Below is a copy of my friends comment (blockqoutes) and I have attempted to offer responses as best as I can.

Sure the Bible says that certain lifestyle choices are against God’s will.

Agreed. Though I might want to explore how you see the relationship between lifestyle choices and God’s will. After all we are not talking about which sit-com we enjoy here.

But we all fall short in God’s eyes. None of us are blameless.

I think we both agree on this point.

I don’t think we can judge others or should judge others… That is not our place.

Really? It seems whenever we use this phrase we get all Matt 7:1 and repeat again and again the mantra “Do not judge, Do not judge, Do not judge.” If judgement is about weighing evidence and deciding what course of action to take based on this examination then we need to be good judges over those things in which we have a jurisdiction. I have the responsibility to judge myself well in relation to what I do with my money, time and affections. I also have the awesome responsibility of judging the actions of my children, teaching them to live well and disciplining them appropriately. I have had pastoral responsibility towards others and this calls for a degree of judgement about what course of care to pursue, what information to share and when trust can or cannot be extended.

Of course you already know much of this. We use this everyday. Importantly my ability to judge is limited to areas over which I have responsibility. So it’s crucial to us as Christians to see that we do not have the right to judge someone’s eternal salvation. That is God’s job thankfully! Was this the judging you had in mind? The eternal condemnation or acquittal of a person based on their sexual orientation? This would be God’s jurisdiction and not mine. If I where to presume that responsibility then I would necessarly bring condemnation upon myself. As you rightly state – “None of us are blameless”.

But this is not what the Bishop’s speech is about – at least the part that I take objection with! It is the Bishop’s endorsement of consecrating and maintaining licences for practicing same-sex attracted people in Anglican ministry.

Let me be clear, I do not raise objections against those outside of the church who have attractions to those of the same sex (or both sexes for that matter). They are loved by God and called firstly into a saving relationship with Jesus Christ. In him they will find – as we have found – life in abundance.

I do not raise objects with Christian people who have attractions to those of the same sex (or both sexes). We are all tempted in a variety of ways and through God’s spirit we are being sanctified in the truth by the word of truth, Jesus. While they remain open to the possibility that same-sex attraction is not God’s will and they continue to experience the tensions of ongoing sanctification they do well. We all do well when we run the race towards Christ-centred wholeness. Whether our starting point is pedophilia or pedantry, the goal remains the same – to see and savour Jesus and to wonderfully, finally, transformed into the image of God in Christ when he returns.

What I do take issue with – any my exasperation is the result of too much patience and listening on my part – is that mature Christians, ministers and bishops, are lying to those around them, to themselves and to God. Their claim is a bold one – same-sex attracted persons are not in sin when they act on these attractions. Their foundation (that homosexual thought and action is not sin) is, on any reading of Scripture, wrong.

I am a firm believer that noone[sic] should be excluded from service and/or marriage and/or anything else because of their ethnic background, gender, sexuality.

What do you mean by “service”? The issue here is not about participation at any level in the church. Jesus’ blood covers many sins. If this where not the case then we should all do well to stay at home this sunday for all of us will have done things, thought things, said things that exclude us from the service of worship. Yet his blood avails still!

The issue here is qualifications for leadership. Are you sure that a persons sexuality is irrelevant for leadership in Jesus’ church? I find it difficult to reconcile the biblical mandates for leadership in the bible with the sexualities practiced today; Bi-sexual? Transexual? Queer? Open marriages? Moreover, I find it impossible to see these as adequate reflections of God’s image in us – male and female.

Jesus taught us to love everyone.

One of my friends on Facebook has something helpful to say on this point:

… I agree the issue of “welcoming” matters, however it is just a cloak in this case. The bishop has appointed an unrepentant person who is sleeping with their “partner” and promotes such behaviour despite what God’s Word says. It is an unloving refusal to call for repentance that leaves people in slavery to sin. Why should we not offer to gay people the same gift of repentance in Christ that we offer everyone other sinner every week?

Love sometimes means saying difficult things.

Sure, I sin big and I believe in a mighty God who will judge me for my actions and my beliefs. I know that God is mighty and forgives mightily.

Notice that you do the right thing and admit your sin. Well done! For the record, I sin too often. I’m impatient and bitter and this comes through in subtle and not so subtle ways. It our admissions, which are signs of God’s grace, our eyes are open to see the possibilities of sanctification and the need to be vigilant. God grant us both grace to run well and gain an imperishable crown.

