We have seen in Australia a history of antagonism towards Chinese, German, and Italian immigrants, and latterly with refugees from South East Asia and Africa. The problem lies not with new settlers, but with those who cannot cope with confronting customs, dress, and colour.

I would like to direct you to a statement by Alfred Deakin, the chief architect of the Immigration Restriction Act of 1901, whose goal was to restrict immigration into Australia from non-European countries. He said:

It is not the bad qualities, but the good qualities of these aliens races that make them so dangerous to us. It is their inexhaustible energy, their power of applying themselves to new tasks, their endurance and low standard of living that make them such competitors.

He was speaking about immigrants from areas around Asia.

It took more than 50 years before Australia began to shift towards significantly increasing immigration of non-Europeans. And it was not until 1973, when the Whitlam Government implemented a series of amendments, that the enforcement of racial aspects of the immigration law were amended to create a more open and multicultural Australia.

Australia’s new official policy on racial diversity is: “to build on our success as a culturally diverse, accepting and open society, united through a shared future.”

In fact, more than 15 per cent of the Australian population now speaks a language other than English at home. The most commonly spoken languages are Italian, Greek, Cantonese, and Arabic.

I give you this history because of recent negatively-driven media hype and obsession associated with Islam, Muslims, people with “different” customs and dress codes, which have choked our society into forming a new ‘White Australia’ policy and Islamophobia.

Islam and its place in Australian society has been the subject of much public debate, yet there is still a great deal of misunderstanding about Australia’s Muslim communities.

According to the ABS 2006 census, approximately 340,392 people, or 1.71 per cent, of the total Australian population, were Muslims. Over a third, or alternatively 35 per cent, are actually Australian born, and their families have been in Australia for many generations.

I am appalled to have found out, through personal interaction with Muslims, and research from the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission (HREOC), that Muslims in our country do not feel that they belong. They commonly feel isolated and fearful of their safety.

The HREOC report called Isma Listen: National consultations on eliminating prejudice against Arab and Muslim Australians, found that participants identifiable as Arab or Muslim by their dress; language; name or appearance, told of having been abused; threatened; spat on; assailed with eggs; bottles; cans and rocks; punched and even bitten.

The issue is made more serious as evidence surfaces of Arab and Muslim Australians being:

Run off the road, and pedestrians run down on footpaths and in car parks. People reported being fired from their jobs or refused employment or promotion because of their race or religion. Children have been bullied in school yards. Women have been stalked, abused and assaulted in shopping centres. Private homes, places of worship and schools were vandalised and burned. Profanities were used to torment these people, and Arab and Muslim Australians were told to ‘go back to your own country’, even though they are Australian born, and their families have been in Australia for many generations.

The Report also found that most incidents raised in the consultations were not reported to police or other government authorities or even services, due to fear of victimisation; lack of trust in authority; lack of knowledge about the law and complaints processes; the perceived difficulty in making a complaint, and the perception that outcomes were unsatisfactory.

Recently while a guest of the Australian Muslim Women’s Association, I was horrified to hear Australian women speaking of their experience in the streets with complete strangers, that were believed not to be random attacks. Most events failed to be reported because of similar reasons discussed earlier.

A recent study on racist attitudes conducted by the University of New South Wales (UNSW) in 2003 found one in eight Australians interviewed admitted they were prejudiced, particularly towards Muslim Australians.

Ghali Hassan, a Global Research Contributing Editor, from Perth Australia, writes:

A report, entitled ‘Respect and Racism in Australia’, prepared in June 2004 by the Racism Monitor Group of University of Technology in Sydney (UTS) revealed that; the Australian Arab Muslim community “has been and continues to be unfairly targeted” specifically, and that racism is so frequent that “it has almost become accepted” and Muslims do not feel ‘entitled’ to make any complaints. Racism against Muslims is openly promoted, and continues to contribute to decrease in the process of integration. It is propagated by politicians as a tool to instil fear in the community and justify draconian policies.

The media plays a crucial role in inciting and legitimising these criminal acts. Ghali Hassan writes:

Anti-Muslim hatred is a best-seller in Australia. TV, radio, print and publishing houses are competing for the best available distortion of Islam and Muslims. In fact, one can become a celebrity overnight in Australia, by simply producing a distorted image of Arabs and Muslims. It is a widely promoted topic.

Hurand Seyit, director of the Forum on Australian-Islamic Relations publicly admits “there is underlying racism running deeply in the Australian psyche.”

Islamophobia is a serious threat to the Australian society. It is reminiscent to that of anti-Jews hatred in Europe in recent history.

I conclude by quoting the Acting Race Discrimination Commissioner for Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission, Dr William Jonas AM, who in 2003 said:

We need to confront the fears and uncertainties that have become a part of our everyday lives post-September 11 and guard against prejudice and intolerance, not just towards Arab and Muslim Australians, but also against other culturally and linguistically diverse communities. Increased hostility towards particular groups produces a dynamic of exclusions that encompasses a range of vulnerable groups – attacking the very principle of respect for diversity has an alarming ripple effect.

Protecting the core multicultural values of our society is a very good reason for action. We need to ensure that all Australians, Arabs and Muslims included, have the opportunity for equal participation in Australian society. To do this, we need to listen to, and acknowledge the kinds of prejudice, discrimination, and vilification experienced by Arab and Muslim Australians, post-September 11.

Let us pray that we too can emulate this attitude so as to prevent Islamophobia becoming the new ‘White Australia.’

Dr Moyes directed his concerns to the Minister for Housing in Parliament yesterday and asked, “Is the Minister aware that the few occupants left at Gallop Court, Maroubra, whilst waiting for relocation, fear for their lives due to the lack of appropriate security for Department of Housing Units?”

Dr Moyes went on to ask the Minister, “Will the Minister please indicate what is being done to adequately secure these Department of Housing premises while renovations are taking place? And also, please indicate why these people are forced to live out of boxes in such inhuman circumstances, without any communications, as to when or where they will find a new home?”

