Some people ask why I am gentle to some of the Papists, and refer to them, because I don’t get anything back. Not to say anything about the spam, which talks about monetizing this blog, or the enemy, who will find nothing but offense. Well, in part this about a witness, in part it is keeping myself accountable.
Thousands of men and women of good will get to the cybersphere to take part in the war as humble foot soldiers, and not only they do not make any money out of their blog but they even spend money to run it. Whilst they might wish that a financial reward could be attached to their activity, the reward in heaven is the reason why they blog and they therefore write gratis et amore Dei without any difficulty. This little effort does not give a Barack Hussein if the fairly clear words therein published about the Pope – words that the blog authors feels not only can, but must be said for the good of his and his readers’ souls – cause the readership to stagnate, dwindle, or disappear. Such considerations are neither here nor there. There are no running costs to be paid, and whatever technology investment is required is paid by me gladly and without thinking twice. The freedom this gives is a luxury few businesses (and be they without the aim of a profit for the owner) are willing to afford. If you make of journalism your profession you are a professional journalist. Even if you accept a lower pay to help the cause, you get your livelihood from it. Even if your organisation is a non profit, the necessity to make that 90-to-94% of the revenue (good is the media company that makes 6% of its revenue in net profit before taxes, and very good the one that makes 10%; very many do not make any profit at all, and the Internet isn’t going to make it easier for them) is there anyway. All this can easily – and we have an example in front of us – shape the way these companies do business.
That is Brother Mundabor, and the Papist is correct. He who pays the piper calls the tune, and that is a reason there is no paypal donate button here. There are plenty of those who need helping out in their witness support them. I think Mundabor is in error because his church has fallen into syncretic heresy and is not reformed: he says my soul is at risk if I don’t return to Holy Mother Church. But… at the last day we will both be corrected.
Now to the text: many say that no judgement means we cannot teach about sin and hell and judgment, ignoring the last sentence, and completely ignoring the story of Michal.
For I have no problems with either of these passages. I have do difficulty condemning a sin without despising the person. Because I understand sin: I am a sinner. I am just glad that that sin is not one I am tempted by. I pray for your mercy to not serve the cinnabom or the carbohydrates in front of me: nor send me photos of fast cars, medium format cameras or violas, for I both have gear acquisition syndrome and am a glutton. And both require discipline and daily forgiveness.
So I don’t despise the drug addict or theif or the poor woman putting her body on the rack. There but for the grace of God go I. But… I want the theif and whore working honestly, the drug addict clean. Let the enemy call that judgemental: I call that working in someone’s best interests, and freeing people from chains.
For none of us lives to himself, and none of us dies to himself. For if we live, we live to the Lord, and if we die, we die to the Lord. So then, whether we live or whether we die, we are the Lord's. For to this end Christ died and lived again, that he might be Lord both of the dead and of the living. Why do you pass judgment on your brother? Or you, why do you despise your brother? For we will all stand before the judgment seat of God; for it is written, “As I live, says the Lord, every knee shall bow to me,and every tongue shall confess to God.” So then each of us will give an account of himself to God. (Romans 14:7-12 ESV) And it was told King David, “The LORD has blessed the household of Obed-edom and all that belongs to him, because of the ark of God.” So David went and brought up the ark of God from the house of Obed-edom to the city of David with rejoicing. And when those who bore the ark of the LORD had gone six steps, he sacrificed an ox and a fattened animal. And David danced before the LORD with all his might. And David was wearing a linen ephod. So David and all the house of Israel brought up the ark of the LORD with shouting and with the sound of the horn. As the ark of the LORD came into the city of David, Michal the daughter of Saul looked out of the window and saw King David leaping and dancing before the LORD, and she despised him in her heart. And they brought in the ark of the LORD and set it in its place, inside the tent that David had pitched for it. And David offered burnt offerings and peace offerings before the LORD. And when David had finished offering the burnt offerings and the peace offerings, he blessed the people in the name of the LORD of hosts and distributed among all the people, the whole multitude of Israel, both men and women, a cake of bread, a portion of meat, and a cake of raisins to each one. Then all the people departed, each to his house. And David returned to bless his household. But Michal the daughter of Saul came out to meet David and said, “How the king of Israel honored himself today, uncovering himself today before the eyes of his servants' female servants, as one of the vulgar fellows shamelessly uncovers himself!” And David said to Michal, “It was before the LORD, who chose me above your father and above all his house, to appoint me as prince over Israel, the people of the LORD—and I will celebrate before the LORD. I will make myself yet more contemptible than this, and I will be abased in your eyes. But by the female servants of whom you have spoken, by them I shall be held in honor.” And Michal the daughter of Saul had no child to the day of her death. (2 Samuel 6:12-23 ESV)
Michal was a royal princess. She was courageous: she had defied her father the king to save David. She loved him deeply. Until she saw him out of control in front of the ark. Then she despised him, and did not seek correction for it.