I hope and pray to “be one of that number” as the old song lyric goes. In short, I guess I just choose to love and do my best to lead a decent life in an imperfect world.

And it was this last few lines that made me want to honor your contributions. It is a great example to me and hopefully to others that a little bit of self-reflection and humility goes a long way in this confused discussion over same-sex attraction among Christian ministers.

I hope that I was able to render some of that humility in this post. Perhaps we are too much in agreement to have said so many words. And, even if we are not, I have done my best to respond in so few words.

But on the way home I started to think about work. Not unusual for me yet today I was bugged by this thought that maybe I work was not what my Sunday’s are about. I want them to be about Jesus and the people Jesus has blessed me with; a beautiful wife, great kids, and fantastic friends. So why was I thinking about work?

All of my work for the past few months has been with a business a started over a year ago – Happy Widget Design. Until very recently this was a business that never turned a profit. All the work I performed was either pro-bono or at cost. It was also a part-time affair where I could support and bless those organisations that asked. Now it must make money so I can support my family and be a blessing to others. But that still doesn’t answer why on a day like today I would lend ear to the concerns of my day job.

Perhaps it has become more of concern now that I am running my own business. As many of you may know who have started your own business, whether it be a for-profit enterprise, a community based organisation or even running your own church – It ain’t no 9 to 5 thing! While I endeavor to work regular office hours, this happens less than I would like. Bursts of creativity and enthusiasm for work often come at night or on weekend. So what should I do? Ignore those impulses and potentially lose them altogether? I’ve tried writing them down for later but picking them up never later rarely has the same results as when the drive first hits. Whether designing or coding ‘the zone’ – like it or not – remains sacred territory. But it’s not always zen like desires that bring me to work outside of business hours. Sometimes is just the slog of running your own business; having project deadlines, quoting, admin or errands.

This is the first time of actually had to run my own thing. It’s really rewarding knowing that everything I hand over has been my own work. If it sucks it’s because I made it suck. And if I manage to unstuck it then that joy is mine too. I’m glad that I get the privilege of working with companies and organisations that I love. I am grateful that Jesus granted me the gift of coding and errant design. For those of you already doing your own thing, Godspeed. For those of you considering a move in that direction; pray hard, play hard or go work for someone else.

But today is a Sabbath and I would never blog about work on the Sabbath!

XX OO

As an aside, I wonder where this taste of grace has been for the last five years as I prepared for ordained ministry? I know not where!

I was listening to a sermon by the Rev. Tim Keller of Redeemer Presbyterian Church in New York City called Nakedness and the Holiness of God. I like many of his sermons because God has gifted him in a unique way to unpack the cultural connection to the biblical text. I think I’ve written elsewhere that John Piper is my contemporary hero for biblical exegesis and Tim Killer is one who I find inspires intelligent cultural exegesis.

To the point, Gen 3:

So when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was a delight to the eyes, and that the tree was to be desired to make one wise, she took of its fruit and ate, and she also gave some to her husband who was with her, and he ate. Then the eyes of both were opened, and they knew that they were naked. And they sewed fig leaves together and made themselves loincloths.
And they heard the sound of the LORD God walking in the garden in the cool of the day, and the man and his wife hid themselves from the presence of the LORD God among the trees of the garden. But the LORD God called to the man and said to him, “Where are you?” And he said, “I heard the sound of you in the garden, and I was afraid, because I was naked, and I hid myself.” He said, “Who told you that you were naked? Have you eaten of the tree of which I commanded you not to eat?” (Genesis 3:6-11 ESV)

What has happened in this passage is an inversion of the statement made earlier concerning the state of the man and the woman in the Garden. Where they were once “naked and not ashamed” the man and his wife know they’re nakedness and their shame causes them to hide. God asks Adam “Where are you?” Adam responds “I was naked, and I hid”. It is not his naked that is the issue. It is something deeper.

Keller is dead right to observe that Adam had ALWAYS been naked. There is nothing new. They had both been naked and walked and talked with God in the garden without nakedness being a barrier. So it can’t be that nakedness in and of itself is the issue. Now Adam feels exposed and flees to hide. It is the awareness of his own disobedience that is transferred into an awareness of nakedness. Adam’s eyes have not been opened rather that have been blinded to the reality of his actions. His diagnosis is askew.

