The ‘word of truth’, according to Colossians 1 (Pentecost 5C)

This coming Sunday, we turn from a letter written in the name of Paul, which few interpreters doubt is an authentic letter of Paul, to a slightly shorter letter which also claims to be written by Paul—but about which there is quite some debate as to whether Paul did write it. We will hear the opening section of the letter this Sunday (Col 1:1–14).

The letter begins with a clear claim to be a letter from “Paul, an apostle of Christ Jesus by the will of God, and Timothy our brother, to the saints and faithful brothers and sisters in Christ in Colossae” (Col 1:1-2). Despite this claim, there are signs that Paul may not be the author.

A more complex grammatical structure at some points, and some unusual vocabulary when compared with the vocabulary of the authentic letters of Paul, suggest a different hand in the creation of this letter. Some theological motifs are developed further than is found in the authentic letters of Paul, while the situation addressed appears to be different from—and probably later than—any situation envisaged in the lifetime of Paul.

(On the authorship of the various letters attributed to Paul, see https://johntsquires.com/2020/11/18/what-do-we-know-about-who-wrote-the-letters-attributed-to-paul-3/)

It is typical of Paul’s letters that the opening “prayer of thanksgiving” sets out some of the key contenders which will be addressed in the body of the letter. (This is the case in many other letters from the time that survive to today; whether Christian, or Jewish, or pagan, letters invariably flag key issues in the opening sentences.) Here, the key concerns seem to be about “the knowledge of God’s will in all spiritual wisdom and understanding” which will enable the readers and hearers of this letter to “lead lives worthy of the Lord” and “be prepared to endure everything with patience”.

The letter refers to Onesimus (Col 4:9), the slave about whom Paul wrote to Philemon (Phlm 10), as well as one of the addressees of that letter, Archippus (Col 4:17; Phlm 1). The greetings at the end of the letter contain a number of names also found in the greetings of Philemon 23–24: Epaphras (Col 4:12), Mark and Aristarchus (Col 4:10), and Demas and Luke (Col 4:14).

This suggests that the two letters might have originated at the same time in the ministry of Paul—when he was in prison (Col 4:3, 8; Phlm 10, 13), perhaps in Rome towards the end of his life. However, there is little else to connect Colossians with Philemon. The content of each letter is quite different.

Alternatively, the Colossian references to Paul’s imprisonment might link the letter with Philippians, written similarly during an imprisonment (Phil 1:7, 12– 14, 17). This would be so if Epaphroditus in Philippians (2:25; 4:18) was the same person as Paul’s associate, Epaphras, noted in Colossians (1:7–8; 4:12– 13). That possibility suggests a common origin; but no further links between these letters are evident.

A more fruitful connection is found between Colossians and Ephesians, where there are a number of similarities in theological development as well as a significant overlap of text. Eph 6:21b–22 replicates almost exactly the underlined phrases in Col 4:7–9. The most persuasive theory is that Ephesians, written well after the death of Paul by a follower of Paul’s teachings, drew on that section of Colossians, believing it to be the words of Paul.

Returning to Colossians itself, we note that it follows the traditional form of a letter, with opening greetings (1:1–2) and thanksgiving (1:3–8) leading into a further prayer for the Colossians (1:9–14) before the body of the letter (1:15–2:23) and a series of exhortations (3:1–4:6). The closing greetings (4:7–17) and grace (4:18) bring the letter to a close in conventional fashion.

There are a number of indications of the distinctive situation to which the letter is addressed, although these insights are mediated through the perspective of the writer of the letter. The Colossians, although believers in Christ, continue to recognise the “elemental spirits of the universe” (2:8, 20). They are “deceived with plausible arguments” (2:4) and thus are captive to a “philosophy and empty deceit” (2:8) which is contradictory to Christian belief. They take part in “festivals … new moons … sabbaths” (2:16), engage in “self-abasement and worship of angels” (2:18) and adhere to strict regulations (2:20–22).

These terms seem to be describing people who are Gentiles (elemental spirits) who have adopted some Jewish practices (new moons, sabbaths, worship of angels) yet have an ascetic flavour (self-a basement) with rhetorical interests (plausible arguments) mediated through their philosophical interests. That’s quite a thick description of the presumed recipients, and not like others who received authentic letters from Paul.

Along with clear evidence for syncretism amongst the Colossians, there is a thought that the believers in Colossae were proto-Gnostics—that is, precursors of the kind of Christianity that emerged fully in the second century onwards, and which we know about most directly through the documents collected in the Nag Hammadi library (discovered in Egypt in 1945). See http://gnosis.org/naghamm/nhl.html

Over against this cluster of beliefs, the letter-writer advocates the gospel, which is described as “the word of truth” (1:5) and “the faith” (1:23; 2:7), and exhorts the readers to be “mature in Christ” (1:28; 4:12). The opening thanksgiving (1:9–10) contains key terms which express the writer’s hopes for the readers: understanding (2:2) and growth (2:19), and especially wisdom (1:28; 2:3, 23; 3:16; 4:5) and knowledge (2:2, 3; 3:10). These last terms, particularly, point in the direction of the developing Gnostic movement which held sway in some parts of the developing Jesus movement.

