Asia Christianity Ethics Health Music Politics Sport the Church USA

Quantum 130 -Ethiopian, Biden, Spector, Navalny, China, Benn, Deck of Cards, the Archers and Wytch Hazel


This week we look at a massacre in Ethiopia, the new American President,  when Bob Dylan met Jimmy Carter, Phil Spector, Alexei Navalny, Human Rights in China, Tony Benn, Multiracial Whiteness, Deck of Cards, a vaccine for MS, the Archers, and Wytch Hazel.  You can listen to it below – or on Apple, Spotify etc.

Here are some of the links,

  • The New American President…..–cXk


  • Phil Spector


This is a great clip from Benn

This is madness – you can be white when you are black!

  • Multiracial Whiteness.
  • Deck of Cards


  • Archers 70 years




Catch up here – Quantum 129 – Big Tech; IRA; Sturgeon; Cliff Richard; Kyrygyzstan; Covid; Atheist Children; Indian Persecution; The National Trust Personhood of Water and Gerry Marsden

Support Podbean here –



      1. @Dave, I used to live in Tassie for a while. No one down there calls Mount Wellington by its Aboriginal name. This is a case of the ABC trying to shape the culture rather than reflect/report on it. They have been calling Mount Wellington by that Aboriginal name consistently in reports over the last year so they are persistent with it. 🙁

      1. I thought Jean explined it well above: no one in the community actually uses that name for the mountain. It is a PC ideal foisted on society from above by the ABC over the past year.

      2. the issue is it is token pandering to a minority by an elitist group in a (taxpayer-funded) news service which has become very bias in recent years.

        Here. Scroll through the last week’s worth of news and count the articles condemning Australia Day, promoting homosexuality, promoting transgenderism and promoting feminism.

        Now count the articles with the opposing point of view, or those with positive things to say about, say, Christianity.

        See the massive skew?

        People (even local Aborigines) simply call the mountain, Mount Wellington BUT that is a colonial name and, after all, the Duke of Wellington is a dead, white male so that is now considered bad. Hence, the ABc are now reviving a name used by an *extinct* Aboriginal tribe to appeal to the trendies. This isn’t like, say, Wales where local people actually speak the language in large numbers and were persecuted by the Welsh Not and the Blue Books treachery, hence the justification of putting street signs in Welsh first and English second, which I support and applaud. It isn’t a grassroots revival of traditional names by local people. It is an elitist, top-down imposition by a media organisation using language to try yo change the way people think. Hence also their decision to refer to Australia Day consisyently as Invasion Day this year.

        Cheers and God bless.

      3. Thanks Dave for your reply. But according to the ABC report that you linked, it was Mr Sultan’s company (Sultan Holdings, is it Tasmanian?) that used both names to refer to the mountain. So your data on ABC’s ‘apparent’ bias don’t seem quite relevant here.
        Also, again, why is it wrong to use both names? Is the way that the Aotearoa New Zealand national anthem is sung, also wrong? In Australia, wouldn’t using both names simply acknowledge that there were people already in Australia before the 1700s. Apropos your Welsh example, doesn’t using two names also acknowledge the people who still speak Australian languages?


      4. hello Bruce, I don’t live in Tasmania (although I’ve spent a lot of time down there). I *think* it is a local company from the research I’ve just done.

        Yes, the press release from the company is quoted in the body of the article but the ABC is also making a big fuss ofputting it in the headlines, too and it turns out the ABC has been doing this in news teports for over a year now.

        Jean and I are probably especially sensitive at the moment because of the politivisation of Australia Day this week and the ABC’s major role in it, ofgicily using terms like “Invasion Day” as a corporate policy, etc. (See Pastor David’s later blog post on this).

        Anything to fo with Aboriginal Rights us very politicised in Australia. Here, have a read of this for some more context. It is just a Wikipedia article but it is a surprisingly well-balanced one:

      5. “This isn’t like, say, Wales where local people actually speak the language in large numbers and were persecuted by the Welsh Not and the Blue Books treachery, hence the justification of putting street signs in Welsh first and English second, which I support and applaud. It isn’t a grassroots revival of traditional names by local people. It is an elitist, top-down imposition by a media organisation using language to try yo change the way people think. Hence also their decision to refer to Australia Day consisyently as Invasion Day this year.”

        Yes, I have a lot of Welsh ancestry (as I just mentioned on another post) so I know *a bit* about Welsh history. I feel the Aboriginal situation is very fundamentally different from the Welsh trying to reclaim their language after having had it suppressed by the English elites. This is the reverse – the elites are telling the locals their names for landmarks in the tegion are not good enough and that they should feel “white guilt” and reimpose names no one knows or uses to force them to change the way they think. It is indidious, IMHO.

      6. Dave, thank you for linking that page. I know that there are arguments about what should be taught as ‘history’. I would probably go for the approach of understanding things like ‘terra nullius’, not including people in the census, a ‘white Australia policy’, downplaying of language, as well as more positive things. I also understand that there is no single Christian response to the question of 26 January in Australia nor, actually, to what some call ‘progressive’ ideas nor even to ‘ABC bias’.
        That said, you (and Jean) have really not shown yet what is ‘wrong’ with using an earlier name as well as a later one for mountains and things.

