Danny Nalliah. My brother in Christ, minister with ‘Catch the Fire Ministries’ (who recently won a Federal court case against the Islamic Council of Victoria), recently forwarded an email that’s been making the rounds outside of his own circles. It’s an interesting read for a number of reasons, primarily because he says that if you vote Labor in the upcoming federal election you’re (essentially) not a Christian. How else would you read these words?

If you still say ‘I will vote Labor’ that is your choice. That’s the freedom we enjoy in a democracy, but I must say you definitely cannot be a Christian who has a proper relationship with Jesus if you vote this way.

There’s been a few other unhelpful emails flying around Christian networks – or I assume they are flying around primarily because I’ve received them a number of times from various sources. I classify them as unhelpful for a variety of reasons, but chief among them is the assumption that Julia Gillard’s atheism makes her unfit to be Prime Minister of a ‘Christian Nation’.
Now, here’s where I’d like to point to a couple of more helpful thoughts on the upcoming election.
First there is my college friend and coffee-dealer Nathan Campbell. He asks some good questions and links to otherhelpfularticles from well thought out Christians. He also raises questions on why an Atheist should not hold office in a democratically elected Parliament, making the insightful point that when Paul tells the Roman Christians that all governments are placed there by God he had in mind one of the most anti-Christian governments in history, the Roman Empire.
Second there is Simone Richardson who has raised some good questions in regards to the ‘Christian Values Checklist’. Here’s her thoughts:
  1. Many items on this list are not Christian values at all. Take #22 – ‘Oppose all illicit drugs and fund abstinence based rehabilitation’. Why is abstinence based rehab the Christian way? Is God opposed to methadone programs? Or #21. Christians have different views on the charter of rights. Or #10 – Why should same sex relationships not be registered? Or #7 with the education voucher things?
  2. The list is disproportionately obsessed with issues of sex and reproduction. 11 items!
  3. The re-writing of Australia’s history required for #2 sounds a bit silly. Didn’t think we had much of a christian heritage.
  4. All of the parties get a tick for ‘support greater care of God’s environment’. Do they really want to care more for the environment? Are they all willing to make the costly and unpopular decisions that may be necessary? Certain parties that got the tick for this one voted against the ETS and don’t believe in global warming. A much softer line seems to be taken on this than on any other item on the list.
  5. The biggest problem with this list is not what it says, but what it leaves unsaid. The things (apart from repentence and faith) that God has told us he cares about most are not on the list. What about showing respect for the elderly? the poor? the sick? the outcast (refugees…)

She’s then posted her own version of a Christian Values Checklist (admittedly incomplete and skewed) but with surprising results.

Third there is this fantastic interview with Sydney Anglican Archbishop Peter Jensen on the upcoming election and the role that faith (for voters and Politicians) plays. It’s a lengthy interview but here are some interesting snippets:
Peter Jensen: The thing that impresses me about the two who are leading up our respective larger parties at the moment is how similar they are. That may sound odd to you.
Monica Attard: How are they similar?
Peter Jensen: They’re Aussies. They’re Australians. They’re passionately committed.
Mr Abbott shows his commitment very strongly. But I wouldn’t think if you ran a commitment-o-meter over the two of them you would find the same thing.
Furthermore they’re committed to much the same things, and many of those things are good things. So the first task of government is to provide justice. I believe they’re both committed to justice.
And there’s many ways we have a choice between two goods. And I think we need to recognise that. Yes, there are differences. Of course there are, thank goodness for that. And there will be differences of party philosophy. But there’s a lot of similarity, too.
Monica Attard: Now, three out of four Australians identify themselves as being affiliated with Christianity, though only around fifteen per cent, I believe, of those people attend weekly church services. Do Christians necessarily vote from the viewpoint of faith, do you think?
Peter Jensen: Yes, we do. And fortunately in Australia it is perfectly possible, even across the range of options, to vote from faith and to vote differently. You cannot say to a Christian in Australia I think you must vote for such and such a person. It’s a matter of balance. You will work out which way you want to go.
There are certain things about the genius of the Liberal Party which are very attractive to Christianity, there are certain things about the genius of the Labor Party that are very attractive to Christianity, because they both come from Christian sources.
Monica Attard: And you’re not concerned having a Christian lobby participate in the political process so directly is kind of tearing down that whispering wall between religion and politics?
Peter Jensen: We’re pretty robust in this area. One of the ways in which we have got on with each other is for Christian leaders, on the whole, not to reveal voting preferences, and certainly not to urge people to vote one way or the other.
I would hope never to do that. And I would hope nothing I would say would favour one side or the other. That’s how we’ve got on and it’s a good system.
It means that the unfair advantage that a church may have is not brought to bear on the voting system. And we recognise the worth of both major parties, for example. That’s worked over the years.
The difficulty is, however, that now that Christians – active Christians – make a minority of the population, active Christians want to know more about what parties are saying. And the ACL operates as a group to bring to the surface what parties are actually saying, and to create a sense of accountability by the parties to Christian people.
Could it go too far? Well, not yet. But we need to keep an eye on it.
Monica Attard: At what point would it make you feel uncomfortable?
Peter Jensen: Oh, I think if the Australian Christian Lobby or any group, any church, actually said, oh, in this current federal election, Christians, you must vote for this party.
I think as Australians we’ve been through some difficult times. The dismissal of Mr Rudd I think caused a shiver of apprehension about the nature of Australian life and politics. I can’t feel that it was well done, though those in position felt it should be done.
But God be thanked that, whatever happens after this election, that we will have an Australian who can lead this country as prime minister.
So who am I voting for? I’ve yet to make a decision yet (I’m generally a swing voter) and I’m hoping that better (more interesting?) policies come out soon. Until then, I’ll be doing my research on the candidates and trust that our sovereign God will take care of his church no matter what.

Categories:

Comments are closed