Some of these terms do appear in Paul’s authentic letters; some others appear less frequently, if at all. They do appear, however, in the Pastoral Epistles (written “in the name of Paul” some decades after his death) and then in various documents, not part of the New Testament, which demonstrate the growing Gnostic and speculative-philosophical tendencies in some parts of Christianity in the late first century and on into the second and third centuries.

The positive qualities which are highlighted in this letter, noted above, are especially related to Christ, in whom “the whole fullness of deity dwells” (2:9–10), a doctrine which sits at the core of a distinctive hymn in which Christ is portrayed as an all-encompassing cosmic figure (1:15–20). This is one key point where the letter moves beyond what is found in Paul’s authentic letters to the formulation of a post-Pauline doctrine. This, it seems, is central to “the word of truth” that is highlighted from the start of the letter.

My own conclusion is that Colossians was most likely written by a follower of Paul, writing in his teacher’s name in order to claim his authority as he addressed a situation different from, and some time after, Paul’s own time. Paul’s theological and ethical positions are known by the author. However, the problematic situation addressed, the theological ideas expressed, and the ethical instructions offered, each point to an origin after the lifetime of Paul.

NAIDOC WEEK and Uniting Church theology (part two)

NAIDOC WEEK (3–10 July) is an opportune time to reflect on the situation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in Australia, and to celebrate Aboriginal and Islander history, culture and achievements.

Each year, the National Aborigines and Islanders Day Observance Committee (NAIDOC) selects a theme to provide a focus for the week. This year, the theme of Get Up! Stand Up! Show Up! encourages Indigenous peoples “to work for systemic change and to keep rallying around their mob, their Elders and their communities”.

I have noted in earlier posts (see links at end of this post) how previous themes have highlighted the Indigenous commitment to community, the priority of family and the consequent valuing of young people, and the respect for Elders as the custodians, both of the land of this continent and its islands, but also of the many Indigenous cultures—collectively, the oldest continuing culture in today’s world.

In looking back over the past decade of themes, I can note some very clear and strong resonances between what First Peoples have been saying, and what the Uniting Church has articulated and sought to enact.

The 2014 theme referenced the celebrations taking place around the globe relating to the centenary of World War I: Serving Country: Centenary & Beyond. The poster, with artwork by Harry Alfred Pitt, explicitly depicts three Indigenous men in service uniforms.

The 2015 theme provides a clear and strong link to Uniting Church values and commitments, through resonances relating to the land: for land to be valued in its own right, and as an integral part of the very being of the people living on it. From early in the life of the Uniting Church, land rights for Aboriginal people was prominent on the agenda. Resolutions urging the federal government to recognise the land rights of Aboriginal people at the 2nd Assembly (resolution 79.45), the 3rd Assembly (82.50), and the 4th Assembly 85.06). The 5th Assembly agreed to a proposal that added to this wording that sought to have the government “acknowledge the immense and continuing destruction of their people imposed by the adoption of the doctrine of Terra Nullius” (88.22.22(c)).

These resolutions, and other actions, reflect the commitment to the importance of the land in the NAIDOC WEEK theme for 2015, We all Stand on Sacred Ground: Learn Respect & Celebrate.

This commitment is also evident in the 2020 theme, Always Was, Always Will Be.

For my reflections on the 2020 theme, see

Next, there are commonalities which relate to the call for a treaty which has been made by Indigenous leadership many times over the decades. The 2020 theme built on the theme chosen for 2019, Voice. Treaty. Truth. This, in turn, echoes the 2017 Statement from the Heart which was issued by a group of indigenous leaders, meeting at Uluṟu in that year. See https://ulurustatement.org/the-statement/

In 1994, the President of the Uniting Church Assembly signed a Covenant with the Chairperson of the Congress. Although neither body represented a sovereign entity in the way that a state or federal government does, the move signalled that it is possible to conclude such an agreement with the First People.

In the past decade, the Uniting Church has articulated its clear commitment to all three components of the 2019 theme—giving a voice to First Peoples, agreeing to a treaty (or a series of treaties with the various Indigenous nations), and ensuring that truth-telling about our recent history as a colonised country.

In 2015, the 14th Assembly gave detailed consideration to the matter of the doctrine of terra nullius and the claim to sovereignty of First Peoples. This lead, in 2018, to the 15th Assembly making a significant about sovereignty:

In 2019, the Synod of NSW.ACT addressed this theme

See https://www.insights.uca.org.au/hear-the-statement-from-the-heart/

For my reflections on the 2019 theme, see

Reference to the land recurs also in the 2021 theme (see below)

There are connections with story, which sits at the heart of Indigenous cultures in many countries, but especially in Australia; and I am taken by the ways that story is at the heart of both the Hebrew Scriptures and the New Testament. We share this commitment together—although Second Peoples have much to learn about the ways that First Peoples value and practice story telling!

