always second guessing…feeling like you’re nothing” thinking that paralyses the mind and debilitates the human spirit.

PASSIVE THOUGHT BINGING:

We see here that the mind is a very powerful thing isn’t it? Our thoughts often drive our feelings. They shape our attitudes, our beliefs and ultimately, our behaviours (sometimes destructive ones!).

Ralph Waldo Emerson once described the potential influence of thoughts to shape our lives this way…

”To sow a thought is to reap an action; to sow an action is to reap a habit;

sow a habit, reap a character; sow a character, reap a destiny”.

Both Emerson and Pink draw attention to a layer of talk that’s potentially deadly and dangerous if left unchecked. And that’s the talk that goes on in our heads. Our ‘self- talk’, our ‘inner dialogue’ if you like. Those ‘internal conversations’ we have with ourselves. The mental ‘words of life’ and ‘words of death.’

Mental words of death like…

“I ‘m ugly”

“I ‘m useless”

“I can’t do that”

“No one likes me”

“I ‘m no good at anything”

“I ‘m a hopeless mother”

….“I’m nothing”

Or maybe it’s those ‘doubting words of death’ about our heavenly father…thoughts like…

“Why did you make me this way…why didn’t you make me more like her?...”

“God you don’t really care what’s happening to me…”

“I just don’t think I can trust him any more…”

Have you ever had thoughts like that?

We call these thoughts ‘words of death’ because they’re destructive, debilitating, de-motivating, toxic and deadly to our souls. Like cancer, these negative thoughts feed on our minds, and spread throughout our wills, and emotions.

If we allow ourselves to ‘passively binge’ on these kinds of thoughts long enough we begin to believe them. The mental words of death and doubt gradually and insidiously start to displace the ‘healthy truth’ God feeds us in his Word and through his Spirit. Eating away at our trust in him. Slowly but surely, we can begin to move away from God…and from others as well.

I wonder what your ‘self-talk’ looks like?

What your ‘words of life or death’ might be?

Well, how can we begin to hear more of ‘God’s talk’ in our heads and less of our own?

Can I suggest 4 ways we might do that.

SAGE SELF-TALKING:

1. Reining in our thoughts:

We can begin by making mental choices NOT to be a ‘passive thought binger’. Literally just consuming every thought that passes through our heads without check, restraint or question.

We’re soberly reminded in Rom 7:23 and Is: 55:8 that our minds, our thoughts, do not always speak truth into our heads about God, about the world or about ourselves. In fact sometimes they speak lies!

My little mental world of reality is not always reality as God sees it. Therefore I must ACTIVELY decide to “submit myself (my thoughts) to God, resist Satan’s inroads, and draw near to him”. God promises that when I do, the destructive undermining work of the ‘father of lies’ at work in my mind will begin to “flee from me” (Jas 4:7-8, 1 Pet 1:13).

2. Replacing in our thoughts:

Pink’s solution to the lies we speak to ourselves is to replace those negative thoughts with positive ones, to- “change the voices in your head, make them like you instead”. Interestingly, theologian Martyn Lloyd-Jones proposed a similar strategy stating: “Most of our unhappiness in life is due to the fact that we’re listening to ourselves rather than talking rightly to ourselves”.

For Christians this will mean, that when I’m tempted to entertain negative self-talk, I’m to eject the false tapes set on ‘continuous play’ in my head, and replace them with tracks of God-talk. I’m to install, then hit ‘re-play’ with God’s truth about me. Or, drawing upon Pink’s sentiments - “change the voices in your head, make them - like God’s instead”.

In this way, let’s not allow ourselves to mentally “conform to the pattern of this world, BUT be transformed BY the renewing of our minds” (Rom 12:2).

3. Feeding our thoughts:

In Phillippians the Apostle Paul invites Christians to engage in a spiritual mind binge!
He urges them to actively apply their minds to these thoughts…

”…whatever is true, what ever is noble,

whatever is right, pure, lovely, admirable, excellent, praiseworthy…

think (or feed) on these things” (4:8)

Is Paul’s encouragement to ponder such attributes just a psycho-spiritual exercise for the mind? The Scriptures say NO! For when we adopt, feed and meditate on these qualities, these truths - God’s truths, we begin to both incorporate them into our actions, and slowly but surely change and displace old, fleshly and destructive patterns of thinking (Rom 8:5).