      7. Jean, when you say that you ‘feel the Aboriginal situation [do you mean overall, or just giving two names to ‘Mt Wellington’?] is very fundamentally different from the Welsh trying to reclaim their language after having had it suppressed by the English elites’ are you saying that no Australian languages were suppressed? And yet again, what is wrong with using BOTH names for mountains, etc? Isn’t this simply acknowledging that Australia’s history did not start in the 18th century?

  1. Predicta le response to the Margaret Court controversy by one of our evil wolves in sheeps’ clothing Anglican priests here in Australia this afternoon:

    Rod Bower is a notorious uber-liberal and attention seeker, known fir his controversial billboards. He ran for parliament himself in tge last election for a fringe climate change party. I have seen allegations from someone who purportedly knows him that this was just a vanity project for him.


      1. Wow – Reverend Rod Bower doesn’t believe in God or heaven and hell.

        “When we explore, perhaps, what I mean when I use the word ‘God’ we can come close to a common ground [with atheists] because I’m not talking about some divine being. God is the very act of existing. And so there’s a point of meeting for atheists and people of faith.[4] I don’t really believe in Heaven and Hell at least not in the traditional sense. If there is a Heaven it must be a bit like Mardi Gras.”[5]

        taken from


        ” I don’t really believe in Heaven and Hell at least not in the traditional sense. If there is a Heaven it must be a bit like Mardi Gras. Everyone just being totally themselves regardless of gender, race, creed or sexuality and everyone else being totally OK with that. I would never feel comfortable walking down the streets of Sydney in my robes but tonight I did, totally comfortable and accepted. How ironic is that?

        I know some people are not comfortable with what I have done. I guess Heaven and Hell are really the same place and it’s just a matter of perspective.
        Happy Mardi Gras.
        Fr Rod”

        So why hasn’t his bishop defrocked him?! He is putting souls at risk. 🙁 🙁 🙁

      2. Great find!!! – so the openly-atheistic priest Rod Bower thinks it is okay for the Grand Mui to be “homophobic” but not for Margaret Court… I am glad everyone on Twitter has called him out on his hypocrisy. Yes, these liberal/progressive “Christians” love making friends of atheists and Muslims yet they seem to often openly despise their fellow Christians who are of a more orthodox or evangelical bent. I’ve seen that pattern a lot. If push came to shove, I think the progressive christians would find their atheist comrades would turn against them though.

        Bower puts his political correctness/reason above the Bible and claims Scripture’s stance against homoposexual activity is outdated and wrong. He seems to want to rewrite church doctrine in society’s image. At least he is honest enough yo admit he does not believe in God or heaven or hell but not honest enough to therefore leave the church and stop taking its salary. The church is just a vehicle for him to do his public grandstanding with his billboards, political activities and ABC interviews. What a grubby little hypocrite of a man he is.

        We must pray that he will come to God and find salvation before it is too late because we know church leaders like him will be judged more harshly than the rest of us and he is a true false shepherd – by his own public admission – at this stage. Let us hope and pray earnestly he can find humility and become a true man of God.

      3. More from Inkpin who apparently puts the trans/gay community above the church community:

        Another gay pride Anglican church service in Brisbane:
        Shutting down debate, another tactic:

        “shocked how Google & other searches still highlight whether women can preach at all. Women’s inclusion is not debatable.”

        Now a top gay/trans community leader:

        Good grief!

        The world has hone completely mad now that the church openly endorses such wickedness with no hint of reprisal from parishioners.

      4. This one, in which he/she of course rejects creationism and the possibility of historicity in the Genesis account of the Fall, good liberal that he/she is, has an interesting turn of phrase:

        “Again, the meaning of the trees in our first scripture passage today can be read in different ways, depending on how literal or fundamentalist you feel you need to be.”

        “You feel you need to be.” Hmmm…. What about the actual genre of the writing, though, Jo? Wouldn’t that have a bearing? He/she seems to be stuck in the 1960s with the outdated idea that all meaning us constructed by the reader.

      5. Has a little dig at the Australian Christian Lobby and mainstream Christians right wingers:

        I think he/she completely misses the point as to why most Christians don’t like the bizarre, woke, heterodox world of the Progressive Christianity set and its hypocritical adherents….

        One more: equating a transgender changing his/her body to the resurrection of Christ:
        So blasphemous and sick.

      6. “What about the actual genre of the writing, though, Jo? Wouldn’t that have a bearing? He/she seems to be stuck in the 1960s with the outdated idea that all meaning us constructed by the reader.”

        Yes, looking at all the links you provided, it looks like Inkpin, Peter Catt and friends are stuck in a 1960s time-warp, relying on Roland Barthes’ structuralist ideas about the “death of the author” and the reader constructing his own meaning of rhe text, even though that academic fad has passed and those ideas are out of fashion now. They have clearly never heard of post-structuralism, where the author is not dismissed so lightly…

      7. “Yes, looking at all the links you provided, it looks like Inkpin, Peter Catt and friends are stuck in a 1960s time-warp, relying on Roland Barthes’ structuralist ideas about the “death of the author” and the reader constructing his own meaning of rhe text, even though that academic fad has passed and those ideas are out of fashion now. They have clearly never heard of post-structuralism, where the author is not dismissed so lightly…”

        @Dave, to find some humour in a very serious situation, I would say it looks like the Progressive “Christians” are having trouble keeping up with progress!