This issue is made more serious as Dr Moyes discovered that tenants who had recently moved into the estate only six weeks ago have now been told by Housing NSW that they would be moving again, but have not been told where or when. Dr Moyes said “It is utterly demeaning that these people should be forced to live in such dreadful conditions, the Government must address this issue as a matter of urgency, and ensure this does not happen to any other people who look to our state for housing refuge.”

Dr Gordon Moyes concluded by saying “I will ensure people like those living at Gallop Court are heard in this matter and delivered of this burden, and I will continue to support claims of similar matters in other areas so that people are treated with the utmost respect and dignity to which each individual deserves.”

END

Contact: Rev Dr Gordon Moyes AC MLC – (02) 9230 3340 or (02) 4389 1860

This is a program for teenagers who are in trouble with family and the community. Of the 25,000 children who have been through the program, he claims an 80% “turnaround” rate. The organisation is funded largely through public donations through groups like Rotary Clubs.

Of the 8000 children who attended Insearch camps in one year, analysis revealed that 45% had been sexually assaulted, 90% had experimented with drugs, 50% had contemplated suicide, 25% had tried suicide, and 60% came from dysfunctional homes. 35% had been sexually abused by the age of 16. Of those abused, 85% of the perpetrators were family members, family friends or someone “close and trusted”. “Insearch” has revealed a dark underside of family life. The problem of child abuse is an overwhelming one. The murders of several children this year have shocked the public. NSW alone had 22,682 reported and suspected cases of physical, emotional or sexual abuse, with 11,000 cases later confirmed. Studies indicate that only 10% of child abuse cases are reported to the authorities.

The incidence of child abuse correlates with the high incidence of families having children the second-time round. This is a shorthand way of speaking of blended families, step families and de facto families where the children belonged to at least one other parent not in the present relationship. Frequently children born into a second or third marriage may bring a lot of joy to the parents as a seal of their love together. More often than not, it can bring tension and poor relationships. When a child is missing, police usually look closest at the stepparent in the marriage.

Blended families refer to the parents and children who, due to remarriage, now belong to a new family setting. Second marriages may bring together his children and her children and then their children. Frequently the stepchildren, especially younger teenagers, have difficulty adjusting to the new parent and many leave home. I spent 50 years working with kids I had on probation or parole, or who were in youth groups I conducted or as Street kids in some inner city programs I ran at Wesley Mission. Most of these have been dropouts from blended marriages or failed marriages.

I know a mother who has fostered her own teenager’s unwanted child, thereby starting a new family of her own perhaps fifteen or twenty years after her own childbearing ceased. I know Grandparents who have taken over caring for their grandchildren when the parents have been killed, or jailed, or were not available for parenting. In the Bible, Jacob had twelve sons by four women, six by his first wife, then four by two female servants of his wife and then in old age he married Rachel and had two sons, Joseph around whom much of the book of Genesis revolves, and later Benjamin.

Jacob loved his second wife who was much younger than himself, and when she produced her first son, Joseph, the silly old man thought he was Super stud! Jacob “loved” Joseph more than any of his other sons, because he had been born to him in his old age; and he made a richly ornamented robe for him. When his brothers saw that their father loved him more than any of them, they hated him and could not speak a kind word to him.” (Genesis 37:3-4). The teenager Joseph paraded before his older stepbrothers and told them of his ascendancy over them through dreams he had. No wonder the older stepbrothers wanted to get rid of him. But who was at fault? His dreams were nothing but the ideas planted by his silly old father, who reinforced his preference by making Joseph an ‘amazing technicolour dreamcoat’! His coat was the symbol of his preferential treatment by his father. Sibling rivalry is usually caused by foolish parents!

How many times has a parent come into a ready-made family, taking the children of the former marriage, only to hear the words: “You’re not my REAL Mum! You can’t tell me what to do!” The door slams and another young teenager, who centuries ago ran away to sea, runs away to Kings Cross, as the words pierce his new stepmother’s heart. Such cries echo in thousands of homes, splintering relationships and shattering dreams of blissful family life.

About one in every five children lives in a reconstituted or “blended” family. Since 2005, families with stepchildren outnumber families raising their own children. As in nearly all families, the bulk of childrearing falls upon the stepmother, who, ever since the fairytale “Cinderella” has been given the title “wicked”. The role of being a stepparent is draining and demanding. As one said, “Being a step-mum is harder than biological parenting, and the delights are fewer.” With so many adults caring for children the second time round, their own or those they have inherited, how does a Christian cope? Here are a bunch of suggestions.

KEEP A CLOSE, OPEN RELATIONSHIP WITH YOUR SPOUSE.

Marriage and children arrive at the same time for a blended family. But the marriage is still the primary relationship and therefore must be nurtured. The failure rate for second/third marriages tops the divorce rate for first marriages. Often, the strain of raising children is too much for a remarried couple.

“It was his children, not my husband, that I wanted to divorce,” said one step-mum. “They drove a wedge between us and nearly destroyed our marriage and each other.” So the parent the second time round, must work to build a good relationship with his or her spouse. Seek counselling, if necessary, to build skills in communicating your feelings. Clarify and deal with issues before they become problems. Make decisions together. Often a child is jealous of the love of their natural parent being expressed to a new parent. Children can feel responsible for the other parent’s absence.

LOWER YOUR EXPECTATIONS.

Your dreams of “one big happy family” often set you up for a big fall, resulting in bitterness, guilt and jealousy. It takes a few years for a stepfamily to begin to be a family. Be patient and realise it may never fully come. But as respect for you grows, so will your authority.

AGREE ON A PLAN OF DISCIPLINE.

With your mate, develop a plan and then present a united front to the children. At least initially, the major part of discipline should be administered by the natural parent, who must clarify to the children that the step-parent possesses authority to discipline in his or her absence. After divorce, children suffer by bouncing between households where standards of behaviour differ. When co-parenting with the “ex”, try hard to maintain consistency and avoid an emotional tug-of-war.