4. Rest our thoughts:

Lastly, the beautiful words of Lamentations 3:21-21 have this to say…

“I call this to mind and therefore I have hope:

Because of the Lord’s great love,

We are not consumed (even by our own thoughts)

For his compassions never fail.

They are new every morning;

Great is your faithfulness.

I say to myself, ‘The Lord is my portion’;

therefore -I will wait for him”.

We’re reminded that even though disappointment, chaos and self-doubt may still linger uneasily around us at times, with God’s help it IS possible to ‘still our anxious thoughts’, to find ‘settledness of mind’, because we ultimately trust in his love, his compassion, his faithfulness towards us.

We can know peace of mind because we put our trust, not in self-belief, not in the fickle critique of others, not even in the feint hope that someday someone might possibly say - “you’re perfect to me”.

Rather, we entrust ourselves, our lives, our bodies, our minds, over to the only one who was made perfect ‘for me’, gave his life ‘for me’, and places his transforming Spirit ‘within me’.

To the only one who can, and has, declared…

“Pretty, pretty please, if you ever- ever feel like you're nothing

You ARE perfect - IN me!”

Let’s “call this to mind” and set our “hope” on HIM!

* Copyright: Please do not use or reproduce without permission:

Note:

I want to say in passing that for some there may be additional medical, emotional or psychological factors that can significantly impact a persons functioning, & can drown out their capacity to hear and know God’s truths spoken of here.

If that is the case for you, or for someone you know or love, know that you are not alone and that help is available that can make a difference. Can I recommend these helpful contact organizations, or feel free to contact me directly by posting a message with this blog.

* Beyond Blue

* Black Dog Institute

* Headspace

* The Butterfly Foundation

Gen 2-3: ‘Image Bearers in Disgrace’:

2011-02-27T18:31:00.002+11:00

The Grace Of Shared Dominion: Gen 2:
(Note: This post outlines my ‘brief notes’ from the second talk by Peter Jensen at the launch of the Priscilla and Aquila Foundation’. See also my notes from talk 1- ‘Image Bearers in Grace’).

Gen 2:24 "For this reason a man will leave his father and mother and be united to his wife, and they will become one flesh”

We find here at the end of Gen 2, man and woman beginning to move from ‘working together in partnership’ into marriage relationship together. We find that marriage is to become the central case of mankind’s shared dominion. It is central (though not essential) to the task of being human. This Picture at the end of Gen 2 has a great deal to commend in contrast to the culture in which we now live in the 21st century.

In the very next verse we are told that,“the man and his wife were both naked, and they felt no shame”. In other words, it was a relationship of transparency, of innocence without guilt. Their ‘nakedness’ is symbolic of this guiltless, unashamed state.

There are certain principles to note here:

* Marriage of ‘a man and a woman’ is the definition and principle of marriage.

* To the exclusion of all others (polygamy and adultery)

* There's to be a priority of marriage over the closest of other relationships. For there's to be a ‘leaving and cleaving’ (e.g.parents must now take 2^ndplace to the husband/wife relationship).

* There is permanence, a ‘one flesh-ness’ that creates ‘kindred-ness’ despite there not being a genetic relationship.

* One of the tasks is procreation.

The end of Gen 2 is a powerful and potent picture, and it actually has a great deal to commend in contrast to the culture in which we now live. All of these things are demonstrably better than contemporary arrangements. Demonstrably better for men, for women, and for children.

There is also a responsibility in the man, in initiating and sustaining marriage- he ‘leaves’ his parents and he ‘clings’ to his wife. We can describe this as a ‘singularity’ of responsibility, there is a definite ‘initiative taking’ for the man in making and sustaining the marriage which belongs to him. A responsibility that is not co-terminate with the responsibilities the woman has, but rather, is unique to man.

The Disgrace Of Disobedience: Gen 3:

When we get to chapter 3 we no longer find order but disorder, and the passage most certainly shows the wrongfulness of this disorder.

But is that what the passage teaches?

