How I will be explaining yesterday’s “No”

As I anticipated in yesterday’s post about the referendum, the vote was decided in the negative.

Having voted yes, I think it’s not the best (if not bravest) decision. But, as of right now, it’s the path Australia has decided.

So, how am I going to explain the outcome?

How will I explain it to the students in my classroom? 

How will I explain the outcome to my children?

How will I explain it to my grandchildren?

In part, most of my explanation way laid out yesterday.

The government did a woeful job in clearly justifying what they wanted the people to agree to.

The government, in light of history, should never have announced a referendum without bipartisan agreement.

This, of course, leads to the most important element when discussing the result last night…

People voted no on The Voice.

They didn’t vote no on indigenous people.

The idea was rejected.

Not the people primarily affected.

Now, as a white person, I’m not in a place to say how indigenous people feel about the outcome.

I’ve got no doubt that some, even a large portion, of the ATSI population feel jilted about the referendum.

But, nonetheless, this was a rejection of an idea of government.

A poorly explained idea.

And, the people said no.

This is their right in a democracy.

This would be my final point in the explanation.

You don’t have to like the outcome in a democracy.

In fact, quite often you’ll find yourself in the minority after an election.

Unless your political seat is constantly being held by the victorious national and state governments, then your vote probably went to the overall “losers” of the election.

It will happen often over your voting lifetime.

You have to be able to deal with that outcome.

This is how democracy works.

Even if you don’t like the result.

Even if it makes you angry.

Or disappointed.

Democracy is bigger than you.

And democracy is what people have fought for and died defending.

Yesterday what about democracy.

Messy, disagreeable, democracy.

Why I will be voting yes

Tomorrow, Australia has a referendum about the recognition of the indigenous people of the nation, voting to include them in the constitution of our country and installing an advisory body to the government called The Voice.

The offical pamphlet outlining the two positions - yes and no - can be found here.

Tomorrow I’ll be voting yes.

But, initially, I wasn’t going to.

The reason was fairly simple.

The government has done a horrid job in selling the details of The Voice.

In fact, they’ve outright said that they haven’t arranged the details.

And, understandably, this leaves many unanswered questions.

There’s confusion about the nature of The Voice, the makeup of The Voice, the exact powers of The Voice, who The Voice will be able to give advice to, where The Voice will be based, how much The Voice will cost, how The Voice will be able to accurately represent an entire nation of indigenous peoples and how The Voice will effectively “close the gap” in achieving advancement for the indigenous peoples of Australia. These are only some of the questions left up in the air before polling day. 

As I said, the government has done a woeful job of selling the affirmative case.

But, they were always going to be fighting an uphill battle.

For, Australia usually rejects most referendums placed before them (only passing 8 of 44).

Unless there is bipartisan support for a referendum question, the opportunity for the opposition to air any weakness of a referendum proposal instantly get a loud sounding board and a significant portion of the population will be willing to listen.

More so, this negative message can feed into our individual and communal fear of change and aversion to “being told what to do.” Let’s face it, a government only puts forward a proposal if they want to be be passed. That, in itself, can gear some to rebuff the government’s “agenda.”

For the reasons above, I was prepared to vote no.

Until… I seriously considered the first element of the referendum question.

Should we recognise the indigenous peoples in our constitution?

In this, we must vote yes.

That we need a vote at all is embarrassing.

That the oldest surviving culture on the planet requires recognition is a disgrace.

Anyone with a sense of justice or dignity cannot let this go unamended.

In an ideal world, the questions about the recognition and the establishment of The Voice would be divorced. In fact, this is what the opposition are proposing if the negative wins tomorrow and they subsequently get into office.

The first question would canter in, just as the referendum did in 1967 to then include Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders in the census.

The second element of the question is the major sticking point.

So, why am I going to vote yes?

Simply, because giving someone else a louder voice doesn’t lessen my voice.

Especially since I’m a part of the sector of society with the loudest voice. And, this will not change.

Do I know all the answers about The Voice? Definitely not.

Will it fix every problem for our indigenous peoples? Probably not.

But, something needs to change. 

Our indigenous peoples deserve better.