      8. But, Dave and Jean, isn’t Roland Barthes also among the poststructuralists?

    1. Transgender Brisbane priest Jo Inkpin is also whining his/her head off about Margaret Court:

      Again, it is shocking the way the gay/transgender lobby twist things and project them back on their victims: Inkpin is alleging that the “distorted use of the Bible” is coming from Margaret Court for saying that the Bible teaches homosexual activity is wrong! That is just odious of Inkpin and show how morally bankrupt he/she is.

  2. One of my most trenchant criticisms of Leftist academics is that, on their holidays , they all too easily vacate the area of expertise which gained them their doctorates and then, naturally assume a similar level of critical gravitas re the content of their comments on politics and much else.

    As you are an expert on the Supernatural , what would make neutral observers believe in your political views?

    Apropos , your political opinions, we are seldom at variance.

  3. David, thank you for the extensive work you put into this podcast.
    On the question of the defeat in Parliament of an amendment regarding trade and genocide, although it looks odd at first, I found the analysis by Charles Moore in the Telegraph insightful. The amendment would have taken decisions on genocide out of the remit of elected officials, ie Parliament, and given them over to unelected judges in Courts. This would open the door to the kind of political activism through the Courts that we saw with Brexit. He suggests their first target would be Israel where a case would be made that it practises genocide and so should be deprived of trading opportunities.

  4. Brexit doesn’t seem to be going well, Scottish fishermen dumping rotting fish, High Street retailers burning products, rising prices for the poor, no one doing well except for the Brexit elites who have made plenty of money out of leaving the EU. With no EU passport, no citizenship, no Health Card, can anyone remind what the benefits Brexit were? Even the prejudiced hopes of banning immigration doesn’t seem to have worked.

  5. Benn , in the Twitter link , is being interviewed by the Communist agitator , Michael Moore .

    The etiology of Benn’s Socialism lies in his deeply religious childhood , during which his mother inculcated in him the belief that every time there was a moral conflict between ” Kings and Prophets “, he should side with the latter.

    Benn’s views on Economic matters are unworthy of serious consideration.

  6. Bishop Jeremy Greaves is also whingeing to his atheist friend Philip Adams about Margaret Court :

    It always interests me that ultra-liberal fringe figures like Bower and Greaves find they have more in common with atheists than they do with Biblical Christians.

    Here is another recent tweet from Greaves where he expresses his low view of scripture:

  7. Okay, Dean Peter Catt, who is the Dean of the Brisbane Anglican Cathedral, and his chums, rejects the historicity of the Bible’s stories:

    ““A myth is not an untruth. It’s a something that didn’t happen that happens all the time. It’s a colourful way of describing our humanity. We know there wasn’t a historic Adam and Eve 6000 years ago in a particular garden, but we know it’s happening in Brisbane this afternoon, it’s happening in my part of Edinburgh today. Humans are filled with discontent; they’re filled with wandering, lust and uneasiness.. We lose the capacity to read and understand and profit from myth and we try to scientise it and turn it into a knowledge system rather than a form of art that exhilarate and depress and challenge us and judge us…”

    “One of the things that kills religion is a failure to understand how myth operates. If you try to turn the myth into historical reality you lose the beauty and teaching-ness of it, because it becomes useless to you. Because sensible people know that’s not what happened. But if you keep the myth as myth, you can say, in what way in my own life am I replicating the Adam and Eve story?”

    Richard Holloway joins the podcast from Edinburgh to explore how the stories we tell ourselves create the rules we live by and the meaning we make of our existence.

    Richard tells some of his story as he looks at the narratives of the Judeo-Christian tradition and the way down the ages myth has morphed into certainties that have been destructive rather than liberating.

    How do we engage a rich and varied tradition without succumbing to the temptation to systemise our narratives into dogma that ignores the reality of suffering? How can we live with the paradox of a God we experience in the absence as much as presence? What stories reduce our humanity and which ones capture our imagination and enable us to live into our best selves?”

    “One of the things that kills religion is a failure to understand how myth operates. If you try to turn the myth into historical reality you lose the beauty and teaching-ness of it, because it becomes useless to you.”

    But the reformers didn’t kill religion! They liberated and rejuvenated it and they fully accept the histoticity of the OT and NT, just as millions – billions, even – of mainstream, orthodox Christians throughout the world do today.

    Do you know this Holloway bloke from Edinburgh who joined in with their podcast, Pastor David? Who is he? Have you vlashed with him?

  8. I just spotted this. 🙂 Thanks for the breath of common sense, Pastor. Tweet of the year!

    “David Robertson @theweeflea

    Just wondering if the ABC should now call itself the Invasion Broadcasting Corporation – after all without ‘Invasion’ day – they would not be here?”

  9. More ABC ‘wokeness’: immediately after terviewing an Aboriginal gent about why Australia Day was bad this morning, ABC Radio announced Beccy Cole is going to be the new host of the “Saturday Night Country” show. Country and western singer Beccy Cole just happens to be just about the only openly-lesbian singer in the industry and she was also a notorious supporter of the Iraq War and Australian military. This is just after I learnt that ABC television newsreader, Patricia Karvelas, is another in their long line of openly-gay presenters.


    To tell you the truth, I have never celebrated Australia Day before as I am genuinely a bit uncomfortable with nationalistic, flag-waving exercises. However, between the ABC, the Aboriginal lobby and the Anglican Church in Brisbane, I feel compelled to celebrate it this year in defiance of their political correctness and ‘wokeness’, so they have had the reverse impact of what they intended on me. In fact, I’ve just come back from the supermarket with some lamb to put on the barbecue tomorrow (not joking). I am so annoyed with these arrogant liberal elites, I feel I must quietly protest by commemmorating the day.

