Pentecostal Discussions

Western Values

Further to my earlier post on Sider and simplicity - sometimes a cartoon speaks more than words.  Here is one from Phil Somerville (from his book "I am Moderately Fond of Australia, Hardie Grant Books, 2001)

Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger

by Shane Clifton

Given the assumption of my series thus far (see here, here, and here), that addressing the situation of global poverty is central to the mission of the church in proclaiming the kingdom of God, the question that then arises is a practical one.  How should this mission to the poor be framed?  What should we do and say, as both individuals, local churches and global movements, that might be said to be an appropriate response to both Jesus’ priority for the poor and the needs of the contemporary situation?

Perhaps the most obvious response, at least for those Christians in wealthy nations, is the assertion that rich Christians should pursue a simpler lifestyle in order to give generously to the poor and, thereby, promote a more just distribution of the Worlds resources.  Representative of this argument is the now classic text by Ronald J. Sider, Rich Christians in an Age of Hunger.[1]  Describing the plight of our “billion hungry neighbours,” as well as setting out a biblical perspective on the poor and possessions, Sider challenges Western materialism and provides a compelling argument for plain living and, thereafter, expansive giving.  Concerned particularly with the problem of the distribution of the world’s resources, he provides practical suggestions for ways that rich Christians (understood to include almost all Christians in wealthy nations) can spend less and give more; the graduated tithe, strict budgeting, reduced spending on consumables, use of public transport, second hand purchasing, gardening to reduce food budgets, and community living.[2]

As much as i appreciate the prophetic challenge of Sider's work, i confess i have major economic problems with this argument.  However, i reckon its best if i leave the matter for your response first.

---

[1] {Sider 1977 #4080}.

[2] {Sider 1977 #4080}, 149-162.

War: Robert Fisk: The Age of Terror

Patrik Hagman, from God in a Shrinking Universe, has recently brought to our attention a challenging and bleak report from Robert Frisk on the Age of Terror (click here).  In the light of our recent discussions on war, it is worth taking the time to read.

War & Peace 3: The Just War Theory

by Stephen Wall

First of all, before I begin, I would like to convey my initial thought on the phrase “A Just War”. A question arises when I hear the phrase spoken. Can war actually be just? As humanity, are we capable of making a just judgement completely free of any kind of bias towards our own end? It is my opinion that this simply is not possible – every war that has ever been fought has its own agenda in sight, for it is humanity’s sinful nature that causes war.[1] It is then my proposition that one cannot have a truly “just war”, however I do believe that war may be justified if it meets various principles or scenarios and these need to be met before a nation can engage in it.

Below is a link to a clip I watched that some might be interested in. I found it fascinating as it told a story that was not told in mainline news and it forced me to ask the question. How can we make a correct judgement to what is right in going to war if we are fed lies and political propaganda?

http://www.informationliberation.com/?id=10211 

http://www.vheadline.com/readnews.asp?id=66951

War & Peace 2 - Middle Ground

by Caroline Quek

When it comes to the topic on War, a Christian’s response usually supports the view of either just war or pacifism. The aim of this article is to investigate the possibility of having a ‘middle ground’, thus challenging some of the mindsets on war and peace. However, this task may seem impossible, as the terms ‘just war’ and ‘pacifism’ seem to be on opposing ends. Instead of launching into the exploration of the two opposites (where each define itself against the other), perhaps it is helpful for us to start on a positive note by looking at some commonalities.

“Christians do not all agree about the practical consequences of Christ’s teaching regarding war but no Christian disagrees about Christ’s longing for a world committed to peace and justice.[1]”

In all that we disagree with, we can agree on the ‘principle’ driving our actions and that is striving towards a world of peace and justice (although our definitions of it may vary). It is interesting to note how the longing to fulfill a common purpose can result in such extreme views! The attitudes of the just war and pacifism are not rooted in different views of God, and only to a degree in different views of humanity, because of the recognition of the depravity of humanity[2].

War and Peace 1 - Pacifism

by Nicholas Mogensen

“Total abstention from violence is the only moral option for born-again Christian”. This posting will examine the evidence for the pacifist stance by investigation of Biblical precepts, the example of Jesus and of history. Attention will be given to opposing camps of thought, namely those advocating “necessary war” and “just war” to demonstrate that these positions are untenable for the faithful believer.

Insensitive reading of the OT[1] scriptures has led many to adopt the approach that war and violence are justifiable. Advocates here amplify Israel's history of atrocious warring, which is ostensibly the will of God. Two brief points that undermine this view are worthy consideration[2]. Firstly, Christians would unanimously disagree with the OT approach to war (cf. Josh 10:40, 1 Sam 15:1-3) Secondly, the theological theme underpinning OT warfare is that the battle is God’s, and not by the strength of his people. Note that often Israel received victory without the help of force[3]. In this light, the OT God is seen to despise human warfare, an attitude further exemplified by His Son, Jesus Christ[4]

Even Christian proponents of war would agree that Christ was a pacifist. Jesus exemplified a radical agapeic love that encompassed all humanity, a love that opposed retribution and violence. When Peter sought to use violence to protect the life of his Lord, Christ ordered him to desist and then healed the ear of the high priest’s servant. In response to shameful treatment, he called not on heavenly hosts or loyal followers to fight for him, rather accepting without murmur torture and death at men’s hands for their own sake. He taught that one must love ones neighbour[5], then radically extended neighbourliness beyond ethnic, religious or national boundaries[6]. His pacifism was costly, but it achieved the most revolutionary victory in history. Christians cannot but emulate his example[7].

