AUDIO

by Archbishop Peter Jensen
Archbishop Peter Jensen's Christmas Message 2011 on the centrality of Jesus to human history
7 Sins of Sydney 1: The Pursuit of Space
Michael Jensen
February 21st, 2012

To get us in the mood, have a listen to punkists Frenzal Rhomb’s take on Bobby Troup’s classic ‘My City of Sydney’:

My city of Sydney,
I love the warmth of you.
Love the heart of your people,
That little church steeple in Woolloomooloo.

Sail boats white polka-dotting the blue of the bay
as they glide on their way through a clear afternoon
Night folks thirsting for fun,
meeting most everyone at the Cross
as they toss in their merry balloon.

My city of Sydney,
I love your glow at dark.
Love the Opera House lights from the Bridge
And the nights in a quiet Hyde Park.

When I'm thousands of miles from the surfers and smiles,
Of your laugh-loving children at play,
My warm city of Sydney,
I've never been away.

                 Bobby Troup

Maps
The Street Directories of Sydney, the Gregory’s and the UBD, are disappearing from our cars, now that we have GPS systems. I am a bit sorry for that: I could easily spend a happy hour pondering the way Sydney has been described: with the name ‘mount’ given to flat places (where is ‘Mount’ Druitt?), and with names of London suburbs or English villages finding themselves duplicated, sometimes incongruously (Lewisham, Kensington, Paddington, St Ives). In many cases, these names represent the erasure of the aboriginal name for a place.

But not always: the thick smattering of aboriginal place names, often near water (Bondi, Coogee, Cammaray, Curl Curl, Parramatta, Cronulla), are a ghostly reminder in a now unspoken tongue that this place was once seen with very different eyes.

Invasion
The land was more than strange: it was incomprehensible to people from the other side of the world.
       Geoffrey Blainey, The Tyranny of Distance

Why did Europeans come here, to this strange place?

On 13th May 1787 11 ships loaded to the gunwales with a human cargo set sail from Portsmouth for Botany Bay, in the land of New South Wales discovered by Captain James Cook some seventeen years previously. The 1420 souls aboard – somewhat more than that arrived at the other end – were to begin a colony in the form of a prison under the governorship of Captain Arthur Phillip – a colony built by forced labour at the barrel of the gun and at the crack of the cat o’ nine tails.

Their journey must have been as terrifying in prospect as it was remarkable in completion. What could a poorly educated horse thief or pickpocket have imagined lay before him across the sea?

Transportation was not a new punishment in 1787. But Cook’s discovery of an apparently empty and vast island at the other end of the globe made it a more attractive solution to the perennial problem of punishment. The prisons of the day were notoriously overcrowded and disease-ridden; and in fact the government had resorted to putting its prisoners in prison-hulks moored on the Thames. More space was needed.

More space. But that space was already occupied. Before European settlement, the lands of the Sydney Basin were roamed by the people known to history as the Eora. That name, meaning ‘people’, was derived from the word for ‘yes’ and the word the ‘this place’. Their identity, and indeed their spirituality, was tied to the land.

Eradication did not take long, and it was not through any particular policy of aggression from the Europeans – though there were occasional skirmishes. Smallpox carried off more than half the Eora within a few short years of the arrival of the First Fleet.

We have long wrestled with these events which cast such a pall over the founding of our city, and from which we continue to benefit - particularly the Anglican Church, which received huge bequests of land that only tenuously belonged to those who gave it away. Yet it is too morally simplistic to assign blame to the Europeans for the cataclysm that occurred. There was no recognition of the possibility of a native sense of ownership of the land in the same way that Europeans thought of it. The anthropological concepts with which they might have begun to understand the relationship of the Eora peoples to the land were simply not available.

Likewise, with no understanding of immunology of epidemiology, the Europeans could not have foreseen or understood the genocide that was caused by the smallpox virus. They were simply spreading the human stain. Greed, incompetence and fear played their part. The sad thing is that it is impossible to imagine an alternative history in which colonisers from Europe arrived and did not devastate black Australia.

If Sydney has an original sin, it lies somewhere in the brutality of the exile of the convicts from England and the dispossession of the aboriginal inhabitants of their home.