As the roles and responsibilities of man and woman are different, so too we find that the sin of the man and woman are not the same. There's a clear discrimination of sins between the man and the woman in their role of ‘ruling’.

In 3:13 the deception of the woman is contrasted with the arrogance of the man…

“Then the LORD God said to the woman, “What is this you have done?”

The woman said, “The serpent deceived me, and I ate.”

Here Adam ‘listens’ (Hebrew=obedience) to the voice of his wife, as opposed to the voice of God. In listening to his wife’s suggestion, Adam’s sin is an arrogant disregard of the word of God as it was given specifically to him.

Paul picks up the same distinction between the different sins of Adam and of Eve in 1Tim 2:14: “And Adam was not the one deceived; it was the woman who was deceived and became a sinner”.

And he does so again in 2Cor 11:13: “But I am afraid that just as Eve was deceived by the serpent’s cunning, your minds may somehow be led astray from your sincere and pure devotion to Christ”. Here Paul refers to the deception of Eve and then applies it to the Corinthian church, which though a bride, is comprised of both men and women vulnerable to sin.

In Corinthians, the deception of the evil one is paralleled to the danger of deception that one could likewise happen to the Corinthians themselves if they’re not careful. This is a clear reference to salvation history, where Christians are reminded of what has gone before and then called upon to ‘remember' this history and therefore ‘avoid it’.

It’s important that we note that the purpose of the writer here is to draw a distinction between the sin of Adam and that of Eve. This is the real point of 3:13, it is NOT saying that women ‘by nature’ are always ‘easily deceived’.

We also note that it’s true that the words of the woman DO indicate something significant, but it is actually Adam who bears the chief responsibility here in his ‘representative’ capacity.

There's a sinfulness in Adam, which is entirely peculiar to him. It’s not that the woman hasn’t sinned for clearly she has, but Adam stands as the representative of our race. It is Adam who receives the word of God in the garden while the woman was yet to be formed (2:16,cf Acts 17:26). Adam receives the word of God in his representative capacity, and it is therefore his sin that seals the fall of humanity.

1 Cor 15 picks up this reality as it relates to a renewed image for humanity, recreated by the new ‘Adam’, the Christ. In vs47 we find the first Adam, ‘of the dust of the earth,’ contrasted with the new Adam, the last Adam, Jesus the ‘man from heaven’, in whom we now bear His image. Rom 5 describes humanity as now existing in two possible states. We are either ‘in Adam’ or ‘Adamites’, or we are ‘in Christ’.

Consequences of the fall: East of Eden:

* We find both man and woman suffering the terrible indignity of banishment from Eden (v24) and re-entry into Eden forever barred from them. The original ‘image bearers’ are thoroughly punished for their rebellion against God and death befalls both as the wages of their sin.

* A ‘particular’ punishment is also given to each. Each one is given an indignity of pain in a peculiar way to each. For the woman, pain is in childbearing (v16), joy that will also carry with it pain and suffering as a reminder that she is living under the judgment of God. So too, will be her power struggle with her own husband, a 'desire/rule’.

Is this a distorted desire? …possibly? A desire to rule over him?... possibly? But whatever the right reading, what is clear is that there will be a punishment of tremendous marital discord. There will forever be trouble, pain and suffering in their relationship.

For the man there will be pain in work, there will be pain and suffering in his efforts to bring things to life. And the punishment that ultimately he is doomed to return to the dust he came from (v17-19). Death is an end to the curse of life toil as we have lived it.

As we move into chapter 4 of Genesis it becomes clear what life is like for humanity under the curse. The pain and suffering of Adam and Eve is passed on to their children, and so down through the rest of humanity.

God’s grace for the disgraced:

And yet, as we read this devastating chapter we also find…

* The Lord seeking Adam and Eve out in the cool of the garden (v8). Even knowing the truth God does not abandon them. He does not bring about their immediate destruction.

* v20 God names her ‘Eve’ the “mother of all living” (1Cor 11) indicating that there will be a future for this guilty pair.

* The Lord also makes garments for them and ‘clothes’ them (v21). By doing this he has not taken away their ‘shame’ (2:25, 3:7-11) for only the cross can truly cover their shame.

