There is a cluster of highly dangerous changes for our society currently being pushed through Parliament: euthanasia, unlimited abortion, and the legalisation of recreational marijuana.
These initiatives will affect us all, and all generations to come. These matters are life and death issues. They transcend mere party politics. It is time the New Zealand public (including the Christian public) arouse themselves from their sleepiness and apathy.
The recent majority (69/51) vote by MPs to legalise euthanasia in New Zealand, subject to a referendum at the next election, is very disappointing. It appears that many MPs (along with much of the media and the general public) simply do not understand the extremely serious implications of legalising euthanasia in this country. For doctors and nurse practitioners to be authorised to actively end patients’ lives, even on request, is to cross a critical threshold. Euthanasia is an entirely different thing than ceasing treatment or turning off an artificial life-support machine when there is zero chance of survival. MPs have no moral right to legislate to allow anyone to kill.
The task of doctors has always been to help heal their patients, not to dispatch them. The inevitable outcomes of allowing “assisted dying” include a lessened societal respect for life, growing pressures to opt for death, and the undermining of doctor-patient trust, of palliative care, and of hospices. All this was very ably pointed out, in the outstanding speeches of some MPs.
The euthanasia debate is not over yet. In 11 months (or less) there will be a Referendum. Given widespread public misunderstanding, excellent anti-euthanasia information will be needed to be vigorously disseminated.
The very liberal abortion bill presently before Parliament is even more unethical. In the so-called Abortion Law Reform Bill none of those unborn babies whose killing is to be freely allowed are recognised as human, none are recognised as having any human rights, and none will be given any choice at all. How liberal and compassionate is that? Again, over 90% of public submissions are opposed to the Bill. But many MPs do not appear to be listening, and the select committee process is shamefully selective.
On a happier note, six of us Kiwis have just come back from the General Assembly of the World Evangelical Alliance, in Indonesia. New Zealand Christian Network is one of national evangelical alliances in 130 countries all over the world, and 92 of those were represented at the Assembly. It was an inspiring time, and great to become better connected to that global community. We met delegates from some very hard places. We all came back determined to see NZCN flourish and grow, and to work for an increasingly effective and united Gospel witness in Aotearoa New Zealand.
The New Zealand Parliament legalised euthanasia this week by 69 votes to 51, pending the outcome of a referendum next year. On paper, The End of Life Choice Act 2017 looks restrictive. Its architect, libertarian MP David Seymour, claims it permits “one of the most conservative assisted dying regimes in the world.”
Opponents say it is full of loopholes, which would make it like every other piece of euthanasia legislation in the world. Indications are that, once such a law is in place, nobody much cares about how it is working.
As National MP Chris Penk said at the final debate: “The question is not whether some people will die in the way the bill allows, but whether many people could die in a way that the law does not allow.” That is what has happened in the Netherlands and Belgium.
Hospices won’t be exempt
The Act allows assisted suicide by a lethal dose of drugs, either self-administered or administered by a doctor or a nurse practitioner. This option would be available to New Zealand citizens or permanent residents aged 18 and over who have been diagnosed as terminally ill and having less than six months to live.
Originally, the Act also covered people with “grievous and irremediable” conditions, which could apply to depressed and disabled persons, but this was dropped by Seymour to garner more support from MPs.
Conscience protection for doctors and nurses was added. They are not obliged to participate in any part of the assisted dying process or suffer any penalties for opting out. However, an attending practitioner with a conscientious objection must tell a patient that they have a right to ask the group administering the scheme for the name and contact details of a replacement doctor or nurse.
An amendment drafted in consultation with Hospice New Zealand that would allow organisations to opt out without risking losing public funding was voted down.
Other efforts to address weak provisions concerning safeguards and accountability were shut down in successive debates by members impatient to get the bill passed.
