Peter Jensen on ABC’s Q&A
I had the great privilege and, as it turned out, pleasure, to be in the studio audience for the ABC‘s live panel show Q&A. The panel last night included ArchBishop Peter Jensen who was set against “comedian” Catherine Deveny and a number of other panelists who faded away into relative insignificance given the “dialogue” that would develop (and by “dialogue” I mean that at least one party was prepared to give the other a fair hearing, if only they could have had something substantial to respond to).
The show was truly fascinating, dealing with a number of important subjects and ending quite wonderfully - at least you might think so if you are a Christian. Two things to look out for - the way Jensen handles himself and manages to get a clear exposition of the gospel in (despite the constant interruption), and my shiny head. Watch it here.
I left the studio delighted. Perhaps we might have minor criticisms of things that should or shouldn’t have been said by Jensen but that was a polished display and, as John Dickson notes,
Deveney speaks to Jensen mockingly. Jensen doesn’t respond in kind. There’s a worldview in operation.
— John Dickson (@johnpauldickson) September 10, 2012
Here‘s also what Nathan has to say about it
Share this story:
Recent Related Posts
- Sermon: James 2:14-26 - Faith Without Works is Dead
- Sam Allberry - Is God Anti-Gay? [video]
- They lived not only in ages past (South Sudan news)
- Don’t Sign the Letter
- Hey Anglicans, hearing the Benghazi testimony, how ‘bout that IX Commandment?
- Why Rick. - Another Candidate for Archbishop of Sydney
- So Much Anger Over the Wrath of God
Comments
Facebook comments are closed.
2 comments
The Archbishop reminds everyone that the form of marriage service with the words “submit” is an alternative service. Its use is not mandatory, yet the liberals froth at the mouth at the mere suggestion…
[1] Posted by MichaelA on 9-11-2012 at 01:26 AM · [top]
Reading the transcript yesterday, I noticed perhaps one opportunity he missed (* I wasn’t the one there, and might not have noticed it even if I were).
Deverry (I think) says “rights, rights”. One option at this point is to ask “where do rights come from?”. “Consensus” requires you to assert that a Muslim country, African tribe, or any other culture can define “rights” how they wish, and also guts any moral argument for changing majority view (since the very action of doing so changes - and thus violates - rights). But any appeal to self-evidence or scientific enquiry can be shown to be arrogant, privileging one’s own wisdom (or desires!) over that of others and of history.
The language of rights is inherently self-focused; it’s about what others owe you. It’s the language of demand and force and deserving.
Unsurprisingly, the Christian answer is radically different. There are two parts:
(1) the Scriptures focus not on rights, but on obligations. Knowledge of God obliges us towards others, irrespective on any rights or deservingness on their part. It’s about what God requires of us, not the “rights” of another to demand things of us. When “Rights” language occurs in the Scriptures, it’s usually in the context of someone forgoing them for the benefit of others.
(2) the Scriptures are fundamentally about what we do not deserve. To demand your rights before God is to invite judgement upon yourself.
In the context of the Q&A discussion, emphasising the hollowness of “rights” and point 1 may have had sufficient shock value to open some ears.
[2] Posted by Andrew W on 9-11-2012 at 10:33 PM · [top]
Registered members are welcome to leave comments. Log in here, or register here.
Comment Policy: We pride ourselves on having some of the most open, honest debate anywhere. However, we do have a few rules that we enforce strictly. They are: No over-the-top profanity, no racial or ethnic slurs, and no threats real or implied of physical violence. Please see this post for more explanation, and the posts here, here, and here for advice on becoming a valued commenter as opposed to an ex-commenter. Although we rarely do so, we reserve the right to remove or edit comments, as well as suspend users' accounts, solely at the discretion of site administrators. Since we try to err on the side of open debate, you may sometimes see comments which you believe strain the boundaries of our rules. Comments are the opinions of visitors, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of Stand Firm site administrators or Gri5th Media, LLC.