We can see this commitment in the theme for 2016, Songlines: The Living Narrative of Our Nation. Deadly Story says that “Songlines are the Aboriginal walking routes that crossed the country, linking important sites and locations … the term ‘Songline’ describes the features and directions of travel that were included in a song that had to be sung and memorised for the traveller to know the route to their destination.” See https://www.deadlystory.com/page/culture/Life_Lore/Songlines

2017 provided a focus on language, in the theme Our Languages Matter. That’s a message which is integral to the Gospel—the Gospel that says, in the beginning, God spoke … and there was life (Gen 1). The Gospel that claims that “in the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God”, and that “the Word became flesh and dwelt among us, and we have seen his glory” in the person of Jesus of Nazareth (John 1).

We know God best of all, most intimately of all, because God speaks, God is word. Language connects us with God. Language matters. Language connects us with one another, enables us to know one another. Languages matter for First Peoples. They communicate, they articulate deep truths. Languages matter.

In the Uniting Church, alongside worship in English, there are worship services held each week in another 40 languages—the mother tongues of many Second Peoples who have been welcomed into our century and now call Australia home. This is alongside the many Indigenous languages which are used by First Peoples as they worship each week.

The revival of languages amongst First Peoples is signalled by this theme, and resonates with the Uniting Church’s commitment. There are also 13 National Conferences, which gather together people of the same linguistic or cultural group: Tongan, Samoan, Fijian, Indonesian, Korean, Tamil, Chinese, South Sudanese, Filipino, Niuean, Vietnamese, Middle East and Ibero-Latino.

2018 invited a focus on women, with the theme Because of Her, We Can! The experiences that Elizabeth and I have had with Indigenous communities in a number of places is always that women are key leaders in those communities, the Aunties have power and draw respect! This is another theme that resonates with countless stories throughout scripture. Because of the faithfulness of Mary, his mother, Jesus came. Because of the witness of Mary of Magdala, exclaiming “I have seen the Lord”, the male disciples believed.

See

Because of the proactive intervention of Shiphrah and Puah, Hebrew midwives in the court of the Egyptian Pharaoh, Moses survived and grew to lead Israel. Because of the fiercely powerful leadership of Deborah, centuries later, Israel survived the onslaught from the troops of Sisera, commander of the army of Canaan. Because of her, we can. And there are many more such women. Throughout the pages of scripture. Women always have, and always will, play key roles in communities of faith, just as they have, and do, in Indigenous communities,

For my reflections on women in leadership in the Uniting Church, see

On the themes of 2017–2021, see

A commitment to sustainable living, demonstrating environmental responsibility, was signalled by the Uniting Church in the 1977 Statement to the Nation. That commitment has become more important—indeed, it presses as urgent—in recent times. The theme for NAIDOC WEEK 2021, Heal Country, underlined this area, and brought together Indigenous care for the land and Indigenous spirituality, which has also been noted in earlier themes.

The 2022 theme, Get Up! Stand Up! Show Up!, is a call to advocacy, and to solidarity in that cause. The Uniting Church has always been committed to speaking with, speaking along with, and speaking for, the rights of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders. We have not always got it right, but there has been a consistent thread of standing with and working to support and advocate for First Peoples, from the Noonkanbah action in 1980, through the years of various land rights claims, alongside the work led by Sir Ron Wilson leading to the Bringing Them Home report of 1997, into the more recent calls for Treaty (Makarratta) and an Indigenous voice to Parliament.

There’s a wonderful collection of resources relating to the papers written and statements made by the Uniting Church nationally, in relation to Indigenous issues, at https://unitingjustice.org.au/justice-for-indigenous-australians

*****

For the first post on this topic, see

NAIDOC WEEK and Uniting Church theology

This week, during NAIDOC WEEK, it is an opportune time to reflect on the situation of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in this nation. NAIDOC Week runs from the first Sunday in July until the following Sunday. This year, it starts today (3 July) and goes until 10 July.

The acronym NAIDOC stands for National Aborigines and Islanders Day Observance Committee. It has its roots in the 1938 Day of Mourning which became a week- long event in 1975. The week is a time to celebrate Aboriginal and Islander history, culture and achievements.

It’s an undeniable—and unchangeable—fact that the Uniting Church took some time to arrive at the place where it finds itself today, in terms of its relationship with the First Peoples of the continent we call Australia, and the many islands that surround it.