The beautiful-young-woman-with-a-tumour factor
In the end, Seymour got 69 of the 120-member Parliament on his side. However, to get the eight votes of the New Zealand First Party members (led by Deputy Prime Minister Winston Peters) he and supporting MPs had to accept the party’s demand that the Act go to a referendum. It will be one of at least two proposals the public can vote on alongside next year’s general election, the other being the legalisation of recreational cannabis.
It has taken four attempts, starting in 1995, to get euthanasia across the line in the New Zealand Parliament. Its success this time is in keeping with social trends such as secularisation, but also owes a lot to the advocacy of Wellington lawyer Lecretia Seales, who died of brain cancer in 2015. As an attractive, clever 42-year-old tragically facing death, she has done for euthanasia in this country what another beautiful young woman with a brain tumour, Brittany Maynard, did for the cause in California.
Ms Seales, who had worked for the liberal-minded Law Commission, applied to the New Zealand High Court for a declaration that she had a “right” to assisted suicide under the NZ Bill of Rights Act. She failed at court, but succeeded in the public domain where the support of her husband and family and influential figures such as former Law Commission chief Sir Geoffrey Palmer – not to mention massive and sympathetic media attention – emboldened politicians to have another go at legalising euthanasia. Seales died peacefully of natural causes in June 2015 and in October Seymour lodged his member’s bill. In December that year the New Zealand Herald declared Lecretia Seales “New Zealander of the Year”.
Tens of thousands of opposing public submissions binned
The Seymour bill was drawn from the ballot in June 2017 and had its first reading in December. It then went to a select committee of MPs for study and to receive public submissions. More than 39,000 submissions were received, 90 percent opposing it. Over four months touring the country the committee heard over 2000 oral submissions, of which 85 percent were opposed. These included the majority of medical associations and individual doctors and nurses who addressed the committee.
In addition, a grassroots effort saw published a number of excellent video testimonies from people who had faced a terminal diagnosis or lived with a severe disability, as well as professional commentary on the issue. One of the people appearing in these videos, Clare Freeman, who became tetraplegic at 17 and attempted suicide, addressed hundreds of opponents in front of Parliament on Wednesday as MPs prepared for the final vote. She recounted how a psychiatrist suggested that she could get help to end her life overseas.
All of this has counted for very little with the majority of our political representatives. The public opinion they fear is the referendum looming at the election next year and the debate that will precede it. As NZ Herald writer Claire Trevett commented today: “Few MPs will want to take the lead in that debate – for few will want to be defined by it and have it overshadow their campaign.” That is probably truer of those supporting the legislation than those against it.
The “misinformation” spectre
Supporters have already raised the spectre of “misinformation” to ward off inconvenient publicity about euthanasia and the End of Life Choice Act itself. In fact, Minister of Justice Andrew Little (a supporter) is so concerned that the public may be misinformed and misled that he has talked about setting up a unit in the Ministry of Truth – sorry, Justice – to monitor advertising campaigns. This applies also to the cannabis referendum.
Following an interview with Little, however, the NZ Herald reports, “Teams in the Justice Ministry will prepare neutral, factual information for each referendum and make that publicly available, but they will not be tasked with calling out misinformation.” The Minister expects things to get “ugly” and expects the worst of social media, but has indicated that complaints to the Advertising Standards Authority are the way to go for disgruntled members of the public. He will simply do what he can to “call out misinformation.”
It would be foolish to think that the public is already well informed (and could only be misled by further debate), although politicians and the media regularly invoke opinion polls that show a level of public support for euthanasia of around 70 percent. If the public is generally ignorant, what is the value of a poll that asks a superficial question such as, “Parliament is considering passing a euthanasia law that would allow terminally ill patients to die with the help and approval of their doctors. Would you support it?”
Of course people should be allowed to die. Of course doctors should do what they can to ease their symptoms and reassure them as they die. Aren’t they, don’t they already? Yes. But the euthanasia movement fosters the deceitful idea that people are being kept alive against their will by extraordinary means.