    1. Patricia Karvelas has put out dozens of Tweets over the last few days, ranting against Australia Day “on behalf of” Aborigines. Not that ABC reporters are bias or out of touch or anything…

      (As a lesbian, Pat’s retweeted a few digs at Margaret Court, too, of course, but she’s actually surprisingly restrained there, I must admit.)

  10. @Dave, yes, I live in the Diocese of Brisbane and I posted comments on here quite often about a year ago to highlight to Pastor David and readers the terrible things that are going on in Anglican Church Southern Queensland before taking a break for a while, because it was so depressing. It has always been a very liberal, Anglo-Catholic diocese, unlike more mainstream evangelical dioceses like Sydney and Tasmania. Nowadays it has been completely taken over by the Progressive “Christian” movement, including many of the people mentioned on this page, most of whom have links to the Jesus Seminar/Westar Institute. There is an incrddible amount of hypocrisy there – for example, Dean Peter Catt is ready to protest for any “woke” SJW cause that takes his fancy but when someone protested at his cathedral against the child abuse cover up, Catt called the police and had them arrested. Speak truth to power and the church will take legal action against you, is the message they wanted to send out and it is what people got, I think.

    Catt is also on record denying the hostorical reality of Jesus’ bodily resurrection. Most of the Progressive Christians deny the historicity of the miracles, seeing the Bible as a book of metaphors, even though it has never been interpreted in that way by the ancient Jews, Early Church or anyone else. They are just reinventing it to align with their modern reason and moden PC culture because they want to conform with the world. They also have other “woke” things like yoga sessions in the Cathedral, a gay-e-tea social event for the LGBTQ crowd, environmentally friendly Christmas carols, etc. They have reduced church to SJW activism and a lot of hollow, theatrical Anglo-Catholic ritualitic nonsense. They also have a very rigid hierarchial structure where priests defer to bishops who are somewhat liberal authoritarian. It is nowhere near as decentralised as other dioceses. Some priests live in fear of the bishops and won’t put sermons online to evangelise the masses in case they say something againat the liberal groupthink and get into trouble with the bishops.

    There is of course also a very prevalent homosexual culture there amongst priests, especially around the Cathedral and Holy Trinity Fortitude Valley but also at various other parishes.

    It is a very sick, very crooked culture and I can’t see it changing short of the Diocese hoing bankrupt and having to turn to Sydney for help. Please pray for us here in Brisbane with our wicked priests!

  11. I wouldn’t worry about Peter Catt, Jeremy Greaves, Jo Inkpin and their kind too much. Liberal Christians are well known for their anti-intellectualism.

    Of course, it is terrible that these false prophets are leading people are stray but these movements have feet of clay and it doesn’t take people long to realise the emperor has no clothes, if I may mix my metaphors.

    They are inventing new forms of Christianity totally alien to the Christians of the first 2000 years because they lack the faith to commit to the religion of their firefathers or seek approval from society instead. Would the early Christians really have been prepared to martyr themsves for these vague and wishy-washy SJW ideals proposed by Catt and the Progressive Christians? I think not.

    As for the Inkpins and their rubbish about Christ not walking on eater, remember their predecessors in the liberal movementtried to convince themselves that maybe the water was shalliowor the apostles were confused and Jesus was really walking on the shore and other ridiculous attempts at justification. The miracles occurred as signs to point the Jews to the Messiah and the coming of His Kingdom. They are not metaphors made up decades later!

    I’ve known Progressive Christians and they are modern day Sadducees – hypocritices, elitists, anti-intellectuals and more than willing to dispense with the supernatural elements of Scriptures their narrow minds can’t cope with. The Sadduccees collaborated with the Romans and these guys collaborate with the Woke State. Their are more things on heaven and earth than they could ever dream of in their pholosophy.

    1. Thank you. That is all so very true.

      I was reading another incredibly arrogant piece by Gregory Jenks (of the Westar Institute) earlier. He is probably more of a pseudo-intellectual than an anti-intellectual, given his links to the fringe scholars in the discredited Jesus Seminar.

      His article included this statement:

      “The problem is not his naïve use of the complex texts which constitute the Bible, nor his total disconnect from critical religion scholarship. Both those things are typical of Australian Evangelicals.”

      He seems to have a jealous hatred of the more intellectual strands of Christianity such as evangelicalism/Calvinism, such that he is projecting his own inadequacies onto them.

      I tather think that the poor peasants and slaves that constituted the early church would have largely been reading the text in a rather naive way themselves, not twisting the meaning and trying to discredit large portions like the Jesus Seminar crowd did.

      Here though, another APCVA SJW, Len Baglow, asserts the opposite. He wants a return to the simplicity of Christ:

      It is interesting that he is prepared to cite a Calvinist, Brother Roger of Taize. I guess there must be a few “good” evangelicals in APCVA’s eyes then!

      Ultimately, though, it is all about politics. This quote could have come straight from the Marxist, Foucault (even though Baglow had just cited Foucault’s ideological enemy, Derrida, approvingly!)

      “Progressive Christians by trusting that Jesus’ words and actions are still relevant today, risk questioning culturally sanctioned creeds and dogmas that mask the power structures of the status quo.”

