|
 Americans
have a tendency to judge everything by American standards, so
that it is right only if done the way “we” do it. We are
less cosmopolitan than Europeans, because we have not been
forced, by geography, to rub shoulders with a multitude of
different customs. To some extent the vastness and separateness
of Australia has thus affected her people, especially in those
areas more cut off from world -trade centers.
So,
basic British customs of worship, attitudes toward money, etc.,
have taken on distinctive Australian dress, and resist change.
When a colloquially “tuned” American tries to “Americanize”
an Australian church, the sparks may fly. Exactly the same thing
would take place here, if their preachers tried to “Australianize”
an American church.
Now,
to this mixture add liberal U.S. preachers, seeking to impose
the current “churchhood” projects, social activities, “Campaign”
ballyhoo and worship “program” techniques upon a people who
have but recently come out of the “Associated” church
(Christian Church) because of these very things, and you get the
Australian picture.
Today’s
Australia is a challenging field for conservative preachers who
are capable of distinguishing between inconsequential
|
|
customs and scriptural principles —
and who have patience to teach this difference to others. A few
spiritually mature “men” could help faithful Australian
saints shape the course of history there. Money to support
conservative Australian men will help, but this is not enough.
Self-sacrificing
examples are needed; the Australian saints need to see that not
all American churches have bowed the knee to Abilene or
Nashville — that conservative churches do indeed seek to
spread the gospel afar and do not need “Associated” tactics
to do it. The “American Influence” must become Christ
at work in us.
This
month’s “Quote” page concerns “American Influence” of
a past age. I was surprised to learn that Americans had checked
early efforts to make the “Conference” decisions binding on
the churches of Australia, I was NOT surprised to see that so
long as the “Association” meetings continued, and the
principle of collective action was generally accepted, the move
toward denominationalism continued.
One
reader thought my printing of “quotes” meant endorsement of
all the article taught. Not so! Specifically, I do not believe a
church may operate a secular school. (May—June “Quote.”)
[Previous
Article] [Next
Article]
|