Three-quarters of Kiwis don’t know what ‘choices’ the Act allows
A poll commissioned by Euthanasia-Free NZ and released early this week showed that, despite the legislation being around for four years, the great majority of the public do not know what “choices” the End of Life Choice Act would legalise.
70% thought it would make it legal for people to choose to not be resuscitated, when people can already ask for such a request to be added to their medical file.
75% thought that the Bill made euthanasia available to terminally ill people only as a last resort, after all treatments have been tried to control their pain.
“However, the Bill does not require an eligible person to have tried any pain relief or palliative care before requesting a lethal dose, or to have a consultation with a palliative care or pain specialist to find out what options are available to them,” says Euthanasia-Free NZ.
Like the Act’s supporters. this group is concerned about the referendum. “We doubt that another year would be long enough to allow the public to become adequately informed about the Bill’s content, amid contentious debates on cannabis and the general election,” says its executive officer Renee Joubert. “We are concerned that a referendum result may not reflect the public’s true sentiments.”
There seems, indeed, a real possibility that the cannabis referendum, being a more grass-roots issue (so to speak) and therefore given more media time, will eclipse that of euthanasia. The best we can hope for in any case is a change of government.
I recently read an article about what it’s like being deaf in New Zealand. One woman interviewed recalled a camp she attended when she was young. The experience made a big impression on her, so much so that she came to realise that being deaf was “who I am”.
This got me thinking about other times I’ve heard someone say that such-and-such is “who I am”. One hears of people saying it about their race, their gender, their sexual orientation, or some other characteristic they consider to be vital to the point of being definitive.
I expect many who say this are very deeply affected by the significance of the characteristic they are describing and this is articulated, with some poetic licence, as “This is who I am”. In some cases (perhaps many), this poetic licence may be energised by the fact that the person has been made to feel like a social outlier because of the characteristic. In these cases, the “poetry” becomes quite poignant and very powerful.
However, some proclaim “who I am” with a polemical purpose which, if spelled out, goes something like this: “This characteristic is who I am. For that reason, your disapproval of it, or disagreement with it, is a rejection of me as a person, a denial of my humanity”. What seems to follow, in the mind of the speaker, is that the disapproval or disagreement must therefore not be permitted and may even be reasonably described as hate speech and condemned as such. We see this happening all around us.
This characteristic is who I am. For that reason, your disapproval of it, or disagreement with it, is a rejection of me as a person, a denial of my humanity.
No matter how the declaration “This is who I am” is used, I suggest that it isn’t actually true. I cannot interfere with a person’s view of themselves – I’m just an onlooker with no authority – but I can have an opinion about this kind of thought process. When the woman declared that her deafness is “who I am”, it occurred to me to ask, “What about your ethnicity and gender, are they just peripheral?”
When a person identifies a characteristic and says, “This is who I am”, they are doing themselves a great injustice and selling themselves way short.
Each person consists of an enormous number of characteristics, some innate and others formed by experience and context. I’ll call each of these a “what” as distinct from the “who”. There are all sorts of whats – sex, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender presentation, age, height, body shape and weight, strength, IQ, EQ, disposition, beauty, physical prowess, physical health, mental health, attitude to heights, enclosed spaces and spiders, place on various spectrums (eg introvert/extrovert, optimist/pessimist, sweetness of tooth, sensitivity to heat and cold), opinions and world-view, life experience, experience of oppression (from one side or another), skills, self-esteem, memory, facility with languages… I’m not sure the list has an end.
I suggest that “who” a person is must be, at the very least, the aggregate of the enormous number of whats that characterise the person. To be honest, I would go further and suggest that this aggregate is simply “what” the person is, while the “who” of that person is something even more profound and utterly unique.
Who we really are
We Christians believe each human being is made “in the image and likeness” of the creator God. This is rather grand and gives each person fabulous significance and value, which is the other reason I find limited self-identification so irksome.