Even if The Voice is a disappointment.

It will be a disappointment which can then be tweaked and, hopefully, improved.

Unfortunately, if the polls hold true, I will be in the minority tomorrow.

And Australia will find itself on the wrong side of history. Not to mention justice.

Why you should do your private business in public

Now that I’m back in the country, I still have some work to do before the next term kicks off.

Just like when I was in ministry, as a teacher, there’s a prevailing idea that there’s a lot of time off.

Those in ministry only work on Sundays…

Youth group only lasts for two hours per week…

Teachers only work 9-3…

Teachers get 12 weeks of holidays per year…

One way to combat this mindset is to do your “hidden” work in public.

Mark papers or do post-youth group admin in the library.

Do term preparation or sermon research in a local cafe.

In doing this “off the clock” work in the eye-line of others, then the mindset that teachers or those in ministry “only work” a limited window of hours may begin to fade away.

How do you effectively do ministry in a basilica?

I just got back from a holiday in Europe, including a ten-day trip to Rome.

Needless to say, I saw a lot of churches and ruins.

Among the 900 alleged places of worship, the majority were very old and very large.

While we were there we saw a few church services - a baptism, wedding and an ordinary church service. Unsurprisingly, none packed out the space.

When your in a hundreds-year-old basilica, capable of holding hundreds of people, the churches were sparsely populated.

Frankly, a similar thing could be said about most Sydney churches on any given Sunday.

But I did wonder how modern ministry would happen in an ancient building?

What challenges would you face in a 1500 year basilica?

For an ancient building even logistical elements like electricity or technology availability would be a challenge.

Of course, very few ancient buildings have a space appropriate for youth or children’s activities.

How do you run an effective ministry to the young in a church full of ancient relics?

How do you keep a church ministry legislative compliant when your ministry is running atop a 500-year-old mosaic or the gravestones of deceased saints?

Is there any space where you could play games without endangering heritage relics (no church appeared to have halls attached to their buildings)?

The more I think about it, the more the challenges arise…

How do you conduct services with a continuous stream of gawking tourists? Surely this couldn’t remain child-protection compliant.

How about the challenge of holding a service in such a vast, but primarily empty, space?

I suppose the secret is to leverage the advantages of such a vast, old, church.

You link heavily to the awe-inspiring nature of the space.

You emphasise the links to centuries of history.

While you may not have a space to play basketball inside, there are no churches in my entire country which are as old or large as many of the churches I entered while in Rome.

Maybe those in Rome would be pondering how you could do effective ministry in a place which doesn’t take your breath away when you enter and isn’t centuries old…

Could a church have a booty-call ministry?

Marriages need time to remain healthy.

Some of that time may result in… adult cuddles.

But, children will encroach on this time.

Obviously.

With this in mind, some churches are willing to provide babysitting so parents can periodically have a date night.

It’s a tremendous idea.

But, what if, instead of seeing a movie or going out for dinner, the parents used the time to… cuddle?

Spoken or unspoken, how would the church respond if this use of a “dating-window” emerged?

Should they be all for it?

Perhaps even encourage it?

Could it be an unofficial booty-call ministry?

I’ve never heard of this ministry actually occurring, but maybe that’s the point. 

You don’t ask. 

You just provide an opportunity…

If you’re passion for pro-life doesn’t align with your passion for pro-birth than your actually an a$$hole

Last week I was asked my opinion on abortion.

As I was walking out the door, I quickly mentioned that, as a contraceptive device, I’m against it.

Nothing too controversial there.

But, I could have gone further.

I could have elaborated on my answer.

I could have said that, with the plethora of better options, a pre planned abortion is a bad idea. It’s potentially harmful. It’s needlessly complicated. Depending on the wishes I’d both sexual parties, it can get immensely messy.

But, I suspect I was actually being asked if I was, as a concept, for or against abortion. 

Of course, the conversation couldn’t have occurred properly due to the mere seconds I had to respond. For example, there was no change to the abortion disclaimer.

If I did have a longer discussion, I’d raise two points.

First, I’d ask if someone’s start of life aligned with their definition of ending life.