As a prelude to the work of the cross there are clothes provided for them so that Adam and Eve didn’t have to walk around in their shame and nakedness. These ‘skins’ are a sign that God has not finished with them.

Before, Adam and Eve lived under God’s ‘common grace’, now they live under his grace to the thoroughly undeserving, just as we do today.

* In the promise to the serpent in v15 we also see a word of hope. From the offspring of the woman would come the victory of God and the triumph over evil.

* Image is not lost but retained, though defaced (Col 3:9-10).

* Adam’s name is not lost either, for Jesus himself is then called the ‘Son of Adam’ (Lk 3:38).

The New Adam:

* Through the ‘Son of Adam’ humanity is to learn the proper way of relationships. Headship must be exercised for the proper benefit of the other (Eph 5). The N.T passages call upon men as men to exercise headship in a way that reflects the true Adam, that is, Christ.

* For Eve, the ‘mother of all living’ (Gen 3:15) she is given the privilege of being a model for the church. The son who died for her- the ‘bride of Christ’ is her model. We also see that from a virgin woman comes a Saviour (Lk 1:34f), thereby exalting woman, for from her will come the one who will finally crush the serpents head (Lk 1:48, Heb 2:14).

To Conclude:

It is clear that both man and woman are to partner each other in living for Christ in righteousness and holiness. And what is that work that we are to do together?

- to be fruitful and multiply

- to rule the world for the benefit of the world

- to live in the good works we are called upon to walk in day by day (e.g. to rule the world by the good works of prayer, the greatest work we can do to fulfill our ‘image bearing’ role in the world. Col 3:5-11).

GEN 1-3: ‘Image Bearers In Grace’:

2011-02-18T22:23:00.013+11:00

This post and the one following are brief 'notes' taken from Peter Jensen’s 2 opening talks at the launch of Moore College’s Priscilla and Aquila Foundation.

PRELUDE:

Complementarianism is the biblical orthodox view that needs to be explained and addressed in our new culture; there is a painful disjunction between the Bible and the community. If it is Biblical we will be serving the community.

OVERTURE: Gen 1-3:

Gen 1-3 is a profound passage in the scriptures. It is the beginning of a great journey that will shape what follows. Gen 1-3 sets the journey going; it’s the place we look to gather where we are going, much like rowing in boat, we take our direction from looking behind.

But it is not THE journey as such, for there is so much more to come.

So WHAT is Gen 1-3? And HOW should we read it?

* As a proto-history with symbolic naturalism? As a theological polemic against naturalism?

But Gen 1-3 is theocentric before it is anthropocentric.

It is about God before it is about us. Who is he? What has he done? Why has he done it?

And it touches on a myriad of other things…

-it deals with the nature of work

-the origin of sin

-God’s judgement

-other gods

-creation …etc

* Gen 1-3 is also part of a story not just a philosophical snapshot; and as such it has movement in it.

Therefore, the key to reading it is within the larger context of the whole of scripture. Scripture gives us the Holy Spirit’s interpretation (eg. we find Jesus’ teaching in Matt 19 on marriage and divorce as it relates to the original intention found in Gen 1-3. Here Jesus takes the hearers back to the fundamentals of these chapters as the context for thinking about divorce. In looking back on Gen 1-3 Jesus reinforces the ‘principle’ of marriage in Matt 19 i.e. the commitment to marriage as something intended to be permanent and life long).

* So, how do you intend to listen to scripture?

Will we recognise God as our creator and humans as his dependant creation? Will I submit to God’s rule? His kingdom? His word? His trust? trusting in His wisdom?

To listen to the Word of God, to listen with a ‘faith that obeys’.

IMAGE BEARERS: GEN 1-2: ‘STANDING IN GRACE’:

A: WHO IS ADAM?

* Gen 1:26: “Let us make man in our image, in our likeness,

and let them rule over the fish of the sea

and the birds of the air, over the livestock,

over all the earth,and over all the creatures

that move along the ground.”

We note that Adam is not named, rather the title ‘Adam’ is being used as a generic title for ‘humankind’. (cf 5:1-2 “he called them ‘man’ or ‘Adam’). The title points to a role that he has been given, a unique role, a ‘singularity’ if you like.

