The Goodness of Sex in God’s Plan vs the Sexualisation of Girls

I was interested to see an article this week on the Age website reporting on a conference in Melbourne. The conference was on 'Religion in the Public Square' - an opportunity to consider issues that impact on our wider society.

In some ways it was not surprising that the issue the writer (Barney Zwartz) picked up on was sex. But it was encouraging to see the way that he reported positively on what two of the presenters said.

Barney reported on the presentations made by Melinda Tankard Reist and by mother and son team Patricia and Kamal Werakoon. Melinda Tankard Reist (picture above) is a prolific writer and social commentator with a particular interest in women's issues and bioethics. Among her published works is Getting Real: Challenging the Sexualisation of Girls. Patricia Weerakoon is a Senior Lecturer at the University of Sydney, and the Coordinator of the Graduate Program in Sexual Health. She is a sexuality educator, researcher and therapist, and has developed a media profile as a sexologist. Kamal Weerakoon is the minister of St Mary's Presbyterian church and a Presbyterian chaplain at the University of Western Sydney (Parramatta Campus). Kamal had an adaptation of his presentation published this week in the Age & SMH (The good book's guide to great sex).

Satisfying God’s Honour?

My Apologies for not posting in more than a month!

Stott has shown that in explaining the cross, theologians went through periods where different theories took priority. The early Greek church Fathers explained the cross in terms of Christ's satisfaction of the rights and claims of the devil. The early Latin church Fathers explained the cross in terms of satisfying God's law. A third theory of the atonement was first proposed by Anselm of Canterbury in the eleventh century. (Anselm was an Italian, but became Archbishop of Canterbury in 1093 AD.)

Anselm's great work was Cur Deus Homo? (Why Did God become Man? Completed 1098.) His work is seen as a leading example of medieval 'scholasticism', which was an attempt to reconcile philosophy and theology, Aristotelian logic and Biblical revelation. While Anselm does include some Biblical quotes and considers the Bible a 'firm foundation', his prior commitment is to be 'agreeable to reason'.

Stott summarises Anselm's argument:

Modern Slavery? CPX Interview with Baroness Caroline Cox

Baroness Caroline Cox of Queensbury is a nurse, lecturer, author, advocate, humanitarian and cross-bench member of the House of Lords in Britain. She has lead a rich and full life that would fill the pages of an adventure novel. For decades she has worked to provide relief to people suffering in countries across the globe. Determined not to pontificate from afar, her policy has always to go where the people are and the trouble is at its worst. Her commitment and bravery in the face of real threat and deep discomfort is extraordinary.

This interview focuses on the reality of modern slavery. It is sad to think that despite the 200th anniversary of the abolition of the slave trade in Britain led by William Wilberforce, that slavery is such a significant issue around the world - and even in Australia.  Check out this video from CPX, then pray and think about what you can do:


Baroness Cox: Modern Slavery from CPX on Vimeo.

SATISFYING THE LAW??

In Chapter 5 of The Cross of Christ, Stott continues in the discussion of who is satisfied by the cross by asking the question 'Is it the law that is satisfied'?
He summarises this argument succinctly:

Sin is lawlessness (1 Jn 3:4), a disregard for God's law and disobedience to it. But the law cannot be broken with impunity. Sinners therefore incur the penalty of their law-breaking. They cannot simply be let off. The law must be upheld, its dignity defended and its just penalties paid. The law is thereby 'satisfied'.

The strength of this argument is that it recognises the justice or righteousness of God – in that His law is right and true demands an appropriate punishment.

Can a 16 Year-Old Girl Really Do Anything?

It was remarkable to see the reception that 16 year-old Jessica Watson received on her arrival in Sydney on Saturday. Tens of thousands of people turned out to welcome the girl that our Prime Minister called our "newest hero". As someone who has sailed around the world (HMAS Sydney, 1990, 450 foot ship, crew of 225, 6 months, lots of stops!) and experienced some of the challenges of being at sea in rough weather, I have nothing but respect for Jessica's efforts to sail around the world, solo, unassisted in a 34 foot boat in seven months!

Of course Jessica received a great deal of support from her parents and sponsors and was able to be in regular contact through the wonders of satellite communications. Nevertheless she had to face the challenges of solo sailing with all its inherent dangers, including huge seas which apparently knocked her boat over 7 times. It takes a special kind of mental toughness to tackle such a huge endeavour and to persevere to the end.

We might be thinking differently if there had been some accident or disaster. Many more experienced round-the-world sailors have failed in their attempts. Remember Tony Bullimore and Thierry Dubois – rescued by HMAS Adelaide from the Southern Ocean in 1997? Bullimore had to wait 5 days in his upturned boat before being rescued. Another competitor in the same race, Gerry Rouffs, lost his life.

But Saturday was all about celebrating Jessica's success. When the Prime Minister called Jessica a hero, she said:

I'm going to disagree with the Prime Minister. I don't consider myself a hero. I'm an ordinary girl who believed in her dream. You don't have to be someone special, or anyone special to achieve something amazing. You've just got to have a dream, believe in it and work hard.

They are inspiring words, but are they true? They certainly are a great encouragement to young people to dream great dreams and work hard to achieve them. While it is true that not everyone who dreams a dream and really believes in it will achieve their goal, it is also true that people who dream big and work hard to achieve their dream are more likely to achieve something!

This leads me to reflect on what young Christians dream about. Do we encourage our young people to dream great dreams for God and work hard to achieve them? Or are we happy to let them continue on with the same ambitions as the world around them? It is great for the 'old folks' to dream of reaching our city, nation and the world for God – when in reality our capacity to do the new things needed for such a mission are much more limited. But what if our young people started to dream big and started working on being and doing what is necessary to proclaim Christ to everyone around us? What if they were prepared to give up the small ambitions of the world and continue their whole lives working in God's strength to see His kingdom grow? Then we might indeed see great things done for God's kingdom in our own day.

SATISFYING THE DEVIL??

In Chapter 5 of The Cross of Christ, Stott examines a number of traditional views of what 'satisfaction' is achieved on the Cross. Was Jesus satisfying the devil?

The idea that on the cross Jesus satisfied the devil was apparently widespread in the early church. Stott suggests that the early church fathers were sometimes 'extremely injudicious' in the way they presented the devil's power and how the cross deprived him of it.

It is true that the Bible tells us that since the fall, mankind has been in captivity not only to sin and death, but also to the devil. Some of the (post-apostolic) early church fathers therefore thought of him as the major tyrant from whom Jesus came to liberate us.

Stott suggests that, with hindsight, we may detect three errors made by the early church fathers:

The Cross – Who is Satisfied??

Chapter 5 of John Stott's The Cross of Christ is on 'Satisfaction for Sin'. As Stott says, there are no words more likely to cause offence in discussions of the atonement than 'satisfaction' and the related term 'substitution'. He quotes Sir Alister Hardy, former professor of Zoology at Oxford and researcher into religious experience who describes his inability to come to terms with the 'crude' beliefs of many 'orthodox churchmen. Quoting from The Divine Flame (c. 1965) he says:

I feel certain that he [Jesus] would not have preached to us of a God who would be appeased by the cruel sacrifice of a tortured body. . . I cannot accept either the hypothesis that the appalling death of Jesus was a sacrifice in the eyes of God for the sins of the world , or that God, in the shape of his son, tortured himself for our redemption. I can only confess that, in my heart of hearts, I find such religious ideas to be among the least attractive in the whole of anthropology. To me they belong to quite a different philosophy – a different psychology – from that of the religion Jesus taught.'

Stott reminds us that opponents will often caricature the Christian understanding of the Cross in order to more readily condemn it. "The real question", he says, "is whether we can hold fast to the saving efficacy of the death of Jesus, and to its traditional vocabulary (including satisfaction and substitution) without denigrating God". His answer is "I believe we can and must."

Professor John Lennox on the Problem of Suffering and Evil

At a recent outreach at UWS we raised the question of suffering and evil by asking: 'Is God Really Good'

I found this helpful resource at the Centre for Public Christianity (CPX). Professor John Lennox (of Oxford University) discusses the arguments for God's goodness - at both an intellectual and emotional level. I hope it is helpful.


A good God? from CPX on Vimeo.



More videos can be found here:  http://www.publicchristianity.com/Videos/lennox.html