Brain function? Heartbeat? Independent survival?

If these are your markers for continuing living, then how do these compare with your stance on abortion?

More so, if anyone is pro-life, no matter to what degree, it must be determined if they are actually pro-life or pro-birth.

In short, does someone’s stand on abortion align with their stance of what happens after birth?

Are they as strong an advocate for neonatal care? Or adoption services? Or postpartum care? Or early childcare? 

Do they give a single thought to what happens to the child and mother once the child is born?

If not, then the person isn’t pro-life. They are pro-birth.

They demand a birth, but not the systems to support the new life.

Frankly, this is the action of an uncaring jerk.

if you push for a child - no matter under what circumstances - to be born, then you absolutely must ensure that this life, and the mother, is provided for.

Squinting in the pulpit

I was blind. Legally. For almost a decade.

Then, in a quirk of irony, I could see.

Now, as I wade into my forties, my vision is starting to fail again.

I now use glasses to read screens and to drive at night.

It’s not an emergency, I’m just getting old.

But, I do wonder how it would have effected my preaching if I was still mounting the pulpit every fortnight.

In the classroom, I’m almost unaffected. 

Whilst I take my glasses to every lesson, I almost never need them during class. For some reason, during school hours, my vision is still capable for me to educate  the youth.

In fact, whenever a student spots me in the staff room with my glasses on, they are usually confused by my spectacles.

Nonetheless, if I was teaching a morning lesson or a night class, I’d be in the need of vision assistance.

And these are the timeframes when I’d be preaching in a church.

Of course, the answer is simple. 

I’d just wear my glasses.

I’d admit that I’m getting older and pop on my eyewear.

No. Big. Deal.

But, this change wouldn’t happen overnight.

It has taken me a few years to get used to wearing my glasses when required.

So, would I have adopted my glasses sooner once I noticed it affecting my preaching?

Or, would I have just enlarged the font on my notes?

Would I, inevitably, have been put in a position where I couldn’t actually comfortably read my notes?

If so, how would I have dealt with this catastrophe?

Would I let anyone know?

Would I just try and wing the sermon?

Now, on the other side of my declining eyesight, I’d have no qualms in wearing my glasses to preach or read the Bible.

But that one Sunday when I’d have failed due to blurry words would have left me pretty red-faced.

Someone must stay in the zone to take notes

Every so often, you aren’t in the zone to learn.

It may be as a student in a classroom.

Maybe as a member of a congregation in a church.

No matter, sometimes you can feel that you’re going to zone out.

When this happens, there’s a couple of options of what do do next.

The first is to fight the urge to tune out.

Be it through the use of caffeine, a rededication of focus or a firm shake of the head, you’ll do all that you can to stay attentive.

Frankly, this can just result in your energy, effort and attention being directed at preserving your state of mindfulness.

Alternatively, you can just be resigned to drifting off.

No matter if it is caused by fatigue from a restless night, tiredness from a prior session of intense focus or your mind wandering due to indifference, sometimes your brain just isn’t prepared to listen or absorb information.

Can there be a third course of action?

Partnership.

Develop a learning partnership which includes reciprocal note taking.

Develop a spiritual partnership with someone who will pay attention.

Occasionally, within this partnership, you’re able to tap out for this session. Your partner will then extensively record what was said and engage you with the content later.

They, for your inattentive session, will engage for you.

Just as you will do for them if called upon.

But, for all involved - the speaker, the attentive and inattentive.

It takes self awareness.

It takes honesty.

It takes responsibility.

It takes preparedness to do the same.

HYAnd it takes maturity.

The balance must go all the way

Referendums and theology can have multiple things in common.

We can wildly disagree about them.

We can get firmly entrenched in “our camp” of the issue.

We can be incredibly opinionated about them online.

And, sometimes, we say - even with the best of intentions - that things are going to be balanced when we discuss them.

The trouble is, no matter if the discussion is occurring amongst family or friends, or in private or civic settings, we often fail to be truely balanced.

Why? 

Because our good intentions often don’t cover over our personal feelings.