      He then goes on to say:

      “Progressive Christianity fails if it remains at the level of theology and creates a new orthodoxy. Rather, if successful, it propels progressive Christians into the ongoing struggle for justice, the putting of things right[v], the unfolding Reign of God understood anew.”

      So they are against orthodoxy and doctrines, hence, yes an anti-intellectual strain of “Christianity” a d they are focused on politicizing everytging, since they want to see the Reign of God unfold on earth, since they only have a vague, wishy-washy concept of an afterlife, if they even believe in one at all.

      In fact even “the fomestic is political”:

      Again the plliticisation of all aspects of life and examination of power structures is pure Foucault-style Marxism.

      They’ve been dialoguing with Rob Bell recently too:

      Spreading the ABC’s “fake news” (debunked by Media Watch) that male headship in Bible-believing churches has led to higher rates of domestic violence:

      More arrogance. They they are supe actually boast that they are superior to orthodox Christians:

      “And if, to quote a current mantra of piety, namely “the power of prayer”, why have the prayers of the pious for rain not been answered in current drought-ravaged Australia? Why have the prayers been so powerless?

      There are varied streams of Christianity in Australia. Some are not only simplistic but callous.

      Callous explanations for natural destructive events (floods, fires etc) as being inflicted by God continue to be propagated in some fundamentalist oriented churches.

      Progressive Christianity, in contrast, is open to new understandings of, and explanations for, events in nature and in our world. Such Christians are prepared to incorporate and face contemporary understanding of the causes of human responsibility for such phenomena as floods, fires and drought.”

      This is interesting, too:

      It seems like the Progressive Christians like activist theology… except when the activists are protedting against them, such as in the aforemebtioned protests against the paedophilia cover up and the hypocrisy of people like Peter Catt!

      This statement though is telling:

      “For activist theology, God is in the change that is becoming”

      but change can be good or bad. Not all progress is positive and though reactionaries have bad connotations these days, reversing some policies is not necessarily bad.

      Anyway, in the same article, Baglow admires a Robyn Henderson-Espinoza. He describes her thus:

      “Robyn describes themself as a transqueer activist and Latinx scholar with white-passing privilege because of the colour of their melanin who has had to rely on food stamps to survive.”

      By the way, Peter Catt would clearly through the bakers to the wind in the gay wedding cake row:

      “Neither should such a Bill allow people who provide goods and services to withhold them from say, LGBTIQ+ people.”


      “I get attacked more often for my views and practices by fellow religious travellers than I do by people from outside the faith community.”

      Other Christians must be seeing through this hypocritical false preacher then, which is a good thing!

      I had a look at Baglow’s Twitter feed too. It is basically full of SJW activity and totally biased in favour of the left side of party politics. It reminded me of Peter Catt’s infamous Tweet:

      Peter Catt
      I long for the day when the term ‘politically progressive Christianity’ is recognized as the tautology it is
      11:33 AM · Mar 30, 2014 from Brisbane, Australia·Twitter for iPhone

      These are the kind of cranks and sordid individuals we have running Anglican Church Southern Queensland. God have mercy on us.

      1. It would seem that way. When they make sweeping judgements about evangelicals, I think they really have Sydney Anglicans and the Australian Christian Lobby in mind. Calvinists of a left-wing hue apparently get a pass for political “right-think” even if their theology is almost identical to the aforementioned groups.

  12. I’ve just been readine morprgressive Christia website article. I think the saddest thing is when Peter Catt and friends give lip service to heping the poorest and most vulnerable in the communiyy yet I have seen the Brisbane Anglicans – including Catt – bully , intimidate, threaten and sue the poorest of Anglicans.

    In their newsletter, it says that “This year we are hoping to build our membership to
    500. We currently have about 158 members. You will
    shortly get an email suggesting ways you can help in
    building membership.”, which is about 1/1000 the size of ACL, do they are just a noisy fringe group of cranks still. They have no real power. Their politics and tgeology is learly on the nose with ordinary Christians who can see right through them.

    One more thing that really annoys me is that for all their talk of peace, like here:

    we never see them doing any actual peace work. I am involved in several anti-war groups, including the makn Anglican one. Peter Catt and his chums are not members. They’ve never visited us, never reached out to us, never supported us. It is all just talk. Also, it is specifically party-politucal. If the right were less bellicose than the left (as has been happenjng jn the USA recently, when we compare Trump’s record of new military actions to that of Biden) we would still fund Catt and his mates suded with tge prigressive side of politucs. Their ideology is all that matters to them.

    Finallt, here is another attack on “fundamentalist” Christians. It is a straw man caricature of course and does not reflect the views of any fundamentalist I have known in Australia:

    I have known many Bible believing Christians of the evangelical tupe who aee working gor peace and have opposed wars and the Australian military.

    ” At least in Australia and Northern America, much progressive Christian thought has come out of a relatively privileged middle and upper class.”

    At least Len Baglow is honest enough here to admit the Progressive Christians are an elitist movementand do not represent the concerns and beliefs of average, working class, suburban Australian Christians who are, surprise, surprise, mainly Bible-believing evangelicals.

    Anyway, that’s enough talk about these wicked, hypocritical men and women like Peter Catt and Len Baglow and their cronies for now.

    1. Sigh, I found a few more quotes worth bringing peoples’attention:

      ” But what if your church community doesn’t try to keep you honest, but rather panders to your worst inclinations and biases, and feeds you lies and half-truths and never challenges you. You will have certainty but at a huge cost.