The View
Elaine: Sydney is different. Money is more important here.
Colin: Why more so than Melbourne?
Elaine: To edge yourself closer to a view. In Melbourne all views are equally depressing, so there’s no point.

         David Williamson, Emerald City

The aesthetic beauty of the harbour was immediately noted by the new settlers, or at least, those who had sensibility enough to notice. Ever since then, the city of Sydney has been a bun-fight over who has access to the best view. Real estate brochures crow over the sight of a patch of water the size of a ten cent coin only visible from the bathroom window. The annual fireworks serve to remind everybody that the class system in Sydney can be easily read from which area has the best spot for spectators. Corner offices that face the harbour are where the big bosses of industry and commerce sit and make their conference calls.

The great artists of Sydney have tried to make something of the harbour, though it is difficult to do so without lapsing into sheer postcardism. Brett Whitely somehow got the blue just right, before he succumbed to the blues. Grace Cossington-Smith was another who managed to find something new to say about it. The man-made structures of the Bridge and then the Opera House by some extraordinary miracle enhanced God’s work, but have made it harder to paint, since human artistry has already done its best.

But the truth is, we’ll kill for a harbour view - others, or ourselves. Looking at the harbour is the secret to the envy that makes Sydney the town it is. When it comes to views, in Sydney, size definitely matters. We'll work so hard to have it, we'll never have the time to see it.

The Burbs
…on the surface not even the sufferings endured in the two world wars of 1914-1918 and 1939-1945, the dropping of the atomic bomb at Hiroshima in August 1945, the depth of the crisis in capitalist society during the great depression, or the loosening of the conventions of previous decades seems to have shaken the faith of the average Australian in the capacity of both the land and the society to provide every adult with the opportunity to become the owner of property, a house, a plot of land, a car, and all the gadgets deemed essential for the gratification of the senses in an age given over to surface delights and titillations.
    Manning Clark, A Short History of Australia

People, wasting away in paradise…
Too much of sunshine too much of sky
It's just enough to make you wanna cry
I see buildings, clothing the sky, in paradise
Sydney, nights are warm
Daytime telly, blue rinse dawn
And Dad's so bad he lives in the pub, it's a underarms and football club

    Midnight Oil, The Power and the Passion

But all these little dog-kennels – awful piggling suburban place – and sort of lousy. Is this all men can do with a new country?
    D.H. Lawrence, Kangaroo

When the great English novelist D.H. Lawrence arrived in Sydney in 1922 he was on a quest for a new world free of the tired old customs of Europe. He was instantly disappointed. What had Sydney-siders done but build row after row of cramped and charmless London-style homes? They had not had the imagination to develop a new way of living on the new land. Back from the harbour were acres of houses without any daring. The roads were dusty and windy. Though there was space to burn, it seemed as if the inhabitants of the New World had been too terrified to inhabit it. 

Back from the harbour, Sydney seems to have squandered its opportunity. Some of its suburbs are ugly as sin. The evidence of quick bucks earned by property developers in the 60s and then again in the 80s - all with the collusion of local councils - is everywhere. 

The Australian dream is not as nakedly rapacious as the American one: it is not to make a million dollars, but to own your own plot of suburban land and to live quietly on it. In fact, it isn’t really a dream – that’s too grand a term. It is an expectation that the land on which we stand will yield its bounty readily and not ask too much in return. The myths of hardship all stem from the inland. Down at the coast, we know we have it easy.
Trouble is, the ease of life has caused us to lose our imaginations. It is too easy to believe that this is all there is. 

Maps 2

Unlike Americans, Sydney-siders have no ceremony of thanksgiving for the place they now inhabit. We don't tend to regard the space we inhabit as a gift. We look at the view, if we do, because we earned the position through talent and hard work. There is the danger, too, of sounding a note which unpleasantly triumphalistic: we are not somehow like Israel entering the promised land and dispossessing the locals at God's express command. 

But Richard Johnson, the first chaplain of the colony, is perhaps the voice we need to remember here. In his first sermon on Australian soil - the first sermon on Australian soil - Johnson expounded the text from Psalm 116: What shall I render to the Lord for all his benefits to me? They are remarkable words considering the context in which they were first preached.

But they could be words of ongoing significance for Sydney-siders. They do not strike a note of triumph. They rather ask: what does the possession of this marvellous gift - this city - mean for me? What is my response to the giver? 