Looking back, we can see the key steps that occurred to bring us to the present position, which places relationships with the First Peoples and advocacy for sovereignty and treaty at the centre of our commitments. It hasn’t always been an easy relationship, and there have been some difficult moments that required careful conversation to resolve, but some significant step have been taken over the years.

The first thing to note is that at the inauguration of the church in 1977, there was little (if any) attention paid to Indigenous matters. In terms of relationships with First Peoples, it was not an auspicious start. The inauguration service had no Aboriginal participation or recognition. There was no mention in either the Basis of Union or the Constitution of Indigenous people.

Whilst the Basis has remained virtually unchanged (apart from the minor wording changes of 1992), the Constitution now includes a revised preamble (adopted in 2009) which recognises the First Peoples, confesses our complicity in how they were treated from the time of colonisation, acknowledges the centrality of spirituality in their cultures, and even declares that the Spirit was already in the land, revealing God to the people through law, custom and ceremony.

Is it still timely for us to consider a parallel change to the Basis of Union? I’ve canvassed that thought in another blog, but I suspect that the appetite for this change in the church at this time is small. See https://johntsquires.com/2018/08/23/what-is-missing-from-the-basis-of-union/

Nor was there any mention of Aboriginal or Islander peoples in the 1977 Statement to the Nation. That Statement mentioned our commitment as a church to be a “sign of the reconciliation we seek for the whole human race”, and stated our intention to “seek the correction of injustices wherever they occur”; but it fails to mention Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islanders in any way.

See https://johntsquires.com/2018/08/20/alongside-the-basis-of-union-there-was-the-statement-to-the-nation/

This was a striking omission, as Aboriginal issues had already been to the fore in the previous decade, leading to the famous 1967 Referendum decision which altered the Australian Constitution to provide for recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples in the population of Australia. See https://aiatsis.gov.au/explore/1967-referendum

This unfortunate oversight was addressed in 1988, when a second Statement to the Nation was issued for Bicentennial celebrations of the founding of modern Australia. In this Statement, the church declared that “The integrity of our nation requires truth; the history of Australia, as it is taught in educational institutions or popularised in the media, must cease to conceal the reality and nature of Aboriginal society before invasion, what was done to them in colonisation, and what has been the fate and status of Aborigines within the Australian nation. See https://assembly.uca.org.au/resources/introduction/item/133-statement-to-the-nation-australian-bicentennial-year-1988

There had been strenuous debate at the national Assembly in 1985, as to whether the Uniting Church should participate in those celebrations; in the end, we did, although some members joined the 26 January protest held at the same time as the commemoration of the arrival of the First Fleet, marching under a banner that asked, 1988: what’s there to celebrate? See https://www.deadlystory.com/page/culture/history/The_1988_Bicentenary_Protest

Some of the key markers that we can paint to are obvious: in 1985, the establishment of the United Aboriginal and Islander Christian Congress; in 1994, the formalising of the Covenant between Congress and the Uniting Church, sealed by the then Chairperson and President of those bodies, respectively.

In 2005, Uniting in Worship 2 included wording for an Acknowledgement of Country to be used in Uniting Church worship services (see p. 239, in the section entitled “Resources for the Service of the Lord’s Day”. Many Uniting Church services of worship now include an Acknowledgement of Country as a matter of course.

Other moments of symbolic significance no doubt come to mind, such as when the appropriate Congress leader was invited to sit alongside the President of Assembly or the Moderator of a Synod, to signal our joint commitment to one another. My special memory of this was the 2011 Synod of NSW.ACT, when each morning began, not only with prayer, but with storytelling from a local Indigenous elder. That was the moment when, in my Synod, Indigenous voices were highlighted, heard, and valued.

There have been Walking on Country opportunities, the development and implementation of Reconciliation Action Plans by Uniting, Synod Boards, and Presbyteries, and the formation in 2018 of the Walking Together as First and Second Peoples Assembly Circle of Interest, which draws almost 300 Uniting Church members together through social media, to share news and develop ideas relating our commitment to reconciliation, to forging a destiny together, as the final, clause of the Revised Preamble to the Constitution states.

As I reflect on this history during NAIDOC WEEK 2022, I am reminded of the ways that the theological commitment of the Uniting Church has been focussed and refined in order to give priority to First Peoples and to crystallise our commitment to working together, seeking justice, advocating for and serving the needs and hopes of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples.

And as I have looked back over the themes of NAIDOC WEEK over the past decade (see the links at the end of this post), I have been strengthened in my understanding that the Uniting Church has a deep-seated and thoroughgoing commitment to the hopes and ideals expressed by First Peoples through those decades. I’ll reflect on that in my next post in the series about NAIDOC WEEK.

For previous posts on NAIDOC WEEK, see

This is what the Lord showed me: the visions and messages of Amos (Pentecost 5C and 6C)

Over the next five months, the lectionary is taking a dive into the books of the prophets. These are offered as companions to the Gospel readings from the “orderly account” of Luke that we are hearing, week by week. It is, after all, Luke’s narrative which most directly depicts Jesus speaking as God’s prophet (Luke 7:16; 24:19; Acts 2:30; 3:22).