      Before I bag religious certainty too much I would like to stress I understand its attraction especially if you are poor and oppressed and don’t see much hope of improving your situation in this life. I now speak from a relatively wealthy position, wealthy enough at least to travel internationally to attend this conference. It was not always thus, and but for a series of fortunate events it could have been otherwise and I could have lived a life of poverty and destitution. In such an alternative present I can see how certainty could have been very attractive, yet it is still an illusion. Maybe for some it is a necessary illusion. However, it remains an extremely dangerous one: it becomes the opium of which Marx spoke.”

      I can understand concerns about too much self-assurance and many Jews, for instance, missed Christ because of their preconceptions. However, there is that arrogant, patronising tone again: Poor people might need certainty but us superior and privileged progressive Christians thrive on ambiguity.

      Never mibd Christ came to give us certainty through gaith in Him.

      I wonder what churches they are talking about too, when they complain about the ones that affirm our worst prejudices? I assume they are talking about evangelicals and homosexuals again. I’ve never heard an evangelical preach in a way to promote homophobia though. Tilting at windmills again…

      “That means for Australia, at the moment, we need peace rallies, good old-fashioned peace rallies, in every capital city. Organised by the Greens, as de facto leaders of the left, together with the churches (my emphasis) and other peak faith bodies, and political and social groups.”

      Why from the Greens and the Left? I’ve known plenty of right-wing anti-war activists. Why tie it to party politics?

      ” I then discovered that little Costa Rica had abolished its army in 1948 and spent the savings on health and education.”

      He’s only just learning this now?! I know these Progressive Christians aren’t the most intellectual but I thought this was very common knowledge, especially for someone with a supposed interest in the anti-war movement.

      Going on:

      “Will going on a peace rally stop war? In itself no. What it might do is help your imagination grow so that you can find ever more creative ways to be a peace maker. It shows solidarity and gives encouragement to all those who have worked unceasingly for peace during the time when we have fallen asleep. ”

      Why have I never seen these Progressive Christians at an anti-war rally then?

      “Here in Australia, conservative Christian spokespersons, in their contribution to the currrent debate, tend to give voice to a generalised appeal to the Bible as support for their position. For example, the Anglican Bishop of South Sydney, Robert Forsyth, in a recent media interview, referred to his diocese’s allegiance “to God’s word” (which presumably means ‘the Bible’) as primarily and substantially shaping his view.”

      Interesting use of quotation marks. Again a low view of the Bìble as if they were rebelling against a literal reading of it or were embarrassed by it.

      “But let us leave aside the particular views expressed in Romans 1:14-31, views that not surprisingly are aired by a first century monotheist like Paul, whose attitudes have been shaped by ancient middle-eastern society.

      Our concern is with the present.”

      Contextualising it away…

      “The Bible is not an inerrant collection of writings.”

      Bingo. Anti-Protestantism revealed. Condemned themselves with their own words again.

      “… it has become clearer that we will need to oppose more strongly the Australian Christian Lobby who are effectively creating the illusion with many politicians that they speak on behalf of all Christians. More dangerously, as highlighted in ACL’s recent support of Israel Folau’s destructive and hurtful comments, ACL projects an image of Christianity that is at odds with Christ’s central message of love and inclusivity. ”

      So if you are a Christian who is being persecuted for your stance against homosexual activity, do not expect any support from Catt and his mates. They will turn their backs on their fellow Christians.

      No, ACL is not projecting an image at odds with Christ’s message. They are expressing consistency with scriptural teaching and Jewish ethics, both of which Jesus endorsed. That is pribably why the ACL is ONE THOUSAND times the size of Catt and Baglow’s anti-Christian organisation which seeks to teach ethics which are blatantly contrary to the Bible and Jesus’ ethical teachings.

      “As often happens when you wonder, (especially if you are a big reader like I am), a text comes along that is helpful. On this occasion, it was the editorial of the latest edition of The Fourth R by Art Dewey of the Westar Institute.”

      Good to know another Westar link, this time from Baglow.

      “It is tragic that they [Evangelicals] helped Trump and the Republicans be elected in the USA and the Liberal National Coalition here in Australia. ”

      They were silly and fearful enough ti vote wrongly, apparently.

      “Progressive Christians can have a special role in Australia over the next few years by showing that we have conquered fear.”

      More artogance. They are here to enlighten us poor Bible-believing Christians and teach us how to vote for the correct party.

      “Often progressive Christians struggle with the notion of prayer. Many progressives have rejected the idea of an omnipotent powerful God, who micromanages the universe on our behalf if only we have enough faith, are persistent enough or pure enough. However, the question is often left open as to how God responds, or even does God respond, or perhaps can God respond to prayer. ”

      They are rejecting Calvin’s theology of God’s sovereignty. I’d like to know how they counter his arguments but they don’t mount an intellectual defence of their assertions.

      It seems they lack faith in prayer too, not to mention what Jesus said about faith and Jeremiah’s writings about God having our lives mapped out while we are still in the womb.

      Those of us who have had miraculous interventions and prayers answered in our lives are living witnesses who can testify confidently and solidly against the dead faith of the Progressives stated here.

      “Marcus Borg, in his book Reading the Bible Again for the First Time , suggests that we should give similar weighting to the inaugural statements Jesus makes in the various gospels.”

      Another hint of a Westar influence, this time from Peter Catt.

