the referendum (again)

My earlier comment referring to Jesus not advocating violence in any form might get a rise from someone... is smacking violence?

I'm saying that smacking is violence - and in the case of adults smacking children, it is in the realm of the worse kind of violence (even if in most cases it is a relatively mild form of it).

Let me explain myself...

1. violence in my view is when one inflicts pain on another using force

2. the violence can take various forms, e.g physical and verbal

3. there are different levels of violence - some are minor some are major, but they are still acts of violence

4. I believe it is better to use this violence as a defining term in relation to this issue rather than smacking because of the ambiguity surrounding the way people talk of smacking. A smack can mean different things to different people... one person's idea of a smack could be a light use of the hand, someone else's idea of a smack might be a forceful striking... both can be regarded as a smack but the effects of them quite different. The values of the people involved are vastly different even though the same term is used.

5. smacking, especially using one's hand against a child is a dangerous form of violence. The adult is stronger and has little idea of the impact of their hand on the body of a child. Smacking with a hand has an impact on the deep tissue of a child rather than on the surface tissue where there might be a momentary sting but no lasting tissue damage. If a parent used a plastic ruler as an alternative, the damage to deep tissue is greatly minimised, but please be clear, I am not advocating this form of smacking either, because...

6. the violence involved when one individual is clearly dominant over the other is of the worse kind of violence. It is bullying, it is intimidating, it is abusive, and it violates the other. It is the worst possible example of 'good' parenting that we can give to our children, for it suggests that violence is an appropriate way of handling conflict. The Gospel way of handling conflict is completely opposite - forgiveness, turning the other cheek, 'blessed are the peacemakers,' serving, humility, and thereby inspiring love

7. Finally, I believe (with Leunig below) that violence begets violence. Often I have seen a child who has been hit then hit out at whoever is further down the power 'chain' than them. Smacking a child perpetuates the myth that violence sorts something out. Where do we get this idea from? I can admit that there is a case for some violent intervention to stop the violent abuse of another - e.g. the overthrowing of the Nazi regime etc etc - but that is not to imply that this sorts everything out... it creates a whole new set of problems and it escalates other forms of violence... the violence involved in the carpet-bombing of the civilians of Dresden and Tokyo, and the dropping of nuclear bombs on the civilians of Hiroshima and Nagasaki was a level of violence far in advance of the violence the allies were attempting to quell... wars have not ceased... the arms race has escalated and not reduced as a result of the allies 'winning' WW2... etc etc

the referendum

In NZ we have a citizens initiated referendum before us on the issue of child discipline.
The referendum is on the question: “Should a smack as part of good parental correction be a criminal offence in New Zealand?”

Already the main Government parties have criticised the ambiguity of the wording and indicated that they will not be acting on the outcome of this non-binding referenda anyway. So, at one level it is a waste of time - yet at another, it gives us something to talk about.

I like the way Joanne Black in this week's NZ Listener indicated that she will be too busy washing her hair to participate in the postal referendum being conducted over the months of July and August!

What is hugely disappointing for me in this debate (of several years now) is the role many Christians are playing in it. The most vocal advocates for smacking children are prominent Christians. I find this to be a deeply disturbing departure from the teachings of Christ, whose Beatitudes, (Matthew 5) among other teachings, do not advocate for violence in any way whatsoever.

There are a couple of websites set up around this issue for people to reflect on... one for a YES vote and one for a NO vote.
http://yesvote.org.nz/ is more to my liking even though I think the presumption of 'good' in the referendum is dumb
The other site is http://www.voteno.org.nz/ and is fronted by Simon Barnett, a prominent broadcaster who is Christian.
Here's an article I enjoyed written by a Napier City Councillor... tp://yesvote.org.nz/2009/06/19/baldock-balks-when-asked-for-proof/

The Church's Primary Task

I receive a daily email from http://www.inwardoutward.org/

Today's quote from John Howard Yoder's The Politics of Jesus on the church seems pertinent in a season where everyone seems to be running around trying to make the church bigger when the primary task is that it lives unfettered by consumerist notions of what is successful.

"The very existence of the church is her primary task. It is in itself a proclamation of the Lordship of Christ to the powers from whose dominion the church has begun to be liberated. The church does not attack the powers; this Christ has done. The church concentrates upon not being seduced by them."