But even if the imago Dei is notionally set aside, it is apparent that an individual human being is an unfathomably deep and complex unit. So, when a person focuses on a single characteristic and says “This is who I am”, they are saying something that is wildly inaccurate.
We should be prepared to go to some trouble to understand why a person identifies themselves in this way, especially if there is real hurt underlying what they say. However, it doesn’t follow that a poetic understatement, no matter how poignant or tragic, should be taken literally – because then it’s false.
Identity politics
I don’t intend this to be of merely passing interest: it’s relevant to identity politics.
I’m not quite sure just who is “in charge” of identity politics – I only know they’ve been operating behind the scenes and that no-one voted for them. They seem to have decided that each person has only a handful of characteristics – or, at least, only a handful of characteristics that matter.
I cannot interfere when a person entertains a false and limiting belief about themselves. I must feel a little sad and leave them be. However, I object to being told that I must treat their paltry self-identification as a fact.
It is even more objectionable when someone applies this shabby branding tosomeone else.
This happens, for example, when I am identified as “just” a pale, stale male or “just” a phobia-laden Christian bigot or “just” a beneficiary of racist colonialism etc. Once one of these damning labels is attached to me, no interest is taken in my other characteristics, much less in my actual opinions, decisions and actions.
It also happens when a person is encouraged to self-identify in this paltry manner – to see themselves as a person of very few parts. The perverse thing is, this encouragement comes from people who claim to advocate for that person!
“This is who I am” is bad enough. “This is who you are” is worse.
This has been going on for a while, but I continue to be astonished by the new elite (academics, media, educators, much of government) who arrogantly presume to define everyone, especially when that definition is insultingly incomplete. This displays utter contempt for every member of the community – not only those the elite intends to punish for past sins but also those it claims to champion.
Identity politics insults everyone by underestimating them. That’s just the start, of course: after rebranding us and dividing us into herds, the elite –
decides which herds are good and bad (regardless of what people actually say and do);
stage-manages a war between them (women against men, Pakehā against Māori, and so on).
The complexity and uniqueness of every human being is not the only vital truth ignored – also ignored is a person’s accountability for what they do, not for what they are – but that’s where it starts.
Eleven years after the 2008 WEA General Assembly, we sense the mighty move of the Holy Spirit. He is inviting, inspiring and initiating a new season of Kingdom work that will unite church leaders across geographies, generations, and global causes. Serving in this new season will require a careful and Spirit-led process of clarifying, casting vision and then shifting to a new mindset. What must evangelism and disciple-making look like in the coming decade?
The 2019 WEA General Assembly is an invitation for us, leaders of churches, nations, regions, networks and commissions, to visit afresh the command of Jesus in Matthew 28:18-20:
Then Jesus came to them and said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age. (NIV)
At this critical global leadership gathering, we will invest our time and hearts to understand each vital element required to prepare the church for the mission ahead of us, and thus we will be intentional about walking alongside and mentoring our younger leaders. As Moses summoned Joshua and commissioned him in the presence of all Israel, we will make use of the event to bless younger leaders with wisdom, prayer and clear direction, so like Joshua they will be strong and courageous in holding their mantle of leadership in the challenging days to come.
The 2019 General Assembly is more than a global event; it will be a defining moment for leaders of the Church to launch a new era (decade) of disciple-making and inter-generational leadership across nations and regions, but also across the global causes and pressing issues of our time. No invited leader should miss the opportunity to be present for this Spirit-ordained gathering!
WEA General Assembly in Indonesia Kicks Off with Colorful Opening Ceremony
Jakarta, Indonesia – November 8, 2019
The World Evangelical Alliance’s (WEA) General Assembly (GA) started off with a colorful opening ceremony that saw 800 participants from 92 countries joined by several thousand Indonesian believers from across the country. The GA brings together WEA’s constituency of regional and national Alliances that represent local churches in their respective countries, and more than one hundred affiliated international ministries and organizations. It is a global network that spans 130 nations and serves some 600 million evangelicals around the world, making it the second largest global Christian body today.