Discipline in a blended family includes combating the universal phenomenon: the “Poor Little Thing” syndrome. This occurs when children are not held accountable for their behaviour in an attempt to “make up” for the painful realities of separation. Many people feel it is hard to discipline a child who has been through so much. If left unchecked, such an attitude guarantees the creation of a spoiled brat.

ACCEPT YOUR CHILDREN AND YOUR SITUATION.

One difficulty in step-parenting is accepting a child’s looks, personality, habits, manners, behaviour, style of dress, speech, choice of friends and feelings – all of which had no contribution from you. You might not even like these children, who may resent and reject you. But you have accepted some degree of responsibility for their care. Forget about “getting married and living happily ever after.” No family does. Time spent wishing for a “normal” situation is wasted. You have married into this family, so accept it as it is and make the best of it. Good omelettes can still be made with broken eggs!

LET CHRISTIAN LOVE DIRECT YOUR BEHAVIOUR.

An intense feeling of love for stepchildren may never come. That is okay. Keeping a child’s best interest at heart in loving ways represents the best of parenting. If you act out of Christian love – which means showing the utmost care for each child – you will do justly towards the child, and perhaps encourage a growth in love between you. But in any case, check your behaviour by the standard of Christian love. Jesus said, “Whoever receives one such child in my name receives me” (Matthew 18:5). When loving is hard, treat the child as though Jesus is asking you to love this child for Him. “I’ll do this for you, Lord” has gotten many a stepparent over a rough spot.

PRACTICE FORGIVENESS.

You will have to learn to forgive your stepchildren, your husband, the other influential adults in your blended family, any interfering in-laws, those who gossip about and criticise you, and a host of others. Realise that all the responsibility for the success of your blended family does not rest on you alone. Every problem your stepchild faces does not stem from the fact that he is a stepchild. Neither take all the credit, nor all the blame.
One of the worst ways we have of handling our guilt relates to our children. We try to compensate to them for what we subconsciously feel we have done by depriving them of their other parent, even if it was by death or accident. We try to buy their favour by our favours.

Many fathers who have access, visit their children with lavish gifts and good times. Children are quick to recognise a good thing and will take advantage of such indulgences. What is the father actually doing? He’s trying to assuage his own guilt over the failure of the marriage. The mother, who is quite often given custody of the children, may not have the same financial resources to do the same, and anyhow knows that disciplined living is best for the child, and so is seen as a mean mother. Children can become adept at pitting one parent against the other. The long-term effects can be devastating for all concerned.

Particularly when remarriage occurs, the guilt level can rise alarmingly fast. You have to learn to forgive others: the interference of the separated parent, the sniping remarks of in-laws, the subtle guilt that is undeserved and most of all, you have to seek God’s forgiveness of yourself.

The former partner has insidious ways of getting back at the ex-spouse through their children: by spoiling vacations and access visits; by failing to give the child a message from the other parent; saying disparaging things about the ex and the ex’s family; using the children as carrier pigeons insisting that they relate what is going on in the other parent’s new marriage and rehashing what contributed to the marital failure in the presence of the child. We all have much to forgive.

TAKE TIME FOR YOURSELF.

The pressing needs of a blended family can sap you physically, emotionally and spiritually. Refresh yourself in time alone with God, with special friends and with a hobby or sport you enjoy. Increase your self-esteem, take a class, read all the books by a favourite author, volunteer at a hospital or start a stamp collection. Choose a relaxing activity that will reduce stress in your life. Balance is your goal.

You will need support, someone in whom you can confide, someone who will listen non-judgmentally and accept you unconditionally. Stepparenting can be a lonely job. A support group will help fulfil Paul’s advice (Gal 6:2) “Carry each other’s burdens, and in this way you will fulfil the law of Christ.”

One Australian myth makes it harder for Australians to be nurturing parents. Our belief in our self-sufficiency started with those bush pioneers who came to the Great South Land, cut off from relatives and friends. The settlers moved out to set up farms in the bush, coping on their own became a way of life. This attitude of self-sufficiency is now inbred within us.

But there is great danger here when we allow pride to say, “I don’t need anyone else – and I certainly don’t need God.” Many Australian parents fall into that trap, especially men. We believe that if we let others see what we are really like, they will reject us and we will be destroyed. It is as if we put on armour to protect ourselves. We think that everyone else has it together, so we go around pretending we are strong and capable even when our insides are screaming for help.

We assume there is no one to help when it all gets too much. No other society in history has asked this of its families; but we swallow this myth.

We stiffen in our pride and self-sufficiency, not ready to admit to anyone that our family is having a rough time. To seek counselling or to go to parenting courses is seen by some as a sign of weakness and an admission of failure. To be nurturing parents, we need each other’s help. Once we stop thinking that OURS is the only family with problems, we might be game enough to admit it to others.

BUILD A STRONG RELATIONSHIP WITH OTHER BELIEVERS.

Read your Bible, pray, and worship with other Christians. God understands all your feelings, triumphs and defeats. He guides you over those rocky spots. And He keeps your secrets. Involvement with other believers helps in a practical way. If you are part of a loving Christian community, helping to meet the needs of others, it will be more natural to take responsibility for the nurturing and care of children other than your own.

Being a parent the second time round requires special sense and a lot of grace. You require resources other than your own. Nowhere else can you find strength to cope than from the presence of God. God brought forth a Son, Jesus Christ, then eventually by faith in Him, we become children of God. God can become your Father too by your faith. The God of the second time round is able to help you in your greatest of all challenges.

Rev The Hon Dr Gordon Moyes, A.C., M.L.C.

At a time when many marriages do not endure, it is entirely fitting that couples who do achieve these anniversaries and their families should be publicly congratulated. I looked forward to our families celebrating some important milestones recently. Beverley and I celebrated our 50th Wedding Anniversary, my 50th Anniversary of ordination as a Minister, and then more recently our 70th birthdays. We had always thought this would involve great celebrations given to us by our extended family now numbering 24, only to discover they expected the celebrations to be arranged and paid for by Mum and Dad!