God's generous welcome

Here are some of the observations Eugene Peterson makes in Christ Plays In Ten Thousand Places (2005) p17-21, about God's generous welcome as he contrasts the stories of Jesus & Nicodemus and Jesus & the Samaritan woman at the well (I added little bits & pieces along the way as part of the sermon this last Sunday):
1. The vocabulary is easy to understand. The metaphors describing how God is at work are known to everyone for they come out of ordinary life. With Nicodemus it is birth; with the Samaritan woman it is water. We all have sufficient experience of those two words to know what is going on without further instruction. We all know what birth is: our being here is proof that we were born. We all know what water is: we drink it or wash in it several times a day. And the metaphor common to both stories, wind/breath, is also plain. We all know what wind/breath is: just blow on your hand or take a deep breath, just look at the leaves blowing in the breeze.
2. The first story is about a man; the second is about a woman. There is no preferred gender in the Christian life. How important it is to state this fact! There is no preferred gender! It is still the case that significant parts of the church say that the generous welcome of God to people has certain conditions on it according to what particular sperm out of many thousands happened to fertilise the egg in a woman’s womb. Why should what God’s Spirit wants to do be limited by our human traditions?
3. The first story takes place in a city, the centre of sophistication and learning and fashion; the second on the outskirts of a small town in the country. Geography has no bearing on perception or aptitude.
4. Nicodemus is a respectable member of a strictly orthodox sect of the Pharisees; while the Samaritan woman is a disreputable member of the despised heretical sect of the Samaritans. Racial background, religious identity, and moral track record are neither here nor there in matters of how the Spirit works.
5. The man is named and the woman is unnamed. Reputation and standing in the community doesn’t seem to count for anything.
6. There is also this: Nicodemus opens the conversation with Jesus with a religious statement, “Rabbi, we know that you are a teacher come from God.” Jesus opens the conversation with the woman by asking for a drink of water, a sentence that doesn’t sound the least bit religious. It doesn’t seem to make any difference in the Christian life who gets things started, Jesus or us, or what the subject matter is, heavenly or earthly.
7. In both stories a reputation is at risk: Nicodemus risks his reputation by being seen with Jesus (that’s why he went to him under the cover of darkness – he wanted to minimise the risk); Jesus risks his reputation by being seen with the Samaritan woman. There is a sense of ignoring conventions here
on both sides, a crossing of the lines of caution, a willingness on both sides to risk misunderstanding.
Look at how wide the welcome of Jesus is… a man and a woman, city and country, an insider and an outsider, a professional and a layperson, a respectable man and a woman whose reputation is in serious question, and orthodox and a heretic, one who takes initiative and one who lets it be taken, one named and the other anonymous, with one a human reputation is at risk, and with the other the divine reputation is at risk. But there is more…
8. In both conversations “spirit” is the pivotal word. “Spirit” links the differences and contrasts in the two stories and makes them aspects of one story. In both conversations “Spirit” refers primarily to God and only derivatively to the man and the woman: In the first conversation the Spirit gives birth (“So it is with everyone who is born of the Spirit”); Spirit is an agent, a source, a cause of the birth that makes a person able to “see” and “enter”. In the second conversation, God is Spirit; the consequence is that we worship him in spirit and truth. It is only because God is Spirit that there is anything to say about what we do or don’t do.
9. Finally, there is this: Jesus is the primary figure in both stories – Nicodemus and the Samaritan woman provide the occasion but it is Jesus who provides the content. I wonder if we need to rediscover this when we talk about what kind of church we want to be. In these stories we see that in everything that has to do with living, Jesus is working at the centre. We welcome because Jesus has first welcomed. We understand things because of what Jesus reveals.

old and new music in my life!

The last few weeks have had a little influx of good music to listen to...

Paul Simon's Hearts & Bones released in 1983 has long been a favourite, but I only had it in LP format, thus it was only listened to every four years or so. I imported a CD last month - it is great to have it back as a familiar friend. The outstanding tracks (in my opinion) are: 'Hearts & Bones' and 'Train in the Distance' but most of the tracks are likable. Al di Meola's guitar solo on Allergies is wonderful. Three of the session musicians Paul Simon uses appeared on Simon & Garfunkel's Concert in the Park - Steve Gadd (drummer extraordinaire), Richard Tee (keyboards) and Anthony Jackson (bass) - they also happen to play with Al di Meola in his excellent Elegant Gypsy album.

Next has been Bob Dylan's Together Through Life - in some ways a mixed bag, but with some absolutely wonderful songs in the mix - bluesy, folky, rough, & humorous (My Wife's Home Town is delightfully wicked). The outstanding tracks in addition to My wife's..., are the opening track Beyond Here Lies Nothin', Forgetful Heart and It's All Good. The older Bob gets the better he sounds!

Ben Harper's new album (with Relentless 7) White Lies for Dark Times is a lively rock album. I am not a great fan of Harper (the exception being his excellent work with the Blind Boys From Alabama), and I only listened to the album in the shop because I had a bit of time. Well what a surprise it is! The band are a bunch of very able musicians who let loose on some memorable songs in a strong album. There are a few slower songs that work well to balance the hard rock of the opening tracks. It is a gem. The standout tracks are many - track 2, Up To You Now is amazing - especially the way it sounds after the opening track.

Last but not least is The Decemberists' The Hazards of Love. This Oregon-based folk-rock group are a sensation. They are eccentric - they produce sounds and songs that are certainly nor mainstream. This concept album needs to be played sequentially - it is a story in 17 parts. The music ranges from light acoustic to moments of hard rock - the singing is unusual - the new female singer in the band sounds kind of off-key at first - but her style suits the band's style quite wonderfully. I loved their first album on a mainstream label, The Crane Wife, and this follow-up album is every bit as good.

I've been spoilt rotten this month just some weeks after lamenting that I hadn't listened to much new music in the last year that had left a lasting impression.

soundings: sunday coming

This week we are celebrating Pentecost (a week late!) with worship at 10am and morning tea at 11am, that will link with a children & families celebration event that our children & family worker and children's leader have organised.
I’m doing some thinking about how the Spirit works in relation to two stories from early in John’s Gospel – Jesus & Nicodemus, and Jesus & the Samaritan woman at the well. There are a number of interesting conclusions to be drawn along the theme of ‘generous welcome’ that are pivotal in our life together as a serving church. Eugene Peterson's excellent chapter Clearing the Playing Field in his book Christ Plays In Ten Thousand Places has proved to be a great resource.

a quote from Jean Vanier about community

Everything will resolve itself through love.

Stop wasting time running after the perfect community.

Live your life fully in your community today.

Stop seeing the flaws – and thank God there are some!

Look rather at your own defects and know that you are forgiven

and can, in your turn, forgive others

and today enter into the conversion of love, and remember, pray always.

Jean Vanier in Community and Growth

Oliver again

It is all good news with the wee guy - putting on weight, feeding well, sleeping longer and all that! This week we had a little catch up...