And the ‘image’ language used here is meant to show the uniqueness of this humankind, a term not given to the plants or the animals. There is uniqueness to the human being. A preciousness to God, and therefore we are to understand that there is a preciousness to all of us.
It sets a protective circle around mankind, around men and women, and this is the case even after the fall (9:6).

The image language also points to the sovereignty of human beings over the world in which we live. We rule as God rules over his creation, we rule under God’s authority and rule.

So, to summarise: these are the 2 elements of the ‘image’ language: uniqueness and rule.

* Gen 2:5: “and no shrub of the field had yet appeared on the earth

and no plant of the field had yet sprung up,

for the LORD God had not sent rain on the earth

and there was no man to work the ground…”

Here we find that the created earth cannot fulfill its potential without its ‘image bearing man’. It demonstrates that part of the continued blessing of God on the world is the ministry of man.

*Gen 2:7: “the LORD God formed the manfrom the dust of the ground and breathed

into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living being”.

Adam is created from dust. He is NOT the creator but a living creature entirely dependent on the God who created him. And Adam, so created, is to ‘work and guard the garden’ (2:15), he is called to exercise his ‘dominion’ by ‘caring’ for it. Here the man is entirely under the rule of the word of God. Listening to, and obeying God’s word is part of his role.

* Gen 2:18: “The LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone.

I will make a helper suitable for him.”

The words ‘not good’ are a comment on the arrangement that man should be ‘alone’. He is described as ‘incomplete’. Not emotionally, but for the job he's been given (i.e. filling the earth and subduing it). He cannot tend and care for the garden 'alone', or on his own. The point here, is that Adam cannot fulfill his potential without ‘another’ beside him.

* Gen 2:19-20: “Now the LORD God had formed out of the ground all the beasts of the field and all the birds of the air. He brought them to the man to see what he would name them; and whatever the man called each living creature, that was its name…”.

Adam names the animals as part of the work he’s been given to do.
Here we all own Adam and from him we all come.

B: WHO IS EVE?

* Gen 1:26-27: “So God created man in his own image,  

in the image of God he created him;  

male and female he created them”. V27.

Eve likewise, is also created in the ‘image of God’, and, as with Adam, she is equally and uniquely precious to God. She is also equally and uniquely involved in the task of ruling the world under God.

* Gen 2:18: “The LORD God said, “It is not good for the man to be alone. I will make a helper suitable for him” (or, ‘fit’ or ‘corresponding to’ him).

What does it mean that God made a ‘suitable helper’?

The reference to needing a helper here is really a word about Adam rather than Eve. It shows the 'incompleteness' of Adam i.e. his inadequacy in the task he's been given without Eve. Nothing hierarchical is in the word.

The reference ‘suitable’ or ‘fit for him’, signifies someone who is- ‘not the same as’. One who will NOT be IDENTICAL with him (as with a duplicate, as with another man), but one who will share his essential being.

The woman is essentially always ‘one with man’, equally made in God’s image and equally partaking in man’s full humanity.

In their humanity there will also be no confusion of the sexes, for they are made ‘male and female’. These are the principles set down in the creation, they are both one in full and complete humanity, where the woman is not the same as him, but they are distinctly male and female.

So, are all women helpers by role or by nature?

Yes, in the sense that all men are incomplete without women FOR the task God has given. ‘Helper’ applies to women here in the context of men not being able to rule 'alone' (and this is especially in the task of ‘fruitfulness’, or ‘filling the earth’).

We also see that both the man and woman are not alien to each other, for unlike Adam, she does not come ‘from the dust’ but is taken from ‘his side’. Thus indicating a prior unity, and an ongoing unity. Men and women are not a different species from each other, but like man, women are distinctly separate from the animals, just as he is.

Nor is she just a friend. She complements the man; she does not just repeat him.
The man recognizes her with joy as ‘from him' and ‘with’ him.

She is also to be seen as essential to the task of mankind. Men and women are to treat each other uniquely, women are not to disappear from social constructs, rather, she is to work with him, especially in the procreative element of ruling.

Does man’s naming of her reflect order?

