WHOSE MORALITY.

By Donald Phillipps in All Sorts

how can we use the electronic communications to share the Good News?

WHOSE MORALITY
We've been asked, rightly in my judgement, to put our names to a petition concerning pornography. The insidious abuse and misuse of electronic communications to snare and compromise individuals is an example of the alarming, but wholly logical, extension of the way in which we now prefer to engage with each other. The formalities of correct behaviour and proper language are in the discard. For good or ill the demands of the key-pad seem to push into the background the value of the considered response.
By the way, in respect to matters electronic this writer is an old fogey - which term probably comes from 18th century Scotland, and refers to decrepit or retired soldiers. Is there also the risk that to talk of morality turns the speaker into an old fogey.
The parliamentary petition belongs to the 21st century. For another purpose I explored the Otago Daily Times for this week exactly 100 years ago. I came across an item that helps illustrate the point of this article.
There was a report of 'an address to ladies' at the Art Gallery given by a Miss Austen. The subject was "Should a Child be Taught the Science of Life?" It was reported that Miss Austen spoke in an interesting and tactful way on what the newspaper called a "delicate problem." What she said was received with keen interest and appreciation. Miss Austen was noted elsewhere as representing the 'Social Purity Movement' and had been giving lectures around the country for a number of years. But there's little to go on in respect to her subject matter, or herself for that matter.
One might imagine it was more to do with human biology than what would today be covered in sex education - if that is still a current term. Miss Austen was on a mission to impress mothers and girls on the 'essentials of life', and her overriding objective was the happiness of the individual, the family, and the nation. 'Fit for purpose' for its time, to use another current phrase. In respect to public morality today, what is 'fit for purpose"?
What topic is there that is so important to you that you would want to enforce your way of thinking about it? Put that way the answer, most likely, is hardly anything. We live in what might still be called a permissive society. The faith system to which we belong is grounded in love and acceptance. Our particular denominational flag is rainbow- coloured in celebration of inclusivity. Despite the emphases of our TV news editors are we comfortable with a political system that is confrontational. We like our right and our left to be not too far from the centre - don't we!
We look with horror at the extremism that prevails almost everywhere else on the planet. But we are a small nation, and about as far from the centre of things as it is possible to be. In fact, it is comforting, and safe in its way, to be like that, for it is a sort of excuse for not raising our voices.
Of course that's an exaggeration. We are a concerned people, and for all our short-comings we have an enviable record in human rights for example. So if the world out there doesn't take time to listen to what we have to say, or learn from the unique experience that has been ours over the past two centuries, we still need, must, learn from each other. And there is a lot of learning to be done.
Miss Austen was concerned for the happiness of our nation. Surely, in 2017, we should have a vital concern for what we fairly believe is detrimental to good order, to the exercise of justice, to the care of our corner of creation, to the respect and welfare of our neighbours. How might we Dunedin Methodists go about this?
However much I respect the pulpit on a Sunday, it cannot remain the primary focus of our sharing the Good News of the Gospel. And however inept I may be in respect to electronic communication I am certain that that is where the future of our evangelism must lie. We are at this very moment considering the future of Dunedin Methodism. I happen to think that we may be as well placed as any body within the Connexion, or any group within the Dunedin community, to explore the possibility of reaching out by such means to our neighbour - not just on Sunday, but 24/7.
Not to harangue, but to share. Not to judge, but to stand alongside. And in spite of the lightning speed of communication, to take time, to listen, to reason together, to take more time. And only then to decide.
Donald Phillipps