However I arrange congratulatory messages to citizens of New South Wales such as 50th Wedding Anniversary from the Prime Minister of Australia, Premier of NSW, Governor-General of Australia and Governor of NSW; with the 60th, 65th and 70th Wedding Anniversary greetings coming from Her Majesty the Queen, the Prime Minister of Australia, the Premier of NSW, the Governor-General of Australia and the Governor of NSW.

I also arrange 90th Birthday best wishes to come from the Prime Minister of Australia and the Premier of NSW. And of course, the highly regarded best wishes for 100th, 105th and 110th Birthdays from Her Majesty the Queen, the Prime Minister of Australia, the Premier of NSW, the Governor-General of Australia and the Governor of NSW.

Unfortunately, The North Turramurra Church of Christ celebrating its 45th anniversary has only my congratulations. The Churches of Christ where I ministered celebrated their 90th and 110th anniversaries, and Wesley Mission celebrated its 190th anniversary several years ago. I spoke at our home church at Box Hill, Melbourne for its 50th, 60th, and last month they celebrated their 100th.

We are delighted to be here to celebrate with you as I have done several times before. I first came here as part of a State Wide series of evangelistic programs across all NSW Churches of Christ, organized by Kevin Crawford 35 years ago in 1975. I enjoyed hospitality at that time in Barton and Arlette Perkins’ beautiful home in Fidden’s Wharf Road.

Since then I have preached here for church anniversaries, youth outreaches, and before dozens of classes of students from Carlingford Theological College where I taught preaching and media communication for ten years.

This church was planted by the Chatswood church in the 1960s. As families moved into the newer suburbs of Turramurra, Pymble and Wahroonga it was decided by the Chatswood Church to establish a management committee to oversee the responsibility of planting a church in North Turramurra. As a result, a small fellowship of families gathered in the area for communion twice a month.

Land was bought and the site was selected to build the chapel. At 3 pm on 27th February 1965 the foundation stone was laid. The main purpose of this brief ceremony outside on the Allarra Avenue side was to ‘stimulate local interest and acquaint the larger Chatswood membership of the thrilling developments at North Turramurra.’ (Minutes 6/2/65)

The land was bought and the chapel erected debt free in 1965 through the generosity of the fellowship at both North Turramurra and Chatswood. Many people sacrificed to make what we have a reality. In August of 1965 the first service was held in the chapel at 9:30am followed by Sunday school at 10:45am.

The sense in 1965 was that ‘God has presented us with a unique opportunity for the proclamation of the gospel – demanding from each of us the highest standards of love and service.’

From 1965 to the present North Turramurra has been served by fine ministers and those ministries of the church have reflected the needs of the community. In 2007 the latest addition to the church, in fulfilment of the founders’ vision, was again added debt free through the wonderful generosity and sacrifice of the fellowship. In 2009 the Manse was restored to provide more suitable accommodation for the minister and family.

One dark night over thirty years ago, I was flying in a single engine airplane from Bendigo, where I had addressed the University, to Tullamarine, to catch the last flight back to Sydney. My pilot was Russell G. Withers, Managing Director of Pacific-Seven Eleven Stores Pty. Ltd.

Russell knew that at Wesley Mission I was planning on building a new Wesley Centre at a cost of over $300 million. I was troubled because it involved demolishing the Wesley Centre built only fourteen years previously under the leadership of Sir Alan Walker, and on which we still owed over a million and a quarter dollars.

Furthermore, Sir Alan had given me ten reasons why we should not redevelop our total site with a huge building many times the size of the existing collection of buildings including the Wesley Centre he had built. As the new young minister, I was a threat to his building.

The decrepit buildings on Castlereagh St., and in Wesley Arcade concerned me and the need to refurbish the Lyceum Theatre which was now showing wear and tear, and high maintenance costs. It seemed to me that total re-development was the only answer. Demolish all the buildings, clear the debt, and build 42 storeys high and 8 storeys underground for car parking of 500 cars was my vision.

I shared my concerns with Russell Withers in the dark cockpit of the small plane. He commented: “The successful store operator in my game refurbishes his store every three or four years top to bottom. So have a look at your own site. You can’t help an old location but you sure can help an old store.”

“You can’t help an old location but you sure can help an old store.” That was true. Our historic location in the very heart of the CBD was superb. The land value was high. But our low level buildings were a century old! We could not help our old location but we sure could help our old property! I became convinced we could redevelop the whole site in what would be one of Sydney’s greatest building projects at that time. Committees were established and over several years approvals were gained, plans were drawn and re-drawn, a developer, a financier and a builder were locked in. This all took 20 years to complete. But we opened in 1991 with 35 official openings with 35,000 people attending.

In 1978, I had written a thesis entitled “Transforming the City Church”, based upon my understanding of what was required for a city ministry in Sydney. I said any new church would require the answers to nine theological issues. Our church members studied my theological requirements of a city church. When we had our theology right, we drew up the specifications, then the architects designed a building to fit them.

On this anniversary I want to consider today those theological requirements which will explain what we should be doing as a church.

For our theological understanding determines how we use our buildings.
Contrary to our Akubra bush hats and four wheeled drive vehicles, Australians are not rural creatures. People by nature are urban creatures. Adam was a rural creature, but his son Cain lived in a city. Mankind has long left behind the concept of a rural Eden, and has headed for the city and the suburbs where he finds the fulfilment of his desires. Every achievement of humanity in art, culture, government, religion, politics, scientific and technological achievement has been born and developed in cities and suburbs. These nine theological understandings must guide our ministry:

1.SACRAMENT:
We have a sacramental ministry. For the Church is a symbol of God’s presence. The Church reminds the world that God is at work and that He can take ordinary lives and transform them by His power. Each person has been claimed by God and is loved by God. God loves them and offers them His power for living.

When the youth is pressured to experiment with drugs, or join in juvenile crime, or when the adult is tempted to be unethical in business, or to commit adultery, that person knows God has a place within his or her life. The sacrament affirms God’s presence. The Church possesses the signs of the faith: a Cross symbolising the Christ, a baptistry for believers baptism, a free-standing communion table, a pulpit, open space for alternative forms of worship including drama, music groups, mime, video and dance. I Wesley Centre I planned for four congregations to worship simultaneously in one huge building with theatre, church, lyceum and chapel.