Held at the Sentul International Conference Center south of Jakarta, Indonesia from November 7-12, the GA is the first global gathering of such scale hosted by the WEA in eleven years. The theme “Your Kingdom Come” inspired by Jesus’ prayer in Matthew 6 expresses the hope for the GA to be a critical moment for evangelicals to come together to reflect and strategize how to fulfill Jesus’ Great Commission “to disciple all nations” by focusing on intentional, holistic disciple-making.
“Evangelicals are the fastest growing religious movement in the world in the last sixty years. And we want to thank God for what he is doing,” Bp Efraim Tendero, Secretary General of the WEA stated in his opening remarks at the ceremony, and added: “As we gather for the next six days, we have the passion and desire to cry out to God, that as evangelical leaders, we all work together to advance the Kingdom of God in our time.”
Speaking of the host country, Bp Tendero commented: “We have carefully chosen Indonesia to be the hosts of our General Assembly because this is the country that has the largest Muslim population in the world, but there is also religious tolerance and harmony. And in Indonesia, the church of the Lord Jesus Christ is continuing to flourish and is having an impact in the society.”
Rev. Dr. Ronny Mandang, Chair of WEA’s national member body the Fellowship of Indonesian Evangelical Churches and Institutions (FIECI), expressed his deep gratitude that this global gathering could take place in his nation, saying “we have been praying and crying for this moment and now I’m standing here, looking at all these international leaders who are united and have Jesus Christ as our Lord. This moment is truly a blessing to us.”
The opening ceremony included cultural performances with video presentations and 150 dancers and artists introducing each region of Indonesia. As a nation of “joy, peace and harmony” and a model of “unity in diversity”, Indonesia brings together thousands of tribes with hundreds of different languages in a population of over 270 million. It is also a country of vibrant faith that hosted global Christian events like the World Prayer Assembly among many others.
Pastor Dr Niko Njotorahardjo, a major Christian church leader in Indonesia and partner in hosting the GA, shared in an address that “the WEA GA in this place is not by accident; I firmly believe it is the specific purpose of God.” And added: “Jesus gave us His Great Commission… My friends, don’t forget God wants all of us to be disciples of Jesus. Disciples are the people whose lifestyles resemble how Jesus lived.”
The WEA GA will continue through Tuesday, November 12, with plenaries, discussions and workshops that aim to equip participants to strengthen their collaborative efforts in the area of intentional disciple-making. It will also include the election of a new International Council and a presentation on organizational priorities for the coming years.
Rachel Afeaki-Taumoepeau 8 Nov 2019 | Jakarta, Indonesia The World Evangelical Alliance (WEA) General Assembly. 92 Nations(out of 129) represented with just over 800 international delegates for the next week. NZ has a delegation of 6: Rev. Dr Stuart Lange (Interim National Director NZCN), Ps Brian Winslade WEA International Council), Dr Jay Matenga (Executive Director WEA Mission’s Commission), Glyn Carpenter (WEA South Pacific Regional Alliance Director) Rick Pierce and myself (NZCN’s board and WEA Women’s Commission Co Director -Pacific. NZ Christian Network is the NZ member of WEA (136 Nation members). Themes: Kingdom, Generations, Renewal, Unity and Leadership
Parry Field Lawyers started 70 years ago and have a proven track record. Our team of around 50 staff work closely together in the areas of Property, Commercial and Disputes.
We are based from Christchurch from where we work with clients across the country.
We specialise in the representation of churches, religious organisations, non-profit, tax- exempt organisations, including charities, charitable trusts, social enterprises, social welfare organisations, public and private schools, tertiary institutions, as well as organisations that support this sector.
The Christian Church has contributed so much to life in this country we love – Aotearoa, New Zealand. A lot of that work is in the community among the poor and disadvantaged and goes unacknowledged and unknown today. Many organisations also have Christian roots from seeds planted long ago. The historical legacy and ongoing positive contribution is substantial. Yet there has not been a handbook focused on some of the key legal issues for churches here – until now.