In turn, over the coming months we will read and hear excerpts from the northern kingdom prophets, Amos and Hosea; then from the southern kingdom prophets, Isaiah and Jeremiah, two of the “major prophets” of Israel; followed by three “minor prophets”, Joel, Habakkuk, and Haggai; and then a section from the closing vision in the much later set of oracles collected at the end of the book of Isaiah. We should buckle up for the ride; the prophets pull no punches and speak in ways that can confront, accuse, and terrify!

We have these books in our scriptures and read and reflect on them in our services of worship because, although these voices sounded forth long ago, their message resonates still with us today. The call for justice and righteousness undergirds the entire narrative of the people of Israel, from the call attributed to Moses in Deut 16:20, “justice, and only justice, shall you follow”, through the words of Amos and Isaiah, into the declarations of Jeremiah and in the various “minor prophets” that we will encounter.

See https://johntsquires.com/2021/08/16/justice-and-only-justice-you-shall-follow/

Justice is the common theme in these prophetic books—God’s justice; the justice which God desires for the people of God; the justice which God speaks through the voice of the prophets; the justice that God calls for in Israel; the justice that provides the measure against which Israel will be judged, and saved, or condemned.

In the later scriptures of the New Testament, we hear resonances from many of these selected passages of Hebrew Scripture. Jesus, the prophet of Nazareth, stands in this tradition and speaks “the voice of the Lord”, so the call for justice and righteousness sits at the heart of who we are, as people of faith, heirs of this tradition, in the 21st century.

As we read and hear these prophetic passages week after week, we are invited to reflect more deeply on how these ancient words, particular to their original time and place, can yet be for us the word of God to us, in our time, in our place.

*****

This Sunday, we will hear the vision of the plum line (Amos 7:7–17); next Sunday, the vision of the basket of fruit (Amos 8:1–12). Amos, who came from Tekoa in the southern kingdom (1:1), was active in the northern kingdom (Israel) during the reign of Jeroboam II, the thirteenth king of Israel, who reigned for four decades (786–746 BCE; see Amos 7:10). It was a time of prosperity, built on the trading of olive oil and wine with the neighbouring nations of Assyria to the north and Egypt to the south. But the sinfulness of the time was too much for Amos.

Although the Temple in Jerusalem was the focus for religious activity in the southern kingdom (Judah), there were a number of religious sites in the northern kingdom—Dan, Bethel, Gilgal and Beersheba (Amos 5:5; 8:14)—where not only was the Lord God worshipped, but idolatrous images were used in worship services (5:26). Amos is trenchant in his criticism of the worship that the people offer (5:21–27); embedded in this crisis is a doublet of poetry, words most often associated with Amos: “let justice roll down like waters, and righteousness like an ever-flowing stream” (5:24).

Indeed, it is the perpetration of social inequity within Israel that most causes him to convey the anger of divine displeasure. He admonishes the rich for the way that they mistreat the poor: “they sell the righteous for silver, and the needy for a pair of sandals—they who trample the head of the poor into the dust of the earth and push the afflicted out of the way” (2:6–7); “you trample on the poor and take from them levies of grain” (5:11).

Again, Amos rails: “you trample on the needy and bring to ruin the poor of the land … buying the poor for silver and the needy for a pair of sandals, and selling the sweepings of the wheat” (8:4, 6). In a biting oracle, he criticises the “cows of Bashan who are on Mount Samaria” for the way they “oppress the poor, crush the needy” (4:1).

Bashan was the mountainous area to the northeast of Israel (Ps 68:15), which rejoiced in majestic oaks (Isa 2:13) and extensive pasture lands (1 Chron 5:16). The luxurious lifestyle of these people can well be imagined. The reference to “winter houses … summer houses … houses of ivory … and great houses” (3:15) is telling. Luxury and opulence is evident amongst the wealthy.

So, too, is the description of “those who lie on beds of ivory, and lounge on their couches, and eat lambs from the flock, and calves from the stall; who sing idle songs to the sound of the harp, and like David improvise on instruments of music; who drink wine from bowls, and anoint themselves with the finest oils” (6:4–6). The extravagance of the wealthy is obvious, juxtaposed against the plight of the poor, as we have noted.

Amos indicates that God had given Israel a number of opportunities to repent, “yet you did not return to me” (4:6, 8, 9, 10, 11). God pleads for Israel to “seek me and live” (5:4), “seek the Lord and live” (5:6), “seek good and not evil, that you may live” (5:14).

But this is all in vain; ultimately, the prophet insists, the Lord God will bring on the day of the Lord—a day of “darkness, not light, and gloom with no brightness in it” (5:18–20). God is determined; “the great house shall be shattered to bits, and the little house to pieces” (6:11); later, he insists again, “the dead bodies shall be many, cast out in every place” (8:3).

***

In a series of visions, Amos sees how the judgement of God will be implemented. He sees a plague of locusts (7:1–3), a shower of fire (7:4–6), a plum line (7:7–9), and a basket of summer fruit (8:1–6). Finally, he sees “the Lord standing beside the altar” (9:1–8).

The first two visions give Amos an opportunity to intercede on behalf of the people: “O Lord God, forgive, I beg you!” (7:2), “O Lord God, cease, I beg you!” (7:5). On both occasions, God relents, declaring, “it shall not be” (7:3, 6).

Not so with the following visions, however. The vision of the plum line signals that “the high places of Isaac shall be made desolate, and the sanctuaries of Israel shall be laid waste, and I will rise against the house of Jeroboam with the sword” (7:8). The vision of the basket of fruits signals that “the end has come upon my people Israel” (8:2). In the vision of the Lord at the altar, God declares a definitive judgement on Israel: “those who are left I will kill with the sword; not one of them shall flee away, not one of them shall escape” (9:1).

Interrupting the sequence of visions, Amaziah, the priest of Bethel, confers with King Jeroboam of Israel, informing him that the prophet has spoken of the king’s imminent death and the people’s exile (7:11). Amaziah, disturbed by this pronouncement, commands Amos to flee south, to Judah (7:12-13).

Amos responds with what we recognise to be the humility of a true prophet: “I am no prophet” (7:14; cf. Moses at Exod 3:11; 4:1, 10, 13; Jeremiah at Jer 1:6), yet then he proceeds to reiterate his prophecy: “you yourself shall die in an unclean land, and Israel shall surely go into exile away from its land” (7:16-17).

*****

Returning to the sequence of visions, Amos notes that the day will come when God “will make the sun go down at noon, and darken the earth in broad daylight” (8:9–11). On that day, “the beautiful young women and the young men shall faint for thirst … they shall fall, and never rise again” (8:12–13).

Resolute in the intention to punish those who have perpetrated social inequity and religious idolatry, God insists that “I will fix my eyes on them for harm and not for good” (9:4); “the eyes of the Lord God are upon the sinful kingdom, and I will destroy it from the face of the earth” (9:8).

Yet, at the very end, Amos relays the news that God has modified this intention: “I will not utterly destroy the house of Jacob, says the Lord” (9:8); “on that day I will raise up the booth of David that is fallen, and repair its breaches, and raise up its ruins, and rebuild it as in the days of old” (9:11). This final oracle from Amos (9:11–15) envisages a restored and rebuilt Israel, a land once again productive, and ends with a strong expression of confidence in the people: “I will plant them upon their land, and they shall never again be plucked up out of the land that I have given them, says the Lord” (9:15).

Little did the prophet actually know what lay ahead; soon after this oracle, the king of Assyria began to deport Israelites to Assyria (2 Kings 15:29; 1 Chron 5:26), perhaps in the 730s; two decades later, a new Assyrian king captured the northern capital, Samaria (2 Kings 17:3–6). The northern kingdom had come to an end; the people taken into exile would never return to their land. They became known as “the lost tribes of Israel” (see https://www.britannica.com/topic/Ten-Lost-Tribes-of-Israel).

*****

See also

Get Up! Stand Up! Show Up! NAIDOC WEEK 2022

NAIDOC WEEK is an Australian observance lasting from the first Sunday in July until the following Sunday. This year, it starts today (3 July) and goes until 10 July.

The acronym NAIDOC stands for National Aborigines and Islanders Day Observance Committee. It has its roots in the 1938 Day of Mourning which became a week- long event in 1975.

Aboriginal and Islander people have a proud history of getting up, standing up, and showing up. They have therefore chosen this as their 2022 theme of Get Up! Stand Up! Show Up!

The NAIDOC Week Committee wants Aboriginal and Islander people to continue to Get Up! Stand Up! Show Up! for systemic change and to keep rallying around their mob, their Elders and their communities. Whether it’s seeking proper environmental, cultural and heritage protections, Constitutional change, a comprehensive process of truth-telling, working towards treaties, or calling out racism – they must do it together.

The Committee also says that the relationship between Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples and non Indigenous Australians needs to be based on justice, equity, and the proper recognition of Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples’ rights.

See https://www.naidoc.org.au/awards/current-theme

This theme has many resonances with the theological commitments of the Uniting Church, for whom standing against racism, recognising the sovereignty of the First Peoples, standing up for the environment, working to strengthen reconciliation, and supporting the call for makaratta, treaty, are all central commitments as we stand for justice and advocate for justice.

I’ll post more during the week about the ways that the NAIDOC WEEK themes of the past decade resonate with Uniting Church commitments.