2.SALVATION:
The presence of the Church is a reminder to the whole world of the forgiveness, healing and hope that God offers those who accept His salvation. That message of salvation must be passed on to others. Hence evangelism is primary to all we do.

We worship in many languages and multiculturalism is a normal way of life. People are valued regardless of race. Human nature has not changed since Jesus walked beside Galilee. In spite of all our technological and scientific ability we still have the same problems. Neither education, technology, psychology, nor scientific progress answers personal need. The Bible indicates that apart from God we are sinners needing salvation. The Church must proclaim salvation in Christ. Only Christ saves from sin.

3.SANCTUARY:
There exists in human hearts a need to find a transcendence in living. Urban dwellers need the elevating experience of worship. Where concrete replaces lawns and trees, where factories shut off the sunset, and where the noise of traffic substitutes for the song of birds and wind in the trees – the human spirit is dulled. Hence a new church should be a place of quiet refuge – carpeted, soft drapes, wall hangings, soft natural lighting, stained glass from our heritage, real flowers and greenery, and an atmosphere encouraging prayer and meditation. The church must be a sanctuary pointing beyond itself to a deep and satisfying relationship each can have with our Creator.

4.SECURITY:
People in the city always feel insecure. But the Church can provide a sense of security in the midst of rapid social change. It can provide an eternal stability, a point of reference when all about is in a state of flux.

So many folk face loneliness, feel fragmented, alienated, depersonalized, and powerless. Personal wholeness and healthy interpersonal relationships are difficult. Their devotion to the things of this world seems to shut out ultimate concerns. The Church is given by God a ministry of reconciliation; bringing the warring and the divided self together under the Lordship of Christ; helping the defeated to find dignity, courage, and reconciling them to God. Hence the church must have areas where people can be at home, feel welcome, and find friendship. Historical memorabilia, and stained glass remind us that Jesus Christ is the same yesterday, today and forever.

5.SEMINARY:
The Church must equip Christians for their personal ministry. This involves all aspects of Christian education and of developing those gifts within each individual in small groups and classes. Every church must have a good program of Christian education for students of all ages.

6.SERVANT:
The body of Christ is His servant people. Our Church depends upon His servants seeing the need of mankind and giving themselves into the service of the gospel. The ministry of the Church is the whole people of Christ meeting the needs of people. So we serve the poor and powerless.

7.SOCIETY:
The substance of cities lies not in buildings, freeways and overpasses, but in the way people live together. The roads and streets are a network of communication, the houses and buildings are shells in which we sleep and work. But the life of the city is its relationships. Social networking is fundamental. We bring together the people of the city. Against the impersonality, loneliness, and lack of communication between people, lies the Church with its sense of participation, communication and friendship. That communication takes place in all our social activities. The Church puts heart into society, content into communication, and fellowship into acquaintanceship.

8.SPACE:
Churches must provide space within urban areas. Our streets are lined with building crammed against building, fighting each other as they reach for the sky. Small streets and laneways are over crowded as buildings seem to touch each other at the top. There is an overbearing pressure of buildings. Many people feel entombed within those streets. But the Church breathes space. The quiet atmosphere gives a feeling of space to the spirit. People come in from the street to the quiet and peace of an open Church and sit quietly and pray. A feeling calm and peace comes into overcrowded lives.

9.SPIRIT:
The church is the only provider of the essential human spirit. Every urban dweller ingests some of the pressures, some of the tensions and some of the attitudes of the city. People who live their lives within an oppressive and hard environment cannot help but be infected by the spirit of their community. But the Church can give people a new spirit. Here is the promise of a new creation, of a citizenship that goes beyond this earth to heaven, and a promise of a heavenly city, not made with hands but eternal in the heavens. Our services provide a sense of meaning, hope, and transcendence to living.

When a Church establishes itself with buildings, the architect has the privilege of drawing the lines round theology and of making the Church real in the centre of the streets.

“You can’t help an old location but you sure can help an old store.” Forty-five years of history, and stronger and fresher than at any time.

God has been faithful to your efforts to fulfil that challenge of making a new church for His glory and for the service of your community.

“Behold, I make all things new!” Thank you Lord Jesus! Help us be your Church. We can’t help our location, but we can help our community by being the Church! As Paul said, “Now you are the body of Christ and individually members of it.” 1 Corinthians 12: 27

REV. THE HON. DR. GORDON MOYES, A.C., M.L.C.

Parliamentary Leader of Family First NSW Gordon Moyes believes that the controversy surrounding the introduction of the ‘Summary Offences Amendment (Full-face Coverings Prohibition) Bill’ is fuelling the rise of racial intolerance in Australia. He said, “Australia projects itself as tolerant, welcoming and a fair go country, however, Islamophobia is becoming an increasing part of the Australia psyche. If we continue to fuel an intolerant society, we risk being labelled the new ‘White Australia’.”

A project by the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission called استمع- Listen: National consultations on eliminating prejudice against Arab and Muslim Australians found that participants identifiable as Arab or Muslim by their dress, language, name or appearance, told of having been abused, threatened, spat on, assailed with eggs, bottles, cans and rocks, punched and even bitten.

“Islamophobia is growing rapidly in Australia in that it is not uncommon to see white Australians insulting and harassing Muslim women for wearing a head-dress, but we find no criminal offence, in fact it is considered a mission of ‘liberating’ Muslim women.” said Dr Moyes.

Dr Moyes advises the issue is made more serious as evidence surfaces of Arab and Muslim Australians being “run off the road, and pedestrians run down on footpaths and in car parks. People reported being fired from their jobs or refused employment or promotion because of their race or religion. Children have been bullied in school yards. Women have been stalked, abused and assaulted in shopping centres. Private homes, places of worship and schools were vandalised and burned. Profanities were used to torment these people, and Arab and Muslim Australians were told to ‘go back to your own country’, even though over a third (35 per cent) of Muslim Australians are actually Australian born, and their families have been in Australia for many generations. Perhaps even more troubling and unsettling is the fact that Arab and Muslim Australians expressed feelings of fear and isolation, and not belonging to Australia… Is this the Australia we want?”

