So it’s okay for Christians to openly disagree with the policies and behaviour of politicians from the ALP, the Libs, the Nats and the Greens, but when it comes to the CDP we have to keep our mouth shut?

Who said that mate?

Michael

I’m assuming that you are Mike.

Are you or are you not using Matthew 18 to tell us not to publicly disagree with the way the CDP runs?

It requires us to justify why we think someone is wrong and then we have to listen to the other’s response. Easier to grizzle or publicly allege certain things against the other which may or may not be true.

I would argue that this forum is a great place for people to present their arguments for and against Christian groups like the CDP. We criticise Hillsong not just in these forums but in “official” articles written in Southern Cross. I don’t see why the CDP has to be any different.

From what I have read of the viewpoints of those high up in the CDP, they seem to more “culturally conservative” than biblically conservative. The guy who wrote the letter to Dave Lankshear’s parents was a Victorian Senate candidate. It’s all very well to disagree with global warming, but to then attach some sort of pagan/cult label upon any Christian who does believe in global warming show just how far some Christian leaders have come. There’s a level of cultural syncretism amongst Christians who have taken on right-wing conservative ideology as being somehow biblical in nature. I may vote for the Greens and think that Global Warming is a serious problem that Christians should take seriously, but I’m not going to merge my faith with left-wing ideology (as liberation theologians did with Marxism).

For those who wish to discuss the CDP’s possible syncretism and their adherence to right-wing ideology as synonymous to Christian theology, I suggest perusing their policies.

Just as we can criticise Benny Hinn and Hillsong and link to parts of the internet, so should we be able to place the CDP under scrutiny.

Example:

2. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES - in a general sense the purpose for which the organisation exists has not been changed, but continues to be:
a) to advance the glory of God through the institution of Parliament and through all aspects of Federal and State and Local Government, to advance Australia as “A Christian Commonwealth” as it was originally described in 1901 when the “Commonwealth of Australia” was formed;

This is the first point in the CDP’s National Charter. Where do they get the idea that Australia is a “Christian Commonwealth”? Can someone please check the Constitution of Australia to see what it contains specifically about the Christian religion? My quick glance at it shows nothing but one or two references to “Almighty God” but that could quite easily be deist (like the US Constitution).

http://cdp.org.au/ is probably a good place to start, as the other link takes you to the Victorian Branch.
In particular, look for their statements about the moratorium on Muslim migration.
I have a flyer for Paul Green, and his website is
www.paulgreen.com.au
I have also emailed head office to let them know of this post.

b) to promote the true welfare of the people of Australia through all legislation being brought into conformity with the revealed will of God in the Holy Bible with a special emphasis on the MINISTRY OF RECONCILIATION (2 Cor.5:18);

This implies some sort of dominionist or theocracy. Was the Bible written so that Civil government could function in the way that God wants to it… or was it written so that the man of God may be thoroughly equipped for every good work?

to support & promote recognition of our Christian heritage by uplifting the Judeo/Christian ethic, with pro-family, pro-child, pro-moral, pro-life, and pro-Australian policies;

I wasn’t aware that Judeo-Christian ethics are somehow “pro-Australian”. They’ve mixed up theology with nationalism on this one.

e) to uphold our Christian Constitutional Monarchy and Christian Westminster System of Government through the policies of CDP as a Christian Democratic Political Movement, respecting the sovereignty of Australia.
In accordance with Jeremiah 51:27 we seek to “Set up a standard in the Land, blow the trumpet among the nations”, and to fulfil our Lord’s command in the Gospel of Matthew 5:13-19 “Let your light shine”. c.f. Isaiah 62:6-10, Romans 13, Ephesians 5.

So if you’re a Christian and a member of the CDP you have to support the rule of the British Monarch over Australia. Christian Republicans are not welcome.

Neil M. Cameron - 27 November 2007 07:47 PM

e) to uphold our Christian Constitutional Monarchy and Christian Westminster System of Government through the policies of CDP as a Christian Democratic Political Movement, respecting the sovereignty of Australia.
In accordance with Jeremiah 51:27 we seek to “Set up a standard in the Land, blow the trumpet among the nations”, and to fulfil our Lord’s command in the Gospel of Matthew 5:13-19 “Let your light shine”. c.f. Isaiah 62:6-10, Romans 13, Ephesians 5.

So if you’re a Christian and a member of the CDP you have to support the rule of the British Monarch over Australia. Christian Republicans are not welcome.

Neil,

In your quote from their site (?), they said ‘respecting the sovereignty of Australia. You said ‘support the rule of the British Monarch over Australia’.

I don’t see those expressions as synonymous. Do you? Really?

Cheers,
Andrew

FREE ENTERPRISE: We believe that the Biblical principles concerning economics should be consistently upheld and respected by civil government, including honest weights and measures and avoidance of currency debasement. We further uphold the principle of responsible free enterprise, meaning maximum freedom to develop one’s talents matched with responsibility before God in dealing with our fellow man.

So any Christian who thinks that the state can have some level of influence in the economy - say a socialist state in which many industries are nationalised and some form of central planning goes on - can’t join the party.

I’m a bit lefty in my thinking but I’m nowhere near being a communist. Yet I wouldn’t be able to vote for them because the CDP want a very free market.

uphold our Christian Constitutional Monarchy and Christian Westminster System of Government

If they do that it means that the CDP want the Queen.

I remember Fred Nile back in 2000 discussing the importance of the monarchy.

Again - if a Christian wants the monarchy then that’s fine. It’s when you link it to the Christian faith that it becomes dodgy.

(A) BIBLICAL ETHICS: We believe that decision-making processes by civil government must not contravene Biblical ethics concerning the family, marriage, morality, etc.

One aspect of Biblical ethics is whether or not a person has submitted themselves to Jesus as Lord and saviour. Abortion is sinful. So is unbelief. Will the CDP wish to legislate against unbelief? Will the CDP legislate against people of other religious faiths? Will the CDP wish to legislate against people who have no faith?

jeannine baird - 27 November 2007 07:44 PM

http://cdp.org.au/ is probably a good place to start, as the other link takes you to the Victorian Branch.
In particular, look for their statements about the moratorium on Muslim migration.
I have a flyer for Paul Green, and his website is
www.paulgreen.com.au
I have also emailed head office to let them know of this post.

Jeannine can you elaborate on your statement “To have these dropped in our neighbours’ letterboxes, saying that a party calling themselves one supporting “Christian values” in essence wanted them gone, was thoroughly offensive to us as Christians”. Do you mean they wish to deport Muslim migrants?

And Neil, in my posts I have said nothing about other parties, I have spoken about the analysis of the CDP on this thread alone, in particular the egregious poll at the beginning of the thread. It is slanted and not very revealing of anything except the views of those who put the poll there.

You are putting words in my mouth when you say that I am saying that christians should “shut up” in public about the CDP. If you read my post carefully you would have seen that I said “At the very least if there is public rebukes (sic), let it be done graciously and in a careful manner. “ There should be a process with sinful behaviour rather than ad hoc smear jobs and gossip that may slander those that cannot fight back. Far preferable is putting questions and comments to people directly than simply sniping on a forum and conducting shabby internet polls.

I have looked at the site and find that their policy is for a ten year moritorium(I can’t have spelled that correctly) on Islamic immigration. I find I do not agree with that. I had better start speaking to them about it and asking for an explanation, hadn’t I?