Why has the church ignored the poor?

by Shane Clifton

We need to answer the question about how to help the poor – but before we do, we need to determine whether ministry to the poor is part of the church’s mission.  At first glance, it might seem to be self-evident that the church has a responsibility to the poor.  It is somewhat disheartening, however, to discover that religion, in general, and Christianity in particular, has been described as part of the problem; as something that needs to be put aside if the challenge of poverty is to be finally addressed.  As Karl Marx famously argued:

The social principles of Christianity justified the slavery of Antiquity, glorified the serfdom of the Middle Ages and equally know, when necessary, how to defend the oppression of the proletariat, although they make a pitiful face over it. The social principles of Christianity preach the necessity of a ruling and an oppressed class, and all they have for the latter is the pious wish the former will be charitable. The social principles of Christianity transfer the consistorial councillor’s adjustment of all infamies to heaven and thus justify the further existence of those infamies on earth. The social principles of Christianity declare all vile acts of the oppressors against the oppressed to be either the just punishment of original sin and other sins or trials that the Lord in his infinite wisdom imposes on those redeemed (1).

Extreme Poverty

by Shane Clifton

In the previous post i commented on the global poverty in terms of income.  The issue is that low incomes translates itself into untold sufffering of various dimensions. Here are some more terrible statistics from the HDR.

More than 10 million children die each year before the age of five, and more than 98% of these live in poor countries.  As the report notes, “they die because of where they are born,” a matter that is especially disturbing given that almost all “of these deaths could be prevented by simple, low-cost interventions.”[1]  In some countries more than 50% of children are considered to be underweight for their age, with more than 850 million people worldwide suffering the deleterious effects of malnutrition, which in turn makes them vulnerable to ill health and disease.  HIV/AIDS has had a particularly brutal impact on some countries, with infection rates in certain African nations exceeding 15% of the population.[2]  The effects of malnutrition and disease are exacerbated by the fact that “more than 1 billion people lack access to safe water and 2.6 billion lack access to improved sanitation.”[3]  Taken altogether, these interrelated dimensions of poverty pursue people throughout their lives, so that citizens of the worlds poorest 32 countries can expect to live an average of less than 46 years.  In Sub-Saharan Africa, people born in nations such as Zambia have a life expectancy of as little as 37 years,[4] a figure that is less than half of the average 80 year lifespan of citizens living in the world’s wealthiest nations. 

Global Poverty

by Shane Clifton

Sorry i have been ofline for a while (blogs are hard things to keep up to date).  I have been doing some writing with Professor Neil Ormerod on globalisation, and currently am addressing the situation of global poverty.  Without making any prescriptions or responses - the statistics themselves are fascinating:

According to the United Nations Development Program Human Development Report, more than 1 billion people survive (or don’t survive) on less that $1US a day.[1]  The figure at least stands as an indication of the almost overwhelming extent of poverty in the world.  Given that a further 1.5 billion people live on a mere $1-$2 per day, the challenge of the present age is the fact that more than 40% off the worlds population are subject to the consequences of extreme poverty.[2]  The moral reprehensibility of this poverty is clarified when it is considered in terms of global inequality.  One of the more oft-cited indicators of the magnitude of global income disparity is the fact that the wealthiest 500 people have a combined income that exceeds that of the poorest 416 million.  But this disparity extends to more than just the super wealthy.  Indeed, the richest 10% of the world’s population, which includes the majority of people in more prosperous nations, earn over 50% of global income.[3]

There is more to come - but this should be enough to get you thinking. 

---

[1] United Nations Development Program, Human Development Report 2005 (New York: United Nations  Development Program, 2005), 3.

[2] United Nations Development Program, Human Development Report 2005, 24.

[3] United Nations Development Program, Human Development Report 2005, 4.

Christianity and Politics - Kevin Rudd

by Shane Clifton - Citing Kevin Rudd

On the weekend, Mark Hutchinson and I attended the Australian Christian Heritage Forum at parliament house in Canberra.  It was a fascinating experience, gathering with prominant historians, politicians, church leaders and Christian professionals for the sake of reflecting on the extent to which Christianity has contributed to Australian society.  The point was not simply to contemplate a lost past, but to consider our "heritage" - what was described as useful history; that dimension of our history that will shape the values and direction of our future.

Mark and I will post some reflections on the forum later, but for now i thought it might be fun to get some response to the paper presented by Kevin Rudd, Christianity, the Australian Labor Party and current challenges in Australian politics, available at thee following address: http://www.kevinrudd.com/_dbase_upl/060807%20National%20Forum.pdf.   Note this is a partisan paper - and i am not personally advocating a political party.  But his comments are stimulating, particularly his comments on the relation between church and state, so i have set that out below (for full paper, follow the link above).