“Recently while a guest of the Australian Muslim Women’s Association, I was horrified to hear Australian women speaking of their experiences in the streets from complete strangers. This is the ugly side of Australians who cannot cope with others different from themselves. We saw it in history with antagonism towards the Chinese, German and Italian immigrants, and latterly with refugees from South East Asia and Africa. The problem lies not with the new settlers, but with those who cannot cope with confronting customs, dress and colour. We name it for what it is: racism!” stated Dr Gordon Moyes.

Dr Moyes concludes, “We need to confront the fears and uncertainties that have become a part of our everyday lives, and guard against prejudice and intolerance, not just towards Arab and Muslim Australians, but also against other culturally and linguistically diverse communities. We need to protect our multicultural society, and ensure all Australians have the opportunity to feel they belong.”

END

Contact: Rev Dr Gordon Moyes AC MLC – (02) 4389 1860 or (02) 9230 3340

As most convicts were Irish Catholics, it was inevitable their numbers would grow until one in every seven Australians was of Irish Catholic descent. They became strongly involved in the Labor Party in State and national politics.

As the Labor Party came under the influence of the Communist Party, the Catholic Church strongly supported the formation of a new political party, the Democratic Labor Party. The split in the Labor Party was responsible for keeping the conservative parties in power. Other Christian groups became aligned with the policies and personnel of the Australian Democrats and the Greens. Christians stood for, and were elected to, Parliament in all of these parties.

In the midst of this, Fundamentalist Christians formed the Christian Democratic Party led by Rev Fred Nile. Unfortunately, the direction of the Party resulted in the support which was previously given by all the major Christian denominations to be withdrawn. No denominational leader today comes out in public statements of support for this party. There is only one CDP party member in only one Parliament in Australia.

Because of this the Family First Party, based upon Christian values, which grew out of the churches and with the support of other people who hold those same family values, regardless of their religious beliefs, has become the fifth largest party in Australia with Parliamentarians in a number of State Parliaments and the National Senate.

What are those political policies and principles that might be regarded as the desires of God’s heart? Some people answer that question just by listing a number of cultural issues, which are not strictly speaking Biblical issues. Others just name policies that uphold the status quo and a conservative position.

A careful study of the Bible will illuminate those issues that Christians should promote in the political process.

When Mary was pregnant she visited her kinswoman Elizabeth, who gave birth to John the Baptist. While there Mary burst forth into praise in what has become known as the Magnificat. In that song of praise is an insight into what God wanted of his people in society. It is a revolutionary concept:

46 And Mary said: “My soul glorifies the Lord and my spirit rejoices in God my Saviour, for He has been mindful of the humble state of His servant. From now on all generations will call me blessed, for the Mighty One has done great things for me— holy is His name. His mercy extends to those who fear Him, from generation to generation. He has performed mighty deeds with His arm; He has scattered those who are proud in their inmost thoughts. He has brought down rulers from their thrones but has lifted up the humble. He has filled the hungry with good things but has sent the rich away empty. He has helped His servant Israel, remembering to be merciful to Abraham and His descendants forever, even as He said to our fathers.” Luke 1.

1. JESUS WAS BORN AS A SOCIAL REFORMER.

Mary spoke just after the conception of Jesus, of the revolutionary impact her Christ-child would have. Her song of praise during her pregnancy is called the Magnificat from the first word in the Latin translation. This is a parallel with the song of Hannah. (1 Sam¬uel 2:1-10).

Mary shared the same feelings as Hannah who dedicated her son, Samuel, to the Lord. God was starting a revolution and starting it, as usual, in the birth of a baby!

GOD’S PERSONAL REVOLUTION. (Luke 1:46-47)

“And Mary said: “My soul glorifies the Lord and my spirit rejoices in God my Saviour for He has been mindful of the humble state of His servant.” God was working within her. She could feel the changes. Mary was the first of millions of people who believed in Jesus Christ as God’s Son, and found God was working a revolution within.

That personal revolution was launched one starry night in Bethlehem. That personal revolution changed people, the conditions of the world, and their future more than anything else in all history. That baby growing within her was the One who would change the world throughout the next two thousand years. God was changing people and through them the world.

GOD’S MORAL REVOLUTION. Luke 1:46-51

“God has performed mighty deeds with His arm; He has scattered those who are proud in their inmost thoughts.” One new translation says: “The arrogant of heart and mind He has put to rout.” Jesus was to show God’s great moral revolution in a new standard of behaviour and a new example of conduct towards each other. From now on humility was to count rather than pride, and love was to count rather than force.

The teaching of Jesus on humility was revolutionary. People are proud and arrogant. The higher up they go the more they look down on others. But when Christ comes within a person this is changed. For pride in self, and love for Christ cannot dwell in one person. When Jesus called Simon Peter, the Big Fisherman was at work. He was a good fisherman, big and strong, an acknowledged leader. He was proud of his position and reputation. Then he met Jesus! His pride cracked. He fell down on his knees and cried “Depart from me, for I am a sinful man, O Lord.” Christ came, pride went. This was revolutionary teaching: humility was greater than pride.

Christ’s teaching on love was revolutionary. Even now this is still too revolutionary for most people. Jesus said the way to treat those who hated you or persecuted you was to love them out of it. But we are too scared to try this today. He said: “You have heard that it was said “You shall love your neighbour and hate your enemy,” but I say to you “Love your enemies and pray for those who persecute you.”” Here was God’s moral revolution: humility would be greater than pride, and love greater than might, and Mary foretold it.

GOD’S SOCIAL REVOLUTION. Luke 1:52

Mary told of a social revolution when God put “down rulers from their thrones but has lifted up the humble.” How often do you hear that the Church should stick with religion and have nothing to do with social issues, politics, or economics? God does not agree. God is concerned for spiritual life but also for the social and economic as well.