      Another article linking them with Marcus Borg:

      “Believe that following the path and teachings of Jesus can lead to an awareness and experience of the Sacred and the Oneness and Unity of all life;

      Affirm that the teachings of Jesus provide but one of many ways to experience the Sacredness and Oneness of life, and that we can draw from diverse sources of wisdom in our spiritual journey;”

      “So Progressive Christians live with uncertainty. They follow Jesus but may be uncertain as to who he is, or at least be incredulous about claims made about him and or God that do not make sense.”

      Why would you follow Jesus if you doubt his claims about Himself? If he isn’t the only Way to God as He claims or if you doubt His claims about who He is, why would you follow someone you consider deluded or a liar? Are they actually in fact seeking more confirmation amd certainty, despite their claims about being comfortable with ambiguity? Obviously a lot of pantheism or panentheism/eastern influence in there with their claims about the Oneness (note capitalisation – is it to denote God?) of all life. They are putting fallible humanreason above divinely-revealed Scripture, too, making an idol of their own reason.

      From Borg in the same article: “… beyond that, I have no idea how anybody can know what happens after death, and you can’t make something true by believing it. So if somebody says, “I believe in Heaven,” fair enough, you believe in Heaven, but that has nothing to do with whether or not there is one. And so the energy of progressive Christianity is not about believing something now for the sake of a reward later, or not even about being virtuous now for the sake of a reward later, but for being as completely present as possible to this life, and being open to the moving of the Spirit both within ourselves and our societies, and seeking to participate in that movement of the Spirit.”

      Again, a low view of Scripture, with no trust in what it says about the afterlife. “Completely present in this life” sounds Eastern while references to Holy Spirit seem to be drawing on Quaker ideas.

      ” Know that the way we behave towards one another is the fullest expression of what we believe;”

      Again they condemn themselves with their own words, when I consider the hypocrisy and arrogance of this group.

      “For many progressive Christians, these people and their supporters in the right wing fundamentalist fringe of Christianity have seemed too silly to be taken seriously.”

      At least they admit their arrogance has backfired on them. It is interesting to see how they try to marginalise fundamentalist and right wing Christians (by which I assume they mean Bible believers) as a fringe, yet this group helped het ScoMo re-elected against all the odds so they are obviously a bit more sizeable than APCVA’s circa 150 members… It is the same tactic as is used by Peter Catt’s crony Archbishop Phillip Aspinall when he regular claims his liberal Catholicism is the moderate centre of Anglicanism and that evangelical Anglicans (ie, Sydney and Hobart) are fringe extremists, a distortion of reality.

      “Administration of the Chaplaincy Program is largely in the hands of fundamentalist-inclined evangelical religious groups. Given the clear issues in regard to public financial support for secular schooling that Professor Marion Maddox addressed in her book Taking God to School, we are concerned that such unrepresentative groups are allowed to be in charge of the program. ”

      Catt is jere citing the militant atheist academic Marion Maddox in a bid to remove evangelical chaplains from schools. Again these progressives hate mainstream evangelical Christians so much, they prefer to get into bed with atheists, be it the gay lobby or this atheist professor.

      “We believe that our view is the majority opinion of church goers as reflected in a number of opinion polls taken over the past few years.

      It is regrettable that a number of christian organisations have resorted to misinformation and fear-mongering in attempt to derail this important societal reform.”

      Again, bearing false witness against their fellow Christians.

      This final pro-gay article was written by Stuart Edser, an openly-homosexual activist. It is interesting that they condemn Martyn Iles for not being a trained theologian when they hire someone like Edser, a psychologist with a vested interest and no theological training, to write their pro-gay tracts for them.

      Okay, that’s definitely enough on this sordid, hypocritical, unethical group for now. It is up to God to judge Peter Catt and his colleagues, not me. God bless.

  13. That real was the last one but here is one more important quote:

    “While some sections of the church communicate themselves in rigid moralistic terms, adhere consistently to a Biblical literalist approach or articulate repeatedly the centrality of penal substitutionary atonement in defining membership, the progressive Christian voice is naturally diverse in its expression. Part of the point is to allow the emergence of faith in our time and context, practising being the church tuned into the Spirit and where she is moving. It is to recognise that faith is a relational way to be lived rather than adherence to a set of fixed doctrines…

    At the centre of Christian faith is not a doctrine but a person, and our own identity can therefore only be expressed through a clear understanding of who and what we mean by Jesus the Christ.”

    Well, this is partially true – our relationship with Christ is the centre of the religion and I don’t think any evangelical ever denies that. However, good, sound doctrine is a bedrock and Paul emphasises its importance repeatedly. Again, this emphasises the anti-intellectualism of the Progressive Christian movement. Jeanette Jamieson-Foarde is one Brisbane Anglican priestess I know of who downplays/rejects a doctrinal approach to faith. Of course one function of doctrine is to alert us to false preachers…

    “…our own identity can therefore only be expressed through a clear understanding of who and what we mean by Jesus the Christ.”
    That is a very interesting statement, given the other article talked about the Progressive Christians’uncertainty regarding Christ’s identity. Perhaps they are a little less equipped to handle ambiguity than they say they are. Maybe postmoderns really do need the certainty of Truth. Of course, this is a good thing if it leads them to believe Christ is Lord and believe in their hearts He rose from the dead because at this stage it seems, from my limited human perspective, that they are all on a path leading straight to Hell. Let us pray they do come to a saving faith in Christ.

