been struck down by the 'flu this week and only now managing to get my head back above water (more or less). it's definitely not a pleasant place to be, but the bright side is that it forced me to catch up on some sleep, though even that would have been much better if 'the little one' (freya - 18 mths old tomorrow) hadn't had her own health/sleep issues. she's had a runny nose for several weeks, which obviously affects her sleep because of breathing problems. over the weekend it got so bad, though, that the mucous was seeping through to her eyes and crusting them up. not really an issue when she was sleeping, and apparently not painful, but a bit distressing when her eyes were so 'crusted up' that she couldn't open them when she woke up, and she wasn't too impressed when mum & dad tried to clean them up either. then yesterday afternoon she got really listless and had a high temperature so it seems she's caught the flu from me, the poor thing. thankfully we have an excellent doctor (who’s also a homeopath), and he's given us some good remedies, and freya was already noticeably improved by the evening, and slept quite well (relatively speaking) last night.
speaking of family (how's that for a segue), one of the hot topics around aussie blogs in relation to the election is the Family First party (a handful of posts, which include links to articles and other blogs on the subject, from the saint here, here, here, here and here; also this from backyardmissionary, which has a comment with a link to this blog by a member of the hawkesbury aog church). at the church we've started attending (though still spasmodically), a couple of people, including the service leader (not the pastor, who wasn't present), made statements on sunday in support of Family First. i actually found it quite offensive – not the content of what they said, but the fact that they endorsed a particular political party from the front, with the inherent authority that carries, in effect telling the people present how they should vote.
i suppose the assumption is that a voting christian should vote for a christian party. the irony with Family First is of course that they vehemently deny the 'christian party' tag (as much, one wonders, as an atheistic party would?), though they have very strong ties to the australian Assemblies of God evangelical/pentecostal denomination. obviously the first question is, regardless of whether or not the party is christian/religious, if the individuals themselves are christian, what kind of image is it sending to be dishonest and dissembling in the face of media questions on the aog links. this is what you would (sadly) expect from politicians, but hopefully not from christians, or does the former take precedence in this case, the ends (seats in parliament) justifying the means?
for me this illustrates the more fundamental question, which is whether a christian can or should be a politician at all, because of the self-promotion, dissembling, dishonesty and power-seeking which seem requisite with that job. is it possible to be a successful politician and be a follower of jesus, with the attributes of complete honesty and integrity, seeking to be the last instead of the first, the servant instead of the lord, taking the lowest seat instead of the place of honour, always promoting others instead of ourselves. call me naive or ignorant, but it would seem to me that these things are completely at odds with a life in politics in a modern day democracy.
it is a human desire to want to influence the way one's country is run, wanting the 'values' (getting really sick of that word) one believes in to be universally upheld. the first question must be, even if one legislates one's values, does that mean they will be accepted by the people? of course not, but does it matter? isn't it good enough that it is the law, so those who disagree must abide by it anyway? but isn't the point of christianity the changing of mind and heart? isn't this what we want for all the people? would not legislating our 'values' be counter-productive to this endeavour, creating resistance in those who do not appreciate being bludgeoned into acquiesence? do we really believe changing behaviour will lead to changing of the heart and mind? the great tragedy is that, at least from what you see and hear in most churches, this is exactly what christians believe...
my basic philosophy in relation to democratic politics is that the way to change what politicians do and decide is to change the people. politicians are obviously part of the population, and by and large reflect and pander to the will of the people, basically because that's the only way to get elected. though i don't believe democracy is inherently christian, this tenet of changing the people instead of seeking political power would seem to me to be congruent with christian principles.
though god at times (at least in the old testament) used nations to carry out his justice on other nations (which is nothing to be proud of), i think he's mostly indifferent about who has political power. what he's more interested in is how his people live, and living as a community according to his commands, pursuing justice and relief for the oppressed, cannot help but be a political act, highlighting and critiquing the nation's laws where they are unjust and oppressive. this is the way that i believe christians are called to change their world.
1 comment:
I kind of like the idea that Christians should just get on with the business of looking after the poor and the sick and the lonely. Letting governments do it was OK when 99% of the population called themselves Christians. Now that we are at a point when that is no longer so, we need to remember that they only ever really did it as proxies for the Church. It is our responsibility first and foremost, not the government's. If the church remembered its responsibilities it would have the street cred to change stuff.
Did you know the family first candidate in Vic told us that he would like all the mosques and masonic halls removed from the state. Hmmm. Also, if you vote for the Christian Democrats your preference goes to the 4wd party. Hmmm.
Bobby C - Long retired frisbee chaser.
Post a Comment