The Prophets thundered against the evils of their day. Amos preached against cruel economic policy, drunkenness, sexual immorality, low standard housing, and the rising cost of living for the poor. Jesus proclaimed the Kingdom of God based upon love, not the kingdoms of rulers based upon force. His was the way of peace.

With Jesus came God’s great social revolution. My Theological College Principal Mr. E. Lyall Williams said: “The witness of the Church includes the task of prophetic witness in the case of wrong, of declaring the will of God in personal and domestic affairs, and also no less clearly in our corporate life as nations, in business, politics, culture, and religion.”

Our world needs God’s word. When we give to Caesar what is his, and to God what is due to Him, we will cause a social revolution in the society. We reject politics which throws people on the scrapheap unemployed. We reject racial prejudice. We reject both socialism and capitalism. God intends a new social revolution.

GOD’S ECONOMIC REVOLUTION. Luke 1:53

Mary said: “God has filled the hungry with good things but has sent the rich away empty.” In a secular society each is out to get what he can for himself. A Christian society is one where no-one dares to have too much while others have too little. God’s economic revolution aims at creating a society where we all are our brother’s keeper, where we share each other’s burdens, and help the needy.

A Christian society gives food to the hungry, drink to the thirsty, clothes to the naked, hospitality to strangers, companionship to the sick, comfort to the prisoners, and love to our neighbour. These things can be done by each of us now. God’s economic revolution has already seen much achieved, but there is still much to do.

GOD’S SPIRITUAL REVOLUTION. Luke 1:54-55.

Mary further said: “He has helped His servant Israel, remembering to be merciful to Abraham and his descendants forever, even as He said to our fathers.” He still blesses us. Under Christians who have believed these revolutionary things, many immoral practices of the community have stopped, infanticide has ended, slavery is outlawed, hospitals, schools, missions, factory acts, pensions, sick benefits – almost every improvement in the moral, social, and economical realm of the last 2000 years has come from the work of reforming Christians.

The church needs to be recalled to its revolutionary charter. We need to be rebellious against unemployment, poverty, homelessness, racism, sexism, immorality of every kind. God’s will is for revolutionary social changes. Mary saw her infant holy would be the means of radical change for the better. We must work with Him for the changes.

2. JESUS LIVED AS A SOCIAL REFORMER.

Jesus demonstrated radical social change through acceptance of women and their contribution to God’s work. He demonstrated egalitarianism in table fellowship by inviting all to sit and eat with Him. He refused to become a village patron, instead as a wandering preacher and healer He went to all.

This social ethic is a reason for the growth of the Early Church. In the early centuries, women cared for destitute babies and orphans. Christians knocked on poor people’s doors and offered to move in to nurse the sick, deliberately exposing themselves to illness. They shared their rooms and food, though not their marriage beds. They were indistinguishable by speech or clothing but different in their conduct and character. We do not need new technologies to be an effective church. We need a rediscovery of this vision and energy, compassion and morality.

3. JESUS DIED AS A SOCIAL REFORMER.

Many in the elite class in Judea, saw Jesus as a threat to their social customs and standing. They saw in Him a danger to their established Temple practises. They organised His crucifixion. Lord Macleod, of the Iona Community in Scotland wrote: “Jesus was not crucified in a cathedral between two candles, but on a Cross between two thieves, on the town garbage heap; at a cross-road so cosmopolitan that they had to write the charge against him in three languages at the kind of place where cynics talk smut, and thieves curse and soldiers gambled because that is where He died and that is what He died about. And that is where churchmen should be and what churchmen should be about.”

This is the conclusion of some scholars. Some argue Jesus was as radical a reformer as were the revolutionary Zealots. Yet there is no Biblical evidence to substantiate this. Others see Jesus as a countercultural social reformer breaking down barriers and bringing change into the life of society.

There is a great deal of Biblical evidence that Jesus proclaimed a new way of living and broke down the social barriers between people. John Dominic Crossan sees the provision of free healing without any commitment to a system of village patronage and His wonderful way of inviting just anybody, male or female, rich or poor round his meal table, as evidence of Jesus being a social reformer. Further, he says, when Jesus healed people, it was not so much their physical disease He was healing, but their social alienation.

Richard Horsley sees Jesus as a critic of His society, attacking the Romans for false religion and the priests of Israel for betraying the essence of their faith. Neither group would feature in God’s kingdom which would soon transform Israel’s social conditions and end Rome’s political dominance. His revolution was a grass-roots one, working from the peasants up rather a political revolution working from the top down to overthrow the current regime.

They see Him as the founder of a Galilee peace party. Unlike the other revolutionaries from Galilee, His methods were non-violent. The meek inherit the earth. The peacemakers are blessed. He would establish an egalitarian society where all would have a place, to replace patriarchal oppression (eg Matt 10:34-37; Mark 12:18-27). Discipleship meant casting aside everything for the social revolution.

Yet the theory that Jesus was just a social reformer neither fits the social factors of Galilee nor the Gospel evidence. Jesus was never just a political agitator put to death for His revolutionary message. He was the Lamb of God dying for the sins of the world.

Today we still work for social change in line with the scriptures. Some working for social change want Jesus to baptise their particular ideas. The liberationist, feminist, and homosexual theologians all point to some truth in their theories, but they also fall short of other Christian requirements.

For example, Jesus did not advocate social change which was morally wrong. This is why the homosexual lobby wanting their sexual behaviour approved is wrong in claiming Jesus the social reformer blesses their crusade. The scriptures are clear: the homosexual lifestyle is not acceptable to God. It is not a question of homosexuals not under-standing the scriptures: they just ignore them.

Christians cannot do that. They obey the rules not look for loopholes. Immoral people not only change the goal posts, they discard the rule book.

Jesus is a social reformer. But Jesus is more! He is both Lord and Saviour! His reforms were always in line with the scriptures and with God’s expressed word on morality. Just because some people ignore morality, does not mean that it does not exist. To call Jesus just a social reformer, is to miss entirely His claims to be God’s Son, to be the Messiah. It is to ignore the central theme of the Cross and Resurrection. Social reformer? Yes – but more! He is Lord whose word and morality is to be obeyed. He is Christ, whose death and resurrection is to be believed. That is the way God’s biggest revolution takes place in our lives.