It is likely to be the case, but this is not so much the teaching of the passage, but rather the underlying assumption. The man does have a unique responsibility (and authority, for authority comes out of responsibility).

Is there a difference in responsibility in the role of the man and the woman?

This also fits the N.T passages, where the N.T makes a theological point out of the priority of man in 1Tim, and also out of the source of the woman in 1Cor 11. Here we see that theological weight is given to the man’s priority in creation and the woman’s source of creation being from the man.

* The next post will be Peter’s second talk: ‘Image Bearers in Disgrace’:

Gender Complementarity: Reflections on the controversy

2011-02-14T10:55:00.000+11:00

It was a great joy to sit under the teaching of John Woodhouse and Peter Jensen at last weeks launch of the Priscilla and Aquila Foundation.

If you are a regular reader, you will know that part of the purpose of this blog is to continue to think about the area of complementarity in male female relationships.

To this end, I have included the bulk of the transcript from John Woodhouse’s opening remarks from the launch. The rest of the text can be found here on the MTC website.

John Woodhouse’s opening remarks…

For some years “Gender Complementarity” has been included in the formal statement of the “Values” held by Moore College:

“affirming… the fundamental equality and mutual dependence of men and women as image bearers of God, while recognising proper differences in roles and responsibilities in life and Christian ministry”.

Of course this position needs to be explained more fully than that, it may need to be re-examined, perhaps reformulated, probably defended. Its goodness and value need to be investigated and its practical implications worked out. The Centre will be doing all this, but in a less defensive way than may have been necessary in the past.

REFLECTIONS ON THE CONTROVERSY

However we do not pretend that the controversy is over. In evangelical Christian circles disagreements about men’s and women’s relationships and roles continues to be deeply felt and difficult.

a. The revolution and its aftermath:

This is largely because we are living through a time and in a culture that is still working out the consequences of a social revolution that has been going on in the West since (let us say) the 1960’s. It included the so-called Feminist or women’s liberation movement, the sexual revolution, (and much more). It has involved massive changes in thinking about such things as marriage, family, parenthood, as well as a radical challenge to traditional gender-based expectations of men and women in family, society and the workplace.

Younger members of our churches have grown up and been educated after the revolution and in a world where thinking, attitudes and values are radically different from those of their grandparents. A young Christian married couple today will almost certainly be aware that their own marriage and family are being conducted very differently from the families in which they grew up – certainly very differently from the families in which their parents grew up.

b. Evaluating the revolution:

How do we evaluate what has happened in this social revolution?

It is complicated.

There were, for example, undoubtedly ways in which women were treated unfairly (and worse) – of which we now feel we are more aware.

Changes have come to our society that it is very difficult not to welcome.

In many ways I do not believe we would want to go back as a society and culture. Many of us who are aware of what has happened find it difficult to be too critical of the revolution.

And yet – it is also difficult to think that the outcome of the revolution has been all that might have been hoped. Men and women still hurt one another in many ways. As a society we seem more, not less, confused about marriage and family and parenthood.

Did the revolution bring us to a “better place” –when all is considered?

I am not at all sure it did

Without pretending that the past was a golden age – it was not – I am not convinced that we haven’t exchanged one set of problems for another –and actually still have many of the old ones. Selfishness continues to wreck relationships. Personal ambition continues to derail lives. Power continues to be used for the benefit of the powerful. Un-self-centred concern for others is as rare as it has ever been.

Is it not as foolish to think that today’s culture is “enlightened” and wholesome, as it is to imagine that everything was wonderful in the 1950’s?

c. Christians after the revolution:

It is hardly surprising, then, that when we Christians today consider areas of life that involve the relationships between men and women (whether marriage, family, parenthood, church, ministry –and more) we do not find it easy.

Let me caricature our experience a little…

Some Christians open their Bibles and think that they can see an endorsement of some aspects of the revolution and the relatively enlightened times in which we now live: concern for justice, for the dignity and value of all people, which is only enhanced for all who are one in Christ Jesus, all sons of God.

The gracious Lordship of Jesus Christ under whom we all – equally – are servants, brothers and sisters together, breaks down all the barriers, so that there is now not Jew and Greek, nor slave and free, nor male and female, for we are all one in Christ Jesus.