I’ve got no doubt that when I teach the studies of religion subject at my school next year, even unknowingly, I will not be giving a balanced view.

Not all the time.

Even accidentally.

The best way to measure if you’re being genuinely balanced in your discussion of a topic is the following: questions, praise and encouragement.

Are you posing an equal number of questions to either/all sides?

Are you directing the same amount of praise to all sides?

Do those, no matter where their opinion falls on the topic, leave with the same level of encouragement?

If you can’t honestly respond that everyone has received the same level of challenge and exhortation, then you had a discussion… but it wasn’t a genuinely balanced one.

The people who MUST lead a Sunday morning children’s ministry

In writing this, I do so as the following….

A parent of two school-aged children.

Someone who, unpaid, leads the children’s ministry program at my kids church.

Someone who, while employed, ran Sunday School/the kids/teens program on Sunday mornings for nearly a decade-and-a-half.

Someone who has always had the following nagging feeling.

And, I know what I write next won’t be popular.

Nonetheless…

No one should be paid to actively run activities/ministry on a Sunday morning for kids.

Now, this may be an idealistic pipe dream. 

A fantasy.

An ecclesiastical utopia. 

A declaration which rides in the face of decades of ministry.

An idea which shouts against the expectations of churches.

A challenge to those needing to justify their church pay-check.

But, it is my solid belief that the primary ministers and spiritual teachers/examples for children should be their parents. 

Sure, in rare cases children will arrive at church without a believing parent or guardian, but your atypical youngster will only darken the church doors with a churchgoing caretaker.

Thus, their spiritual instructions should fall primary upon their shoulders.

And this shouldn’t merely involve opening their wallets and paying for “a professional” to minister to their kids.

It should include, periodically, volunteering to be actively involved in the ministry to the youth.

I don’t expect that a parent will take on the primary burden every week or fortnight,but if a church has a dozen or more kids, then the parents should be willing to take it in turns to share the gospel.

Now, this will be controversial since some parents don’t especially like kids who aren’t their own.

Or don’t think that they’re very good at the “kids stuff.”

But, if you’re a parent, then you have a responsibility nonetheless.

While some in leadership on a Sunday will feel the need to justify their presence or employment, a youth/children’s minister can still be completely justified by having them resource, equip and train the parents on a Sunday morning. The paid staff will still run midweek and outreach activities. They can even retain giving the address in church before the congregation.

But, parents should bear the weight of spiritually educating their kids.

The parents should have a burden upon them to be caring adults in the lives of the youngsters at church. They should want to be a part of the new numbers which matter in church.

The parents should feel the responsibility to invest in the kids who share church with their progeny.

Even if they don’t feel a strong sense of call.

Or equiped.

Or capable.

If they feel ill-prepared, then they may want to reconsider their own Christian discipleship and consider it a warning bell to be ready to spiritually lead their offspring.

Keeping a spiritual progression log

Currently, for my electives history class, they end each lesson by updating a log of the progress on their individual research projects.

By the end of their assessment task, the students must also hand in their journal, documenting the thought processes they went through and the moments of advancement of their project.

While it would be good to see a sequential advancement, there is just as much to glean from a process which includes overcoming obstacles and diverting course.

Every Christian would benefit by keeping a similar document.

They track every lesson they learn.

They record every insight.

They chronicle every inch forward.

In this way, there would be much to glean over the years.

For those in ministry, there are duties which naturally enable their processes to be memorialised.

Sermons.

Bible studies.

Reports.

Personally, I’ve retained a few of these archiving devices.

This blog.

Tiny Bible Bits.

And, as I periodically stumble over what I’ve written over the past decade, I’m taken back to the place of these words.

I recall what inspired them.

I’m sometimes surprised by them.

But every post, every article, every thought-bubble is a marker of my process log.

Mine is just slightly more public than everyone else’s.

The three windows of inspiration

I haven’t delivered a sermon in years.

But, three times a week I write a short reflection about a bible passage on Facebook.

Every fortnight I deliver a short address to the church my kids attend.

On the same Sunday, I also lead activities for the infants/primary aged kids at church.

Almost without fail, my planning will fall within three windows of inspiration.