Like Adam, our human bodies – totally corrupt human bodies – reminds us of our spiritual corruption. The two are linked. Toby said of President Bartlett; “Let the poets write that he had the tools of greatness, but the voices of his better angels were shouted down by his obsessive need to win.” And it is not too far removed to say that it is our self-sufficiencies our idols of productivity – that cause us to rely on our humaness more than the eternal truth that we have always been made in the image of God. Our likeness to God has not been totally eclipsed by our awareness of depravity. The better angels have hope yet.

In the bible, as elsewhere, the physical body has an analogous relationship with the spiritual self. To be naked is to be known. Naked before God their knowledge of sin was absent. Knowing sin they are no longer able to stand naked before God. Their willingness to be known is thwarted by their conscientiousness of sin.

Over and over again the act of ‘knowing’ another in the bible is one of physical, emotional and spiritual proximity. The penultimate expression of this is the union of husband and wife in marriage and in the marriage bed. It’s ultimate expression is the union of Christ to her pride.

In marriage we are known by another in a way that surpasses the relationship between parent and child. It is no mere legal agreement. Rather, it is the reunification of two bodies into one. The two become one. When I think about the relationship between Jane and myself, there is no other person who knows me better. She has seen me in all sorts of circumstances and has been my wife for some 11 years. And vice versa. My physical nakedness with her exposes me in ways that I would not do for any other. She sees my foibles and beauty like no other. Yet, knowing her love for me – knowing the promises made – I have no sense of shame lying naked with her nor she with me. This is the confidence and security that sexuality within marriage provides. It is a joy.But as good as this is there is a greater joy – a more lasting reward.

God knows our foibles and beauty too. We are all equally visible to Him. His eyes see deeper also.The truth is that like Adam we are all self-consciously naked, aware that another sees or private and public acts. Our true selves are bare to us. Our best attempts to cover our nakedness are cosmetic at best and disfiguring at worst. And yet, we try.

We imagine that we can be proud of who we are and unashamed of our actions. We shake our fists at God and issue corrections that we are beautiful. We overlook or transgressions against the rules and promises we make to ourselves. Saying “we are ‘only human’” as if this would somehow excuse us, making it alright. We rebel.

Have you ever wondered why religious people can be such pricks? Why they can come across so condescending and boring? Wrapped up in what is the right thing to do and eager to pass on these commands to anyone within ear shot? What religious people are craving, what the good people – well meaning folk – seek is not that different from those who choose to rebel. It is about control. It’s wanting to say to God “I’m not perfect but I am a lot better than ‘those people’.” Religious people don’t presume to be perfect but they would aggressively defend the superiority, expecting God to treat them with greater favour. And it’s hard work living under those kinds of demands. One would expect an indulgence or two from the Almighty. It’s hard work because they can’t meet all of rules and expectations they make for themselves let alone the ones required by a holy and just God. And always – within their hearts – is the feeling of shame and nakedness spurring them onto do better. Moreover they demand this ethic of others. How kind to share the path of shame like this! The treadmill of religion increases in speed and incline until we fall off.

The treadmill is broken. Despite their best attempts to keep on running. It’s time to get off.

Jesus knows me fully. I know this because I have confessed more to him than I can remember. He has always been there, seeing my struggle and success. He has always known my whereabouts and like Adam his voice echoes to each of us still – “Where are you?” That is, “When will you come back?” “When will you open your mouth and talk with me once more?” “When will you accept that I know you still?”. That amazing gift, that naked and ashamed as I am – as we all are – he knows us and he has a covering that brings the transparency and freedom we long for. Unlike the covering of animal skins provided for Adam and Eve, it’s transparent in remarkable ways.

It’s a covering that allows me to see what my sin is truly like and know that it need not overcome me. It is not covering that needs replacing from time to time because it gets torn through neglect or misuse. When you are sinned against and when I fail God by my reckless actions I can still be covered by this remarkable garment. Covered enough not to hide anymore. Covered enough not to fear expulsion from His Divine presence, Covered enough to talk and walk with Jesus in the daytime (and the night). Covered …

So perhaps I might accept more readily the shame and the joy of Jesus’ covering for me. And day by day we might be happier with these clothes than the illusions of covering that other garments provide. This is what gives me confidence to ignore the ladders of religious excess and the delusion of open rebellion.

