Representation

The Moderator gets the opportunity to represent the Presbyterian Church on a number of bodies. So far I have attended meetings of only two (twice each).

Multi-Faith Advisory Group, February 23 2009

This meeting served as a kind of debrief, following the National Day of Mourning service that had happened just the day before. More is said about that service elsewhere on this website, but I was pleased that at this meeting the comments I made about the inappropriateness of organising a public, national service on a Sunday morning were generally supported by everyone there. The chairman of the Group, George Lekakis, assured me that on behalf of the Group he would make sure the government were aware of this.

I was disappointed that I was the only church representative there. Maureen Postma of the Victorian Council of Churches was there, as she always is, but there had been others from the Catholic, Anglican, Uniting and I think Baptist churches at the previous meeting I'd attended. I would have thought that on such an ocassion as this, recognising that the government had made use of this body quite extensively in the preparation and delivery of the NDM service, they would have made more of an effort to get involved, not less.

There were two Muslims there, one representing the Muslim Council of Victoria and the other representing the Victorian Multicultural Commission. In fact, all told, there were 4 representatives of the VMC at the meeting, including the chairman, although the others didn't reveal any particular religious affiliation. There were also one each representatives of the Jewish, Baha'i, Sikh and Buddhist communities.

Heads of Churches Meeting with the Premier, December 19 2008

This was a fascinating meeting, held in the conference room of the Premier's office. The Catholic and Anglican Archbishops were there, as were representative heads of most of the recognisable mainstream churches.

I was slightly disappointment when I realised that each denomination was limited to just one representative. My disappointment was in two parts. First because the Premier himself was assisted in the meeting by no less than three advisors so it seemed somewhat unfair that we were not allowed support. I understand that there were more than a dozen church reps there anyway, so perhaps Mr Brumby just didn't want to be swamped by another couple of dozen support personnel, but surely he understands that as the represntative head of (in some cases) very large organisations, we can't be expected to hold in our heads every detail of every subject that might be raised.

And my other disappointment was that if John Wilson had not been overseas at the time I would not have got an invite. I understand the concern that has been raised by many recent moderators about consistency in our representation on bodies like this, which is why we now send the clerk to support the moderator at Heads of Churches meetings. That's fine when we can both attend, but on ocassions such as this when we are reduced to just one representative, who should it be? My own view is that it should be the moderator; but it appears as if the practical realities are moving us towards the clerk as the one who will be recognised in the wider community as our "representative head".

Anyway, these things aside, the meeting itself was limited in its scope, and to be honest we didn't discuss very much in the way of religion as such. We spoke about a wide range of social and community initiatives that the government have in place or are working towards, especially rural health care and welfare. Many churches of course have a very significant stake in welfare provision, so most people at the meeting were very interested in new funding that will be available to assist in drought affected areas.

The nearest we got to discussing anything about religion itself was when Denis Hart, the Catholic Archbishop, raised some questions / points about the current review of exemptions to the anti-discrimination legislation. I think (though I'm reading between the lines) that he was particularly concerned that if the church is no longer exempt from gender discrimination laws, then restricting ordination to men only could become a matter for the courts.

Multi-Faith Advisory Group, October 29

Some might flinch at the mere mention of 'multi-faith', but this is a group established by parliamentarians (I'm not sure exactly who or when, but it comes from somewhere deep in the bowels of political power) for the purpose of keeping them in touch with issues of concern to the various faith groups. It was an intersting meeting, chaired by the government's man and populated with Muslim, Jew and Baha'i as well as several different branches of the Christian faith.

Most of the subjects on the agenda were social issues, which I guess is where we can find some 'safe' common ground across the faith communities.

Heads of Churches, November 28

Around the table we had the heads of the Australian Christian Churches (formerly known as the Assemblies of God), the Baptist Union of Victoria, the Churches of Christ, the Lutheran Church and the Presbyterians, as well as a representative of the Catholic Archbiship. The Archbishops of both the Catholic and Anglican Churches are members of this body, but I get the impression that they are not terribly great at putting in an appearance. I might be wrong of course, having been to just one meeting, but something was said about the Premier not wanting to waste his time meeting with the Heads of Churches unless the heads of the two (by far) largest denominations are prepared to make the effort and take it seriously.

It is intersting that the ACC, the CofC and the Lutherans, like us Presbyterians, all had double representation there. In other words they had their democratic head (equivalent to the Moderator) as well as their executive head (equivalent to Clerk, but somewhat beefed up from our own Clerk's position). John Wilson was there with me on behalf of our General Assembly.

A meeting with the Premier has been set up for December 19.