    Sorry for the many typos in my posts. I am still a fumbler when I write from my phone. God bless.

  14. Ultimately, can’t imagine the martyrs of the Early Church spilling their blood for the idea of a panentheistic, non-interventionist God unable to help us (thereby not omnipotent and by definition not God) with only bague wishy-washy ideas of an afterlife and a Jesus who has been falsely treated raised to the status of a “god” by blasphemous Jews, yet that is what Borg is claiming.

    No! He is dead wrong. The early martyrs were people of rock-solid convictions, built on the unshakeable foundation of their faith in Christ as Lord! They had “blessed assurance” of where they would end up and worked to God’s glory here on Earth out of love and devotion and firm faith in Christ, something these Progressive Christians do not understand. Let us pray for them, that some might still be saved, especially those in leadership positions who are leading their flocks astray. If God can save Paul, a persecutor of the church, he can save the likes of Peter Catt, Jeanette Jamieson-Foarde, Ray Barraclough and Tiffany Sparks.

    1. Pastor David didn’t publish one of my comments; I may have over-quoted from the source, so here is just the link:

      I strongly recommend anyone interested in the topic read this article; it totally demolishes the arguments of Marcus Borg and the Progressive Christian movement by pointing out all of the logical flaws in Borg’s theology. I pray it may help someone who is feeling swayed to join the Progressive Christians or APCVA.

      1. Here are a few more articles critiquing the Westar Institute/Jesus Seminar for whom Marcus Borg worked and which has many, many close links to Anglican Church Southern Queensland clergy.

        If you are considering Progressive Chtistianity or joining APCVA or your minister is a Progressive Christian (which is a distinct possibility if you live in a diocese like Brisbane), please, please take a few minutes to read these links first, along with the others I provided above. Without wishing to sound hyperbolic or even hysterical (I am not), these articles may help save your soul:

    2. A few more links on Marcus Borg that may be helpful to people:

      “I think the Bible contains a fair amount of material that was never the will of God,” Borg said. “How do we discern what parts of the Bible reflect the passion of God and what parts are simply ancient conventional beliefs? When there’s a conflict between Jesus and the Bible, Jesus trumps the Bible. Taking Jesus seriously is about much more than believing certain doctrines, and ultimately, not about believing or about being good. It’s about a relationship with God that involves us in a journey of transformation.”

      Not about believing or doctrines – again, there is that strong anti-intellectual element there. Also, does not believing mean a repudiation of faith? It is hard to reconcile wiyh his later statement about still wanting a relationship with God. How does he achieve that relationship if not through Jesus, whose body lies dead somewhte according to him?

      “According to Borg, the Christ of creed, the one whom the Church has confessed throughout the centuries, is not the historical Jesus who lived in Galilee in the first century. Rather, the creedal affirmations of the church are “exalted metaphors” that followers of Jesus attached to him after they came to believe that he was raised from the dead (also a metaphor). ”

      Borg creates an SJW Jesus in his own image. He rejected the authoritarian, distant God (he perceived) was taught to him at his childhood church in favour of a paentheistic, non-interventionist being.

  15. Incredible. Thank you for informing us of what is going on in Brisbane, Jean. There I was thinking it was a stsid and conservative city. My heart breaks for the Anglicans up there stuck with those heretical priests. I am very grateful I am not a Brisbane Anglican. They must have a lot of audacity and arrogance indeed to think they can get away with pushing all of these blatantly heretical ideas onto people. I wonder what drives their antipathy for the Reformation/Sydney Anglicans/evangelicals in general. Is it just parochial rivalry with the Diocese of Sydney or a ganatical adherence to liberal/woke politics over and above Christian truth? Some of the remarks in those blog posts sounded almost pathological in their disdain of mainstream protestantism/evangelicalism. Since they are so far remived from anything recognisable as historical Christianity, why don’t they just go off and form their own panentheist religion? It would be more honest. In fact, I can imagine some of them will leave the Christian church alyogether unless they repent and are saved, by the looks of their current trajectory.

    It is very sad and alarming. I am glad only 150 people joined their organisation so far but that is still 150 too many and it is alarming they have been allowed to rise to positions of power and influence in Anglican Church Southern Queensland when they clearly should have been defrocked years ago.

    What wicked men and women they are to twist Scriptures and Christ’s words and doubt their saving power. I fail to see the appeal except for a sophsticated pseudo-intellectual who claims yo thrive on ambiguity and is more interested in the social kires of this world than standing spart as a Christian. Catt is clearly too busy seeking validation in the eyes of sodomists to support his fellow Christians for one. He’d turn his back on a brother in need if they stood up against gay marriage. What kind of Christian is that?

    I am very frustrated and sad that these people have fallen under yhe spell of pseufo-intellectuals like Marcus Borg. Why can’t they see through him? Do thry think they are more sophisticated by favouring reason over scripture or by embracinv ambiguity or is it that they find the morality of this world more appealing than the morality of God and prefer the days “when every man did what he thought was right in his own mind”? Are they too proud to admit they made a mistake and do a u-turn and embrace Biblical orthodoxy and Christian morality? I don’t know but I am so so, so, so very sad about this situation you have presented. I will pray tonight that integrity and morality and faithful leaders will rise up in Anglican Church Southern Queensland. All my thoughts and prayers are with you tonight, Brisbane Anglicans.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

%d bloggers like this: