Tim Thornborough / 13th July 2004
(From Tim Thornborough at the Good Book Company UK:)
I was always in trouble at school. The punishments I received varied from lines to detentions, and being thwacked by a whole variety of implements: the cane, slipper, ruler and the hands of my parents. That was then.
Corporal punishment in school was fully outlawed in 1998, and this week, the Government edged closer to protecting children from being smacked too hard at home. When the Children Bill was debated in the House of Lords, peers backed a compromise amendment to outlaw any smack that causes harm (such as bruising or cuts)—although they rejected a total ban.
Some Christians believe that we have a biblical mandate to administer physical punishment. In fact, the original ban on corporal punishment was challenged two years ago in the High Court by a coalition of independent Christian schools, which argued that corporal punishment was actually doctrine of our faith. A ban, they said, would erode our Christian rights. The case failed.
The biblical evidence for their defence relies mostly on a handful of proverbs (Prv 23.13, 29.15 and 13.24), which they insist must be interpreted literally as a cane for physical chastisement, and not simply as a metaphor for discipline. Elsewhere, however, the rod is a symbol for protection and guidance. Psalm 23, for example, describes how the shepherd's rod and staff will comfort and guide his sheep, and it's an image that recurs many times.
Such arguing about the meaning of texts tends to be counterproductive, however. Far better for us to concentrate on the complete Biblical context of the family. Our contemporary culture is based on rights; some exhort the rights of the parents to smack, while others defend the child's right to be protected. Stalemate.
The Kingdom of God, however, is about right relationships—and the obligations they carry, to love God and each other. Children, therefore, must obey their parents; but fathers, equally, must not “exasperate [their] children” (Ephesians 6.4). Punishment should do many things, but ultimately it should seek to restore an offender to their community or family, not to alienate or physically harm them. If we ever lose sight of that goal, we are simply making a rod for our own backs.
Emma Thornett / 13th July 2004
(Sent in by a Briefing reader:)
We couldn't help noticing the startling juxtaposition of two books in the Koorong Sale Catalogue Issue 17, 2004. These two reviews appear right next to each other with full colour photos on page 10:
PROPHETIC UNTIMELINESS: A CHALLENGE TO THE IDOL OF RELEVANCE
By Os Guiness
Never have Christians tried so hard to be relevant. But never have they ended up so irrelevant. Os Guiness shows how we can live with integrity in the midst of modern pressures and explores how we can be truly relevant without being trivial or trendy.
#196594 Hardback. Koorong's: $17.95 *NEW*
GIRL TIME: A CELEBRATION OF CHICK FLICKS, BAD HAIR DAYS & GOOD FRIENDS
By Laura Jensen Walker
Girlfriends are feminine necessities, right up there with chick flicks and painless hair removal! They're available to laugh and cry, applaud and push, remember and dream. So kick back in your comfy chair and enjoy this celebration of all things girly.
#205375 Paperback. Koorong's: $12.95 *NEW*
Gordon Cheng / 12th July 2004
/ The ones they wouldn't publish!
(This was a letter referring to the successful experimentation on human embryos by Sydney researchers. GU)
Did I really expect them to publish this one? Possibly not, but the issue is always worth writing about, and if we can get a mention of hell into the letters pages, it could spark a significant and usually censored discussion:
Dear editor,
Probably a year ago I still enjoyed trying to write witty, sarcastic letters to the editor about human embryo research.
Now it's happening here in Sydney, and I just feel desperately sad. What an idiot I feel for even attempting to make a joke about it. God damn those researchers to hell.
Gordon Cheng
Ian Carmichael / 11th July 2004
Q: Which is the only E.U. country which has a constitutional ban on proselytising?
A: Greece.
So will all the evangelism that surrounded the Sydney Olympics be allowed to take place in flagrant breach of the Greek Constitution? Almost certainly. It's odd how our behaviour changes when we know somebody is watching us.
For more about the denial of human rights to Greek citizens who are not from the Greek Orthodox religion, see Forum 18's report.
Gordon Cheng / 11th July 2004
/ The ones they wouldn't publish!
On a comment about admissions by Mark Latham, leader of the Australian Federal Opposition, that he had an ‘active love life’ before and between his marriages:
Dear editor,
When Mark Latham says he had an “active love life” before he was married, does he actually mean he had an active sex life? If so, as a Christian I feel sorry for him. Firstly, because he has confused love with sex. Secondly, because in so doing, he's diminished his capacity to do both.
The man with the most active love life on the planet, Jesus Christ, never had sex. Believe it!
The Rev Gordon Cheng
