This is an interesting article...
I find it a little incorrect though, from my perspectives, that he has said that churches want to play a role in politics. I think it is less that churches want to play a role, and more that Christians want to play a role in plotics/national debate. They have been automatically excluded simply on the basis of their Christian faith for a long time - while other faiths - materialism, secularism, darwinism, athiesm etc are free to engage or set public debate
Churches must not play God with Caesar | Features | The Australian
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
I vote separation of Church and State.
Well yes in the sense that the Americans meant it. We never want the forced imposition of religious practise and in fact the message and mission of the church is weakened if it tried to be the state.
We also need to recognise that decisions are not made in a moral vacuum or apart from a worldview framework. What has now happened is that ethical questions aren't allowed to have answers that are informed by a Christian worldview because of an incorrect interpretation of 'separation of church and state'. So someone can be anti-abortion because they are a feminist and believe that abortion harms women, but not because they are a Christian and believe it is ethically wrong to take another's life. Both are worldviews - it's just that only one is 'allowed'.
interesting. You make a valid point.
speaking of valid points,
did u find campbell newmans 'climate change is the BIGGEST and MOST IMPORTANT issue facing us today' point stupid?
Greater than terrorism, more important than homelessness? As far as I know climate change hasn't killed anyone. I'd much rather my government stop me being shot than getting wet in a thunderstorm.
I was surprised to hear that point about the environment.
I am really still 'out' on exactly where I stand on all this global warming thing. If the consequences are what some people would say then he may be right. It would cause wide-spread homelessness. It's not as immediate but could be more dire in the long term and the global impact.
I saw "An inconvenient truth" yesterday and it had very good food for thought. While I don't accept as truth some of the things he presented, that didn't necessarily invalidate some of the action he proposed.
After all the idea of looking after the earth was God's anyway!
I saw An Inconvenient Truth on monday night.
It was interesting enough, but I couldnt help but notice, that was in fact a glorified seminar, with a flashy powerpoint presentation.
It really was hey Matt!
It sort of felt a bit like uni...
Post a Comment