My posts on NAIDOC WEEK themes prior to 2014 can be found at

See also

50 years of NAIDOC WEEK 6 (2007–2013)

The Coming of the Light is celebrated annually by Torres Strait Islander peoples on 1 July. It marks the adoption of Christianity through island communities during the late nineteenth century. The Reverend Samuel MacFarlane, of the London Missionary Society, arrived at Erub Island in the Torres Strait on 1 July 1871, introducing Christianity to the region. Since then, Torres Strait Islanders, whether living in the islands or on the mainland, celebrate this anniversary.

See https://www.creativespirits.info/aboriginalculture/people/torres-strait-islander-culture

It might have symbolic resonance, then, that today, 1 July, in my series about the themes of NAIDOC WEEK, we turn to the next series of themes that are from the period of the Labor Government (2007–2013). It was after eleven years of regressive conservative government at the federal level that Kevin Rudd led the Labor Party back into government in December 2007. Although Rudd was a control freak who ultimately undid his own position of leadership, that of Julia Gillard, and then his own government, his time in leadership did shine some important lights onto Australia society.

During the the almost six years of the Labor Government, led by Rudd, then Julia Gillard, then Rudd once again, the National Apology to the Stolen Generation was made. On 13 February 2008, Prime Minister Kevin Rudd stood in Parliament to deliver the National Apology to Australia’s Aboriginal peoples and Torres Strait Islander peoples. The Apology recognised the injustices of past government policies, particularly as they related to the Stolen Generations.

For more than a decade, the Howard government had resisted making any apology. The stance that Howard took when he opened the 1997 Australian Reconciliation Convention, which we noted in the previous post, remained his opinion in the ensuing years. Still today, 25 years after that speech, Howard remains unmoved; he has called the apology that Rudd gave “meaningless” and “an empty gesture”.

See https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/john-howard-has-criticised-kevin-rudds-2008-apology-to-the-stolen-generations/47t04w7ca

But on 13 February 2008, newly elected Prime Minister Kevin Rudd spoke the federal government’s formal apology to Indigenous Australians. Rudd apologised on behalf of Parliament ‘for indignity and degradation’, declaring it was time to start ‘righting the wrongs of the past’. As he recognised the Stolen Generations, he affirmed that the policy of removing Aboriginal children from their families ‘inflicted profound grief, suffering and loss on these our fellow Australians’.

The key words of apology are worth remembering again:

For the pain, suffering and hurt of these Stolen Generations,

their descendants and for their families left behind, we say sorry.
To the mothers and the fathers, the brothers and the sisters,

for the breaking up of families and communities, we say sorry.
And for the indignity and degradation thus inflicted

on a proud people and a proud culture, we say sorry.

See https://www.aph.gov.au/Visit_Parliament/Art/Exhibitions/Custom_Media/Apology_to_Australias_Indigenous_Peoples

The themes of NAIDOC WEEK in those six years were:

2007: 50 Years: Looking Forward, Looking Blak

This theme looks back to 1957, when the National Aborigines Day Observance Committee (NADOC) was formed. It had support and co-operation from Federal and State Governments, the churches, and major Indigenous organisations. Its aim was to promote Aboriginal Sunday as a day to focus community attention on the nation’s Aboriginal people.

In 1940, the National Missionary Council of Australia (NMCA) had given its support to a permanent annual Aborigines Day. The NMCA encouraged churches to observe the Sunday before the Australia Day weekend as “Aboriginal Sunday’. In 1955, the NMCA changed the date to the first Sunday in July.

In 1985, NADOC agreed to change the dates of the week from July to September, and in 1988, the committee’s name was changed to NAIDOC – National Aborigines and Islanders Day Observance Committee – to acknowledge Torres Strait Islander people. In 1991, the committee decided to shift the celebrations back to the first week in July (Sunday to Sunday) starting from 1992.

The committee was wound up in the mid-1990s when the Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Commission (ATSIC) assumed control of NAIDOC Week, making decisions on the theme, venue and poster.

2008: Advance Australia Fair?

This theme recalls both the 1972 theme, Advance Australia Where?, and, of course, the title of the song that became Australia’s national anthem, Advance Australia Fair. The question mark in both themes is very significant—the themes are asking questions about the direction of Australia as a country (in 1972) and drawing attention to the continuing injustices experienced by Indigenous peoples (in 2008). The questions still stand today.

The artwork used was striking: a large blue SORRY overlaid with a version of the national coat of arms, gesturing the kangaroo and emu, and the five stars of the Southern Cross.

2009: Honouring Our Elders, Nurturing Our Youth

This theme is evocative of the 1976 theme, when Trucanini was remembered and honoured. It sits along with earlier themes that gave recognition, both to the culture of Indigenous peoples: 1978, Cultural Revival is Survival; Take a Journey of Discovery, 1984; Recognise and Share the Survival of the Oldest Culture in the World; 1990, Don’t Destroy, Learn and Enjoy our Cultural Heritage; as well as the importance of young people: 1979, What About Our Kids?; and 1994, Families are the basis of our existence: Maintain the Link.