 

Sandy Grant    21 February 2012 8:24am
Michael, wow, what a wide-ranging article. Hard to take it all in, in one go. Thank you for the thoughts.

But did you see Michael Duffy's opinion piece in SMH on Monday? In it he talked about a designer home TV program being "splendid space porn" as well as "a celebration of materialism and consumerism".

Possibly because the financing of the home now dominates a couple's life more than before, we pay more attention to it and want to make it as big as possible. In the 1970s, this attitude would have been criticised as materialism, but you don't hear people talk about materialism these days.

#2 of 0 top
Michael Jensen    21 February 2012 10:11am
Nice -

a friend of mine drove past a billboard for domain.com.au this morning.

It read 'you're not a buyer, you're a warlord, in a battle for territory.

#3 of 0 top
Mark Elkington    21 February 2012 4:10pm
Richard Johnson "held church services mostly in the open air, performed baptisms, marriages and burials, attended the execution of condemned men and worked hard amongst the convicts. One of those convicts wrote home, amongst the sickness and hunger of 1790 that ‘few of the sick would recover if it was not for the kindness of Rev’d Johnson, whose assistance out of his own stores makes him the physician of both soul and body.' Failing to persuade the colonial authorities of the need for a church building, he built one himself, paying for it out of his own funds."
Was he God's messenger?

A contrast with more recent Sydney property concerns:
Trophy home in waiting

#4 of 0 top
Mark Elkington    23 February 2012 5:02pm
Michael, my post above is not intended as a personal swipe or point-scoring, nor do I suggest that all church property ownership is bad. I do think the contrast highlighted is important.

Michael Frost (Sydney Evangelical, church planter, missiologist and Vice Principal of Morling College) poses a scenario where the Sydney Anglican Church is successfully sued for every last penny. Suddenly it’s all gone: the property, the money, the investments (presciently spoken pre-GFC). "Wouldn’t that be terrible?" he asks, "Or do you think some of them might say, okay, the game’s up, we’re like those peasant Christians in China, there’s nothing left, would we discover something about the spiritual power that’s at our disposal, if we stopped relying on our temporal and material power?"
Michael Frost Wrap-Up at PGF 2007 (YouTube video; start from 32:45 to 34:15, although the whole talk is well worth the time.)

Simplistic? Partly. But are we not moved to reconsider Jesus' words to the church at Laodicea: "You say, 'I am rich; I have acquired wealth and do not need a thing...'" (Rev 3:17a.)

You rightly note that the ease of life for Sydney-siders makes it too easy to believe that this is all there is and ignore the gift-giver. We Sydney Christians breath that same atmosphere - I encourage you to also explore how it impacts the church, corporately and individually.

#5 of 0 top
Michael Jensen    23 February 2012 7:23pm
@Mark - I didn't take your post as a personal swipe etc. You make a very good point - one I was hoping people would infer from the post.

#6 of 0 top
Andrew Mackinnon    26 February 2012 9:16am
If the church celebrated the prosperity of its members, rather than condemned the prosperity of its members, then perhaps more people would remain in church. The smart Christian uses his or her wealth to further the kingdom of heaven. He or she is like the wise virgin in the parable in Matthew. The dumb Christian, which is what the Anglican Dicoese of Sydney breeds, ends up poor and disdained by the world. Nobody wants to know them and nobody is the slightest bit interested in what they want to communicate about Jesus Christ.

The reality is that Christians ought to be the best-looking, the happiest, the wisest, the fittest, the healthiest and the most prosperous people. If they're not, then something is very wrong and that something, at this point in time, can only be what is being preached from the pulpit.

In any case, it is worth noting that the only real beneficiaries of the property market in Sydney are the banks who earn around 70% and more of the mortgaged value of properties in interest revenue over the life of the mortgage. No mortgage holder enjoys paying that economic rent to the banks. It's not populism to point this out. It's reality. The great error of intellectual conceit is to overlook the obvious. The banks rule this city and they have been licenced by the government to do so. This nefarious situation will continue while ever the people allow it.