We need a few kilograms of the salt of humility. For we can all fall into grievious error: not merely in speculation but on things that we know are wrong. Moreover, we need to stand with those who are doing good even if we disagree with the fine (or not so fine) points in their theology.
And I say that as someone who loves a good theological argument. Consider for a second Gloriaville: a quasi anabaptist group I have more issues with than the Papists. But what is happening to them is wrong. Delahuntley is a very useful idiot: like most Greens, she is reliably wrong.
The Education Review Office will be hauled before the Education and Science Select Committee this month to explain why the extreme fundamentalist school is allowed to stop education early and steer all pupils towards life in the community on the South Island's West Coast. Green MP Catherine Delahunty, who has requested the briefing, and Labour MP Chris Hipkins, hope it will be the forerunner to a Parliamentary probe into the isolated sect's school. Delahunty is concerned that the school's narrow curriculum, believed to be based on an American fundamentalist Christian course, prevents pupils, especially girls, from going on to tertiary study. She understood the highest level of secondary learning was NCEA level 1, and there was a strict divide of subjects girls and boys could study to steer them for working inside the compound. She is questioning how the ERO, which recently gave Gloriavale a pass mark, could rubber-stamp a school that appeared to be in breach of human rights legislation. In the latest review, ERO found little fault with the school, saying the tuition standard was suitable for teaching its curriculum. It noted students at the 161-pupil school achieved well in reading and mathematics. "Almost all students in the senior school achieved qualifications on the national qualifications framework. Older students successfully transition into the working life of the community," it said. But Delahunty is concerned this equates to females being forced into a life of domestic servitude. "I absolutely respect practical education but I know there will be students who have a hunger for academic learning and don't want to spend their lives ironing and having babies. When you see women with eight to 10 babies from an early age you wonder whether they have that choice." Delahunty was concerned the ERO was not asking Gloriavale leaders hard questions about the rights of children when it came to tertiary education options. "The report says they are prepared for some type of transition to work but from my observations, work means girls having babies at a very young age and boys work on the farm. It may be that some young women may want to have babies and devote themselves to housework, but having an education gives choice and not all young women want to do that."
I will say the obvious: Delahuntley considers that children are not under their parents or the church but belong to the state. Now I think Gloriaville is a cult. I could mutter about how much this differs from the various state funded Islamic schools in NZ, but the principle here is that these families are trying to set up a community that protects them and their children from the evils of this world — and that is not a bad thing.
Except to the reds and greens, who are making the rainbow coalition compulsory, and want us all enslaved on their plantations.
We are facing considerable opposition. The confessing church — we can argue as to if Gloriaville is part of that in the comments if you wish — is going to be attacked. By regulation, by the courts, by the police. We could lose our lives, our fortunes and our honour. But God will take account of our faithfulness.
So encourage your brothers to remain faithful, and not hold them in contempt.
UPDATE
This came to the attention of Cameron Slater, who did some digging. Most of the kids at Gloriaville had NCEA one at the correct age: 35% had level three two years early. As he notes.
How many lies has Catherine Delahunty told? By my count it is at least four. As I said on the weekend, this was nothing more than a shameful witch hunt against a Christian based school and community. We won’t be hearing a single word from Catherine Delahunty about the inherent misogyny of Islam or the different education available to women under Islamic teaching.
Expect more like this.
