Whatever the result of the SSM vote today, far too many influential Christian leaders were silent on the issue. Letting the ACL, journalists, conservative politicians, and grass roots pro-traditional marriage groups carry the burden and face abysmal abuse.
Right off the bat, I know of ten, including Pastors, teachers and artists who remained alarmingly quiet during the national debate; five of whom hold prominent positions.
This communicates one of three things to Australian Christians as a whole.
The first, these ”shepherds” care more about their pay packet and position, and therefore silently agree with SSM.
The second, these “shepherds” are affable, eager to people please and compromise their faith, the bible, history, biology and healthy orthodox doctrine.
The third, these shepherds were too scared to speak out in support of protecting traditional marriage, and refused to participate in the debate.
I suspect the latter is more relevant than the former two. It doesn’t reflect well on the state of freedom of speech, freedom of conscience and freedom of religion in Australia.
No matter what the result. That’s where our real lament should find itself today.
Even If a “No” vote wins, our collective lament today should be about the decline of truth and the downgrade of our freedom to speak it.
“For the shepherds have become stupid And have not sought the LORD; Therefore they have not prospered, And all their flock is scattered.” Jeremiah 10:21
“Many shepherds have ruined My vineyard, They have trampled down My field; They have made My pleasant field A desolate wilderness.” Jeremiah 12:10
My contributions to the Same-sex marriage debate in Australia can be found here:
Conscientious Abstention From Same-Sex Marriage Is Not The Same As Racism
References:
Image: by underrated 19th Century artist, John Martin, Sodom & Gomorrah, 1852
Rod Lampard 
I see you made a recent visit to my cartoon blog. Nice to hear from you.
Same sex marriage approval has carried the day in US. Many American Christians would like to have tolerance on the matter if those of this Hollywood agenda would accept the terms civil union or domestic partnership instead of marriage but the insistence on the term marriage has caused a great divide beyond just those that condemn same sex arrangement in any form. . Some same sex marriages are not arranged by homosexuality but two old people of same sex living together would care to be able to have legal, medical, property matters same as married protections as they have no family to help. It enhances their security. Marriage is a civil contract.Sex is not relevant. Yes, you are correct : the OT is clear on definition of marriage and Paul repeatedly admonishes the early churches that homosexual relationships are damned by God. Others offer that Christianity is a religion of inclusion.
In US separation of church and state is the rule and laws are based on secular democracy not religious doctrines (to the chagrin of the Christian Right). However, most govern ourselves by Judaeo-Christian personal values. Our great American Puritan theologian Roger Williams proposed in the 1630’s that religious law ought not be codified as civil law. For example adultery and not keeping the Sabbath may be sins but should not be crimes punishable by the community. But murder would be both a sin and a crime therefore punishable by civil law.Ironically he still maintained that the Massachusetts Bay colony be governed by a theocracy of ordained Presbyterian and Congregational ministers.
Our Lord Jesus never went before the Roman Senate or the Sanhedrin or lobbied among the scribes and elders for legislation. Our faith is spread by conversion not incorporating it with Caesar’s law (secular state). Faith belongs in the meeting house(Puritan churches term) not the state house.
I understand and agree with your thinking and concerns. But think of this: If Muslims became a majority in your country and made Sharia Law the civil law you might think quite differently about having religious law imposed on you as a Christian. All things aside we can take comfort in that Jesus has promised His Kingdom will prevail over all.
In the parable about the seeds Jesus relates that some seed falls on rock, some on dry soil and withers for this or that reason but the seed that sprouts was sown in good soil. It teaches us two things: not all will absorb His message and that it is incumbent on us to be His “good soil.” Let others witherin the storm of debate. We must use all our effort to live in Christian testimony in the routines of daily life. This means we are never the source of anyone’s misfortune and never pass the opportunity to perform a charitable act. From the smallest to the greatest of us, that is the Great Commission. That is what good soil means.
LikeLike
Good points. For me this issue isn’t about imposing Christian law, its about bringing balance and preserving the good for future generations.
Today’s generation has the responsibility to use the freedom they are given responsibly.
Confusing children about their gender, rejecting biological fact, endorsing forms of misogyny and misandry among many other things, is an evil that must be rejected and stood up against.
We are to cling to the good, and abhor evil. Not encourage it. Evil being the manipulation of others. Evil being the perversion of science. Evil being the corruption of theology for the service of ideology. Evil being the worship of the creature instead of the creator. Evil being the false doctrine that demands truth be whatever you feel it is. Evil being the sexual corruption of the young to serve the sexual desires of those older than them. Evil being the turning of man against woman, and woman against man, through fear, suspicion, hate, indoctrination and idolatry. Evil being the false doctrine that says the State is my god, parent and lover, my sole provider, my owner, and therefore my master and lord.
This is far from imposing a christian law or a theocracy. It’s about upholding classical liberal principles against a cult of modern liberalism and all that it demands. It’s about the Lordship of Christ. It’s about refusing to allow all aberrations of freedom, justice and love. It’s about saying no in a loving way, so that good – as defined by God in his revelation to us – will be held in distinction from all that threatens it.
LikeLike
Appreciate your response and I agree with you. My comment on your next post fits here as well.
“It’s about upholding classical liberal principles against a cult of modern liberalism and all that it demands.
If you ” got religion” they don’t think you are smart enough to express the ideas in the “sophisticated” arena of political and social principals because they think faith bound renders any presentation ignorant and foolish no matter how legitimate is your reasoning presented. Classical liberal principals have no place in the world of modern liberalism which is self aggrandizing not based in a democratic tradition. As a matter of fact , you called it a cult and ironically you are right because it is their religion. It is qa religion that says anything Bible value based is to be automatically dismissed. They are like the Trump haters. There is not a single thing this president can do that is not evil and contemptuous in their mind. He’s evil if he did it this way and he would be evil if he did it the other way and there is no sense to it. Modern liberalism is against things merely for the sake of being against things and if it is status quo it certainly should be railed against.
LikeLiked by 1 person
Spot on, Carl. I like how you worded this.
LikeLike
Well I see the measure passed. The anger will dissipate. People will go on with daily routines and probably life goes on about the same with no real affect one way or the other. Except of course the gay community will now get to experience the distasteful and devastating matters of property settlement in divorce. Be careful what we wish for.
LikeLiked by 1 person