2010: Unsung Heroes: Closing the Gap by Leading the Way

For the last fifteen years, we have had a national policy known as Closing the Gap. The gap refers to the the inequalities in health and life-expectation that exist between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians. This inequality includes: shorter life expectancy, higher rates of infant mortality, poorer health, and lower levels of education and employment.

Indigenous Australians have a lower life expectancy than non-Indigenous Australians. Non-Indigenous girls born in 2010-2012 in Australia can expect to live a decade longer than Indigenous girls born the same year (84.3 years and 73.7 years respectively). The gap for men is even larger, with a 69.1 year life expectancy for Indigenous men and 79.9 years for non-Indigenous men

Indigenous women also experience approximately double the level of maternal mortality in 2016. In 2016, Indigenous children experienced 1.7 times higher levels of malnutrition than non-Indigenous children. In 2015, the Indigenous suicide rate was double that of the general population; Indigenous suicide increased from 5% of total Australian suicide in 1991, to 50% in 2010, despite Indigenous people making up only 3% of the total Australian population. The most drastic increase occurred among young people 10-24 years old, where Indigenous youth suicide rose from 10% in 1991 to 80% in 2010.

The employment to population rate for Indigenous 15–64 year olds was around 48% in 2014-15, compared to 75% for non-Indigenous Australians. Median weekly income for Indigenous Australians was $542 in 2014-15 compared with $852 for non-Indigenous Australians.

The Gap (or actually, the many gaps) still exist; despite an annual report on how the federal government is attempting to Close the Gap, there is still much ground to be covered.

2011: Change: the next step is ours

This was an invitation to the whole population of Australia to join and work for change for the better for First Peoples.

2012: Spirit of the Tent Embassy: 40 years on

The Tent Embassy had been established in 1972. See the blog I wrote earlier in the year for the 50th anniversary, in 2022, of the Tent Embassy.

See https://johntsquires.com/2022/01/26/the-aboriginal-tent-embassy-50-years/

2013: We value the vision: Yirrkala Bark Petitions

This theme commemorates events of 50 years earlier. Yolngu people from Yirrkala in eastern Arnhem Land in the Northern Territory sent petitions to the Commonwealth Parliament in August 1963. On 13 March that year the Government had removed more than 300 square kilometres of land from the Arnhem Land reserve, with the purpose of being able to mine the bauxite which had been found there. Work started without talking to the people about their land.

The text of the petition was in two languages, English and Gupapuyngu. It was printed on paper then glued to a piece of bark that had been painted traditionally. The petition, signed by nine men and three women, stated that 500 people were residents of the land that was being removed, and that the whole deal had been kept secret from them.

It also declared that sacred sites in the area, such as Melville Bay, were vital to their livelihoods, and that the area had been used for hunting and food-gathering since time immemorial. The petition asked parliament to appoint a committee to hear the views of the Yolngu. They also asked that no arrangements be entered into with any company which would destroy their livelihoods and independence.

Silas Roberts, Northern Lands Council (NLC) Chairman (left),
and Galarrwuy Yunupingu, NLC Manager (right),
with the Yirrkala bark petition

Two Labor parliamentarians, Kim Beazley (senior) and Gordon Bryant visited Reverend Edgar Wells, Superintendent of the Yirrkala Methodist church mission, in July 1963. Yolngu leaders made plain their objection to the lack of consultation and secrecy of the Government’s agreement with Nabalco, and their concern about the impact of mining on the land unless their voices were heard.

The petitions were not successful; mining commenced in 1968. The Yolngu people began a court case, in which Justice Richard Blackburn ruled against the Yolngu claimants in 1971. He recognised that they had been living on the land for thousands of years, but found that any rights they had before colonisation had been invalidated by the Crown. The Australian legal system had been built around the concept of terra nullius, meaning ‘land belonging to no one’.

The Yolngu eventually received native title to their land in 1978, under the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976, which established a procedure for transferring 50 per cent of land in the Territory to Aboriginal ownership. The mining leases, which they had objected to since 1963, were excluded from the provisions of the Act, and also from the Yolngu native title claim.

The Yirrkala bark petitions were the first example of a native title litigation in Australia. They paved the way for the Aboriginal Land Rights Commission and the Aboriginal Land Rights (Northern Territory) Act 1976. In 1992 the concept of terra nullius, which had been used in the Milirrpum v Nabalco Pty Ltd judgement, was challenged by the High Court of Australia. Mabo v Queensland recognised the people of Murray Island as native titleholders to their land.

Information on the Yirrkala Petitions is taken from https://www.nma.gov.au/defining-moments/resources/yirrkala-bark-petitions

See also