Almost immediate.

In the shower the night before.

On the drive to church.

These are the times when ideas initially germinate, get refined and, finally, become concrete.

But there is a negative to these final two windows.

When an idea immediately springs to mind, then you feel prepared. Even if you don’t stick with your initial thought, as least you have a launching point.

The later windows of inspiration leave you dangling.

But, as you get used to the way your mind processes ideas whilst periodically revisiting a passage, then you can suppress the anxiousness around an absence of inspiration.

Unless you need to explain to others midweek what your plans are for the weekend…

Then you can feel a little awkward, explaining that there are two windows of inspiration still to be navigated and your co-leader should just “trust you that it will all come together.”

Snapshots are nothing but

10 years old.

17 years old.

19 years old.

23 years old.

33 years old.

41 years old.

Just a regular shrimp of a kid, near the top of their year in maths, pretty average at playing rugby.

An uncommitted student who both attended youth group/church and went out with his nonChristian mates.

A going-nowhere slacker who worked in retail, but went out three nights a week.

A young youth minister, working in his home church part-time.

A married, new dad, full-time youth minister who appeared to have the perfect Christian life.

Divorced, remarried, father of two, teacher.

Each snapshot will reveal something different.

Each one is also me.

When we meet someone, all we initially get is a snapshot.

I just get a snapshot of the kids I teach.

You just get a snapshot of the person you start dating.

Churches just get a snapshot of anyone who visits.

And we can be quick to judge someone based upon that snapshot.

And, mostly, we would be wrong.

Or, at least, peaking through a tiny keyhole.

Only seeing a snapshot of the wider story.

The overlooked evangelistic strategy

Some churches, notoriously, start late.

Their 9:30 morning service starts at 9:30ish.

Their 6pm evening service actually kicks off at 6:10.

It’s a part of their culture.

They’re laidback.

Casual.

Easygoing.

But, as an evangelistic strategy, this sucks.

Why?

Because visitors don’t know about your lackadaisical routine.

They arrive on time.

And, alone.

And they awkwardly look around and see… almost no one.

To the shame of your church.

If you want to be harsh, the messages a tardy church sends is that church and (by default) God isn’t that important.

At least not enough to be on time.

But, fundamentally, the evangelistic weakness exposed has to do with displaying hospitality.

If a guest turned up to your house, and you weren’t ready, what message would you be sending?

If you hosted an event, and were unprepared, what would it say about you?

A near empty church, which fills up during the first song deserves a rebuke.

From the pulpit.

From the punctual.

From the visitors.

The trouble is, this third category probably won’t be back to tell them.

How do you announce the latest death?

People die. 

Obviously, this includes those who attend churches. They are not protected from the scourge of the Reaper.

But, I’m curious about the manner that churches announce a death of a congregant.

Church-wide email?

An announcement from the pulpit?

A message on the notice board?

But, these methods provoke further questions…

How “in” the church do you need to be before you receive an acknowledgment?

How old do you need to be?

Does it need to be an unexpected passing?

Do either of these last two questions even come into consideration?

Furthermore, if the announcement is only made via email or in person, these methods only reach those actively within the congregation.

What about lapsed members?

How about those whom have a historical legacy at the church but have moved on due to life-change?

A pain of leaving behind a faith-community which you’re connect with is, over time, you lose contact with your former church.

And thus, you will miss the deaths of people you knew.

You’ll miss the passing of those you looked up to.

You’ll miss the funerals of those who were your spiritual examples.

And, without some kind of death notice you can sign up to, it is inevitable as the years pass on…

Trimming down the 23K

23,145.

This is how many verses there are (depending on the version you’re using) in your bible.

As I slowly prepare to teach a new Studies of Religion subject at my school, I’ve started piecing together the essential elements for each of my topics.

One of my religious depth studies, alongside Islam and Buddhism, is Christianity.

In the cheat notes, which I’ll provide at the start of the subject, will be a through vocabulary and important verses/passages from their sacred texts.

Of the +23,000 options, I’ve had to nail it down to just the pearls of the bible.

And, it’s been a refreshing challenge.

I’ve had to discern the primary points of Christianity.

Love.

Grace.

Faith.

Forgiveness.

Christ.

And then, I had to find succinct verses to align with the core truths.

This exercise would be something which I believe most Christians would benefit from.

Because, how often are you challenged to distill your/orthodox beliefs down, ensuring that they are backed up by scripture?

God is now a lot more “willing” than in the past

James 4:14-15 - Why, you do not even know what will happen tomorrow. What is your life? You are a mist that appears for a little while and then vanishes. Instead, you ought to say, “If it is the Lord’s will, we will live and do this or that.”

This truth has been around for two Millenia, but it emerged as a life-verse over the last three years.

The reason is simple.

Lives were locked down.

Plans were cancelled.

Dreams were changed.

Everything went online. Quickly.

Now, everything is “God willing.”

The next season for a ministry.

The next sermon series.

The plans for next Sunday.

Everything is in the hands of God.

Now, post-Pandemic, more than ever in living memory.

Is this going to be the enduring spiritual legacy of COVID?

Is the uncertainty of the future the lesson we, as a church and community, needed to relearn?

When I was in ministry, I’m sure that I gave the “God willing” disclaimer for any plans I laid out.

Now, what was a back-of-the-mind mantra, has been thrust into the forefront of all our experiences.

The COVID pandemic reminded us all that James 4:14-15 is still very much truth.

I wonder how long it will take us until we return to our comfortable forward-planning?

Being rewarded for mining the untapped scriptures

I’ve read the book of Ezekiel in the past.

But, I remember nothing about it.

For me, it’s always been one of the overlooked sections of the scriptures.

It sat alongside Leviticus, Numbers, 1 & 2 Chronicles, Isaiah and Jeremiah.

I just don’t read these books in depth.

But, over the last ten weeks I’ve been studying Ezekiel.

And it’s been really good.

I’ve noticed things I’ve never seen before and understood things which have gone over my head previously.

This has been the refreshing thing over the last few months.

And, honestly, I didn’t expect that to be the case.

At the start of the year, knowing that Ezekiel was on the horizon, caused an inward groan.

But - having already been a Christian for over a quarter century - it’s nice to be reminded that there’s always new things to learn, new truths to find and refreshing scriptures to delve into.

The ministry of accepting the blessing

It is better to give than to receive.

A few weeks ago my wife and I got a new car.

The last time I purchased a car I got a trade in of my old one. 

I received a single dollar for my vehicle. And, I haggled then up to that price.

This time around, we didn’t bother with a trade in.

Financially, we didn’t need to.

Beyond that, we had bigger plans for our departing automobile; give the car away.

Over the last few days we did.

Without going into details, we found a couple in need and I had the thrill of offering them the car.

Frankly, it was as much a surprise to me as it was for them.

I had no idea, even ten minutes before I made the offer, that they were in need.

And, without consulting with my wife, I gave the car away.

But, the experience reminded me of this encounter back in 2009.

Just as I hesitated to accept praise 14 years ago, the recipient of the car - understandably - hesitated.

All I wanted him to do was to say yes.

Why?

Because, there is a gift in accepting the blessing of another.

There’s a ministry you can allow others to have by allowing them to exercise their calling.

Be it a physical gift.

Or an act of service.

Or a word of prayer.

Ministry is not a one-way transaction.

It needs to be received.

And, when it is, then the giver is blessed to see their blessing outworked in the life of another.

Being stuck with someone else’s words

There’s a major downside to using prepackaged material.

They aren’t your words.

Of course, this doesn’t mean you shouldn’t ever use them.

At times, you absolutely should consider using a purchased curriculum.

You’re short on time.

You’re not an expert on a topic.

But, you should never - ever - claim that what you are saying or using is a creation of your own.

The simple reason?

Someone else’s words will not be your own.

They won’t sound like you.

They may not connect as well with your context.

And, if you play them off as your own, then you’ll be stuck with them.

After all, it would be weird if you end up disagreeing or contradicting “yourself.”

And, when your stuck with other people’s words in your mouth, you don’t want to paint yourself into a theological corner or look like you have a theological multi-personality.