Planting or running a church is not without challenges. The exciting prospect of facilitating the gathering of believers comes with a number of important considerations, many of which touch on complex areas of New Zealand Law. Having a properly established legal structure and system of governance, as well as an understanding of financial, employment, governance and key policy obligations will give a church the best chance at succeeding.
This handbook is one example of our “Impact Initiative” which aims to help church ‘planters’ and existing churches alike. Accordingly, the handbook is split into several key sections. We look first at the key legal decisions and considerations that need to be made when church planting, consider relevant aspects in the day-to-day operation of an established church, look at contentious issues and consider the future. Of course, even some long-established churches may need to consider their own legal structure again (particularly if they start new initiatives) and consider if it is still the best model today. We have also included a section on social enterprise, which is a different concept on the role of trading business as a means to help advance good in the world.
As part of our impact initiative to empower people doing good, we have many other free resources that you may find helpful at www.parryfield.com. A unique offering is also seeds, a podcast about purpose with interviews of more than 100 charities, not for profits and social enterprises. In addition, we have released the free eBook ‘Social Enterprises in New Zealand: A Legal Handbook.’
We are trying to empower people like you to succeed and hope this publication will help you to consider and resolve any common legal issues and uncertainties you may find when establishing and operating your church. We wish you all the best in whatever stage of the journey you are at.
We look forward to connecting with you to see if there are ways our team can support yours.
Now that the rugby World Cup is over life in New Zealand can return to normal – at least for another four years 🙂
Along with every rugby fan, I was disappointed and surprised when the All Blacks were eliminated by the more powerful English team. Being English I decided to then support the ‘Lions’ but my hopes were dashed when the South Africans came out hungry and desperate for victory.
However, after hearing the captain and the coach of the Boks at the post match conference, I was delighted and inspired by what I heard; and after seeing many of the English refuse to wear their medal, well let’s just say, I wasn’t impressed by my countrymen.
What made the difference? What gave the Springboks the advantage over the Lions? I believe It was having a vision bigger than the game itself. Sure, every team there had a vision to be victorious and to hold the Webb Ellis Cup high but the South Africans were playing for more than that. They were playing for hope for their country, for unity and for the dream of a better future. If you haven’t read the Springbok captain Kolisi’s speech, here it is… it’s inspiring.
As I read the line, “We love you South Africa, and we can achieve anything if we work together as one”, I couldn’t help but think of how this sentiment could have the power to transform marriages. Imagine relationships where we are always working together as one; where the game plan is to always have each other’s back, to be united and to bring hope to those around us. Imagine couples who aren’t just focused on getting what they want in life, but are seeing the bigger picture of bringing joy, life and purpose to those around them.
All too often in marriage we can forget that we’re on the same team and we can spend our energy ‘mauling’ and ‘scrumming’ against each other – trying to win the argument or get the upper hand. I’m sure the enemy knows that if he can keep us tackling amongst ourselves we won’t have the time or energy to play the real game with the real opponent.
Fortunately, unlike the rugby teams, we don’t have to wait another four years to be victorious. Let’s choose today to focus on how we can each work together as one. As you think about your work environment, your home life, and your community, ask yourself, “How can I work together with those around me, how can I bring unity and hope to my team, and how can I be instrumental in building a better future?”
As I write this now I’m aware that our tagline is a perfect ending for this piece.
Hope for today. Help for tomorrow.
Like the Webb Ellis Cup, that’s a vision worth lifting up!
About FamilyLife NZ
Changed lives; that’s what motivates us.
FamilyLife NZ has been teaching, training and equipping families for over 25 years. We love hearing stories of husbands, wives, and children whose lives are different because of an interaction with something that we’ve been part of. That’s what we’re about at FamilyLife; to inspire and equip couples to be successfully married for a lifetime.