Rev the Hon Dr Gordon Moyes AC MLC

What is so heart-wrenching in all of these cases is that there is simply no need for such suffering and such waste of precious human life. Many other jurisdictions have established what are called Baby Safe Havens and these effectively save the lives of many babies every year. There are many married couples eager to adopt and care for such children, there is no reason for babies to be condemned to death by frightened mothers.

As Leader of the Family First Party NSW, I believe that Baby Safe Havens are desperately needed in New South Wales, and will introduce legislation into the next session of parliament. One would have hoped that in our more enlightened and compassionate age the problem of abandoned babies or actual infanticide would have been long past. After all, women have supposedly been in control of their fertility since the advent of effective birth control in the 1960’s. However, the sad evidence continues to prove that in some cases women are simply unprepared emotionally, financially, or otherwise for the responsibilities of unplanned motherhood. Baby Safe Havens would allow such women to relinquish unwanted newborns with immunity from prosecution. This would mean fewer abandoned babies, living or dead.

State governments in the USA have introduced Acts that have allowed either parent to legally surrender newborn infants (up to 7 days old) to a hospital, police station, fire station or other designated public facility without facing any criminal prosecution. Some additionally allow such relinquishments for babies 3 days old or younger at some churches, ambulances, and adoption agencies. These laws have been effectively saving the lives of infants in those states, and we need similar legislation enacted in New South Wales with the details to be worked out with the appropriate agencies.

But, as in the US versions, if either of the parents was available they would be thanked for bringing the infant to a safe place then asked if they could provide any information that would assist in planning for the future care of the child, but only voluntarily. None of this would be required, however, as that could present a hurdle that could endanger the baby’s life if anonymity is preferred.

I believe that society must act to save the lives of babies, and that such Baby Safe Haven legislation would be compassionate to parents and newborns alike, and help solve a serious problem faced by society.

Rev The Hon Dr Gordon Moyes, A.C., M.L.C.

“Act as if the whole election depended upon your single vote, and as if the whole Parliament and the whole nation on that single person whom you now vote to be a member of it.”

From his letter: “A Word to a Freeholder 1748”

Dr Moyes continues: “I believe that Baby Safe Havens are desperately needed in New South Wales, and will introduce legislation into the next session of parliament. Baby Safe Havens will allow such troubled women to relinquish unwanted newborns with immunity from prosecution. This would mean fewer abandoned babies, living or dead, and help for the mother if she wanted to accept it.”

Dr Moyes points out that a number of state governments in the USA have introduced Acts that have allowed either parent to legally surrender newborn infants (up to 7 days old) to a hospital, police station, fire station or other designated public facility without facing any criminal prosecution. Some additionally allow such relinquishments for babies 3 days old or younger at some churches, ambulances, and adoption agencies. “These laws have been effectively saving the lives of infants in those states, and we need similar legislation enacted in New South Wales with the details to be worked out with the appropriate agencies,” he explained.

“But, as in the US versions, if either of the parents were available they would be thanked for bringing the infant to a safe place then asked if they could provide any information that would assist in planning for the future care of the child, but only voluntarily. None of this would be required, however, as that could present a hurdle that could endanger the baby’s life if anonymity is preferred.”

“I believe that society must act to save the lives of babies, and that such Baby Safe Haven legislation would be compassionate to parents and newborns alike, and help solve a serious problem faced by society”, Dr Moyes said.

END

Contact: Rev Dr Gordon Moyes AC MLC – (02) 9230 3340 or (02) 9230 3341

The major cities in each State have been receiving full attention from the political leaders as they have the major marginal seats. It is these marginal seats that are funded. For example, the Epping to Parramatta railway line was not on the State Government plan for the next ten years. But it is a Seat the Government feared the Liberals would win. So Prime Minister Gillard, without full consultation with the State Government planners, promised $2.5 billion to build the railway as soon as the State puts up the first $500 million.

Considering the State Government doesn’t have $500 million to spend anywhere, this was a strange request. It was like a teenage boy pestering his father to buy him a sports car for $100,000, and the father agreeing provided the teenager paid the first $10,000! Some hope that the sports car will ever be purchased! The father gave the promise but knew his money was safe!

That is the sort of promise that fools some people in marginal seats. But that is typical of many promises made.

2. ON THE CENTRAL COAST.

In the country, citizens get angry when all the promises and money flow to the marginal seats in the large cities. Neither leader has come up with any vision for our rural communities. Bridges over every watercourse need replacing. Rail infrastructure for the transport of wheat needs to be replaced. Major roads need to be upgraded. Employment for rural youth, perhaps to be trained as ambulance drivers to keep the services in town, and the retention and rebuilding of rural hospitals, are priorities. At least some cancer clinics are needed in the country, and seat belts on school busses, and prohibitions against using fine agricultural land for open cut mining or building dams for water in the cities.

The water buyback scheme so wanted by urban Greens, ignores the needs of farmers and irrigators. The plan for the Murray Darling was put off being announced until after the election. Local issues were not accurately addressed at all. They are ignored.

Take, for example, the need for a stadium for our local soccer team. On a visit by the Prime Minister to gain support for her party in the marginal seat of Robertson, she announced a new stadium would be built by the Government for the Mariners Soccer team at a cost to taxpayers of $10.2 million. What no-one in the Federal Government seems to understand is that the Mariners is a privately owned business run by shareholders who are the only ones likely to financially benefit from a larger stand enabling a bigger paying crowd.

Meanwhile the athletics track owned by the community has no stand at all and the area where people have to stand is a quagmire. Every school in the community uses this field, and it is in use every day. Local issues are ignored by politicians as their seats are not marginal.

Elections should be the time of visionary plans for the nation as a whole, and when promises are made they should be relevant and costed accurately. That has not happened in this election.

Rev The Hon Dr Gordon Moyes, A.C., M.L.C.