“When I passed by you again and saw you, behold, you were at the age for love, and I spread the corner of my garment over you and covered your nakedness; I made my vow to you and entered into a covenant with you, declares the Lord GOD, and you became mine. Then I bathed you with water and washed off your blood from you and anointed you with oil. I clothed you also with embroidered cloth and shod you with fine leather. I wrapped you in fine linen and covered you with silk. And I adorned you with ornaments and put bracelets on your wrists and a chain on your neck. And I put a ring on your nose and earrings in your ears and a beautiful crown on your head. Thus you were adorned with gold and silver, and your clothing was of fine linen and silk and embroidered cloth. You ate fine flour and honey and oil. You grew exceedingly beautiful and advanced to royalty. And your renown went forth among the nations because of your beauty, for it was perfect through the splendor that I had bestowed on you, declares the Lord GOD.(Ezekiel 16:4-14 ESV)

Much if the law has been changed by the person and work of Jesus Christ. It’s from his summary of the law that I want to spend a couple of minutes reflecting.

Many Anglican churches still read aloud the Ten Commandments and alternatively the summary of the law provided by Jesus:

“Teacher, which is the great commandment in the Law?”
And he said to him, “You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart and with all your soul and with all your mind. This is the great and first commandment. And a second is like it: You shall love your neighbor as yourself. On these two commandments depend all the Law and the Prophets.” (Matt 22:36-40)

Jesus does not elaborate what he means by “depend all the Law and the Prophets” but it is likely, whatever else the phrase implies, it has the sense of “foundation” or “heart”. Whatever the case these most important of commands depend less on restrictions and more in creative obedience.

So we see that even in the law God is at work inviting us into the creative and new possibilities of love for Him and others. Small number of restrictions, big possibilities for service

But the serpent said to the woman, “You will not surely die. For God knows that when you eat of it your eyes will be opened, and you will be like God, knowing good and evil.”

There are lots of distortions that Satan presents to Eve and Adam in this text. I want to look at just one. The payoff that Satan claims will arise from eating the fruit – that they will be “like God” – is already theirs. Made in his image they are.

So God created man in his own image, in the image of God he created him; male and female he created them. (Gen 2:27)

A small thing that the ESV study notes put well

The couple, unlike the serpent, has been made in the image of God (1:26–27). In this way they are already like God. Moreover, being in the image of God, they are expected to exercise authority over all the beasts of the field, which includes the serpent.

Exit through the Gift Shop

Basically this is a documentary is about the emergence of Stencil art and Street Art. It has a disappointing storyline that sees some remarkable work on display in the early periods of the genre and the film reaches its conclusion in the mass-produced mimicry of My Brainwash.

Street art is a form of expression that raises many questions. On the one hand its legitimacy is doubted by some and the use of public and private spaces to display their work is often labelled vandalism. On the other hand it’s defiance and deviance lends voice to opinions and questions that may be censored by the mainstream. Following on from the tradition that was set in Niebuhr’s Christ and Culture – restated recently by Carson in a book of the same name – culture is to be accepted, rejected and subverted though the lens of Scripture, I’m interested the role of art subverting cultural symbols for the cause gospel.

The truly amazing work in the film was by UK-based artist, Banksy. I found many of his images confronting and at times compelling. His ability to project questions and critique provide a critique of current trends from consumerism to land rights was inspiring. But this got me thinking; where have I seen attempts by Christian’s to bring their artistic skills to the difficult task of cultural subversion?

Maid by Banksy

Two Girls Banksy

Religious symbolism has been used to reinforce an ethnic identity – I’m thinking here of the contemporary portrayal of catholic icons and symbols among Latinos and Italians. Of course there are alternate expression of this catholic imagery where the images are broken down in an attempts to state a new, often contradictory, meaning.

Jesus and a Shotgun

The Blessed Angelina Jolie and Children

Neither of these uses promote the gospel at its core, though I may wrong. A closer example may be the popular screen print created by HHCL and Partners, and advertising agency commissioned by the Churches Advertising Network as part of a national campaign leading up to easter. 2004.”Meek. Mild. As If. Discover the Real Jesus. Easter. April 4″ -  Set in red and black it’s Ché Guevara similarities are clear. The agonised face, with needle like thorns crowning it make a clear statement that his is a different order of politics. The image connects with those who are post-consumerist – though the socialism of Ché may not be wholly received – and yet presents a challenging view of what a leader may look like. Most importantly it brings into question the viewer’s understanding of who Jesus is. When the affairs of this world are brought into question Jesus may stand out as a credible alternative to this audience.

Meek. Mild. As if.

Che Guevara by Korba

And so I’m left pondering how could I use my gifts and encourage others to bring about Christ exalting subversive.

How might and artist comment on issues within the church: free-will vs. sovereignty dialogue? Current controversy surrounding the meaning and implication of the atonement? The lifestyle of progressive sanctification? The encouragement and hindrances to personal evangelism?