Committed to that vision, can we not see that the social revolution of the last half-century has overcome in society to some real degree and in some striking aspects some of those things that needed to be overcome.

In church life there is nothing commendable about social conservatism for its own sake. We want to be at least as good as the society about us in issues of fairness and justice and treating one another properly. We feel decidedly uncomfortable with church practices that seem to belong to another age –practices that seem to care less about fairness and equality than our society does. Is it not, frankly, embarrassing to belong to a church that seems to treat women as second-class members?

Other Christians open their Bibles and think that they see the revolution in very different terms. It has been an attempt to live by one rule: freedom: freedom in sex, freedom in relationships, freedom in every aspect of life –freedom from any external constraints on any of us – so long as we do not hurt anyone else. That has been the spirit of the revolution (as these Christians see it).

But these Christians see the word of God requiring a certain good order in human sexual behaviour, an order in the relationship between husband and wife, parent and child, man and woman. To the extent that the revolution has represented the overthrowing of that order it has represented rebellion against God.

It has been a human bid for freedom from God. It is all very well (these Christians think) to pick and choose some elements of the revolution that look virtuous, and match them with some elements in the Bible. But the bid for freedom, if it is a bid for freedom from God, is a disaster from beginning to end.

It seems to me that this is a reasonable picture of the confusion that is still with us.

d. Thinking about differences:

Although our new Centre does not intend to re-run the debates of recent decades, we will be aware of the differences that still exist in our fellowship.

How should we think about those differences?

To those of us who have come to a so-called Complementarian understanding of the issues, I want to say:

Let us take care to recognise the true and good motivations of those who disagree with us here. See and be glad when brothers and sisters care about justice and righteousness, when they are disturbed by men who seem to think they are superior to women, or by women being treated as less important, valuable, or significant than men. When brothers and sisters react against traditional ways, because they see a history of oppression and ill-treatment, take care to appreciate this.

Furthermore, be slow to think that a brother or sister cares less than you do about being faithful to God’s Word. Of course if this is the case, it is very serious and needs to be talked about. But be very careful. Let us be slow to assume that only we (and those who agree with us) care about God’s Word.

One reason our differences have been so hard to deal with is the impression sometimes given that the so-called “Complementarian” side thinks that those who differ do not care about Biblical authority – OR those who differ imagine that so-called “Complementarians” think that.

To those on the other side of the controversy, I want to say this. Take care to recognise the true and good motivations of those with whom you disagree. See and be glad when brothers and sisters care about faithfulness to God’s Word, who approach God’s Word with the assumption that what we find there is good – no matter what the world may think.

When brothers and sisters believe God’s Word more than they believe the voice of their culture, when they work very hard to see their culture through the lens of God’s Word rather than the other way around – take care to appreciate this. When they will not conform to the values of today’s world for the sake of looking good in the eyes of the world, do not judge them as the world judges them.

Furthermore, be slow to adopt a sense of moral patronising superiority, thinking that a brother or sister cares less than you do about justice and fairness and the proper treatment of people. Of course if this is the case, it is very serious and needs to be talked about. But be very careful. Be slow to assume that only you (and those who agree with you) are on the high moral ground of concern for justice.

A second reason that our differences have been hard to deal with is the impression sometimes given that the so-called “Egalitarian” side thinks that they are morally superior, and those who differ are less concerned for justice and fairness and the right treatment of people – OR those who differ imagine that “Egalitarians” think that.

* My next blog post will include my own notes taken from the 2 keynote talks by Peter Jensen.

My Photo Culture: 'My Love Is The Sea...'

2011-01-10T20:44:00.007+11:00

" We're adrift on a sailboat,

My love is the sea...

Yours is the horizon,

Constant... and steady.

You set my limbs locked hard afloat...

Lifted my lonesome sails,

The tide is out,

the moon is high,

We're sailing.

Darling, your love is healing,

It makes the bitter, sweet ...

Warms the winter to spring again,

Secures the colds defeat.

We're cutting anchor,

Casting out -
into the glorious deep ...

The tide is out,

the moon is high...

We're sailing ".

-Brooke Fraser: 'Sailboats'-