What can we present to the world about family life, work, sex, sport, built environment, family planning, holidays?

I guess one way of clarifying what to say is to find those things that are to be accepted outright, those to be wholly rejected, and – importantly – what has a common connection and is ripe for intelligent subversion.

What caught my eye was the great witness of school’s headmaster, Don O’Connor:

“The college is privileged to have seen many thousands of young people educated at Broughton, with many coming to know and understand what it means to have a life through Christ,” he said. “We have been blessed with quality buildings and facilities and a committed Christian staff.”

The school seems to have many links with churches in the local community, particularly St Peter’s Anglican Church. This is a great sign of the school’s mission falling within the broader mission of the Church, not always the case with Anglican schools.

Tickets celebrating the anniversary can be purchased here.

Next year will be an important one for Rowan as legislation comes before General Synod of whether to allow women to be ordained to the episcopate and what, if any, response can be given to the proposed Anglican Covenant . Of course the nauseating politics within the wider communion will continue and many believe that Rowan is a key figure on arbitrating these tensions. Although that could be debated.

So with all this going on who really wants the job?

A suitable couple have been approached as godparents for Alexis. They have acceded to our request, which is no small thing. We have adopted the old custom that if Jane and I were both unable to exercise guardianship – whether through death or illness – over Hannah and Alexis, their godparents will assume legal custody over their respective God-daughter.

Hannah’s Godparents have been an excellent support for us and for Hannah over the last 5 years. They are great friends whose opinion we value. Hannah has spent regular time with them from an early age and she loves them too. Jane and I have been fairly consistent in teaching Hannah about her Christian faith and we try as best we can to demonstrate our own repentance and humility before our great God and King. I have been thinking that Hannah will have completed the steps outlined for confirmation next year. And so we will have more conversations about that over the coming months.

I have been wondering about the service for Alexis’ baptism . . .

While I like some of the poetry and simple wording within the APBA service for baptism, it just lacks . . . well . . punch? I have been reading through it and its 1662 predecessor, the Book of Common Prayer. I can hear the meaning of the old text fairly well. The doeth’s and thou’s don’t hinder me too much; but I worry for guests and those who are not well versed in such a literary tradition (what!?!). But the more recently published prayer books (AAPB and APBA) do not strike me as mere modernizations in language. They are often novel discourses that share little resemblance with the BCP which remains the authorised standard of worship and doctrine for Australian Anglicans.

So, what are parents to do?

As I have been in conversation with my previous supervisors, and others who have moved into these supervisory roles, I am  aware that things are not always how I remembered them. As I talk with those who I worked closely with, they seem happy and even excited about the possibility of me moving back to work with them. Others have a different memory . . .

I am humbled to be reminded of the fact that I have acted like a real jerk at times. One particular incident – still remembered by them and I some 7 years later – involved another employee. I said something foolish and abusive. At the time I was trying to be familier and funny. The ‘funny’ failed because I was not familiar with her, nor she with me. And a s***storm ensued. I new seconds after the words flew from my gaping hole that I had made an incredible error in judgement. In the week that followed apologies were brokered. Regret was expressed and the fire was put out. But the clear odor of smoke lingered in the air whenever we spoke. Regret . . .

What has got me thinking about this now? Why would I be writing about it? Well, I had the chance to have a frank discussion with someone at the company recently.

I was on the phone with this guy and I just sensed that there was still some issues between he and I. So I decided to name this and see what might come of it. To my relief, he acknowledged that honesty about this issue was what he preferred. We had a short chat about this issue and he asked what might have changed within me over the last few years. It was great that he was willing to take the time to talk with me about this and even to go further by asking me how I might have changed over the ensuing years. I gave home some examples of work I have done that shows a maturing on my part. I hope that he was able to accept this for what it is. Anyway, at least we have acknowledged this ‘something’ that clouds the air and that this is better then fleeting denial.

Relationships of all sorts will eventually require trust if they are to succeed. I have failed in this relationship and I have attempted to make amends - in words and deeds. What I need – but cannot demand – is that trust be given once again for our relationship. Where the relationship is vital and near trust will be brokered by necessity. Where it is farther apart and occasional trust becomes more optional. I don’t like the barriers that others maintain where trust has ben maligned yet I accept that this is the cost of doing business in relationships.

I wonder what bridges have been burnt in your life? Have you found opportunities to rebuild damaged relationships? How do you experience the charred reminders of the past even when the bridge has been rebuilt?