#7 of 0 top
Grant Hayes    26 February 2012 1:44pm
Andrew M @ #7
The reality is that Christians ought to be the best-looking, the happiest, the wisest, the fittest, the healthiest and the most prosperous people.


a.k.a. Übermensch

Consult Nietzsche (Der Antichrist) for possible reasons why this is not the case. You might find that you have a lot in common.

#8 of 0 top
Grant Hayes    26 February 2012 2:00pm
The sad thing is that it is impossible to imagine an alternative history in which colonisers from Europe arrived and did not devastate black Australia.

What's this? Retrospective fatalism as apologia for dispossession? i.e. if British "we" didn't do it to them, someone else would have; and "we" clearly were the least bad of the possible evils...

??

Oh well, poor blackfellas had it coming anyway ... dying race and all that ... destined to be displaced and to die out ... may as well make the best of it ... so sorry about the germs ...

#9 of 0 top
Grant Hayes    26 February 2012 2:27pm
There is the danger, too, of sounding a note which unpleasantly triumphalistic: we are not somehow like Israel entering the promised land and dispossessing the locals at God's express command.

More like Israel than not, surely. After all, a God-bearing culture (flawed, of course) was displacing a wicked, idolatrous one, culpably ignorant of its Adamic depravity in God's eyes. The Calvinist settlers of the North American east coast, and the Boers of South Africa would have seen nothing amiss in such a construct.

Or perhaps our forebears were more like Assyria - the imperial instrument of God's righteous wrath, a rod for teaching a lesson.

Doesn't the Lord arrange these sorts of things to punish peoples for their sins, and to give them a warning foretaste of the final judgement to come? In biblical terms, the fact that aborigines were decimated and dispossessed is proof that they must have been particularly deserving of divine punishment. Otherwise, why would a holy, sovereign God allow their decimation and dispossession to happen?

#10 of 0 top
Michael Canaris    26 February 2012 8:28pm
In biblical terms, the fact that aborigines were decimated and dispossessed is proof that they must have been particularly deserving of divine punishment. Otherwise, why would a holy, sovereign God allow their decimation and dispossession to happen?
A fit of absence of mind, perhaps? Unlike North America or South Africa, outside fringe circles I don't recall seeing attempts to immediately locate our settlement in terms of some grand providential theory.

#11 of 0 top
Robert James Elliott    27 February 2012 7:51am
I agree with the comment that it is difficult to imagine an Australian history where this continent was not occupied by some power stronger than local indigenous peoples. This is the conquest/settlement paradigm that has operated on this planet since time immemorial - it is why Rome conquered southern Britain, why the Moors conquered Spain, why the Spanish then reconquered Spain, why the English conquered the Americas, why the French did as well etc etc. It is ahistorical to pretend there was anything original in the "original sin" of 1788. Given the nature of conquerors, it was not just Calvinist powers but pagans, Israelites, Romans, then mostly Catholic powers who did the conquering up until the 1600s. I think there is too much self-flaggelation here about all this. What was done, was done and the present Christian task is to deal justly with what is fair now.

#12 of 0 top
Grant Hayes    27 February 2012 10:29am
Robert J E @ #12:
This is the conquest/settlement paradigm that has operated on this planet since time immemorial.

Robert, according to the high view of God's sovereignty held by Calvinists/monergists, all that happens is directed by God. The tumult of nations, of one people conquering another, is orchestrated by God par excellence, and however chaotic and senseless it appears to those caught up in it, it's all for the glorification of his Name.

Doesn't the Bible teach that the "conquest/settlement paradigm" is one way that God deals out temporal judgement/punishment upon people groups as a consequence for their sins? ("Natural" disasters have a similar function.)

Aren't the Old testament prophets replete with references to God's sponsorship of conquest and conflict among various peoples - all for his glory?

Doesn't Revelation teach that the violent forces (the Four Horsemen) that wrack human existence have been unleashed by the sovereign Lamb of God?

#13 of 0 top
Andrew Mackinnon    27 February 2012 12:06pm
I agree with Robert at #12 about self-flagellation. The entire Anglican Diocese of Sydney has historically gravitated around self-abasement which is not godly, biblical or healthy. It destroys Christian's will to live and paints them into a corner of paralysis. The continual push to improve the living circumstances of people in countries far away while seeking to make Christians in Sydney feel guilty that their lives are going well is disturbing.


#14 of 0 top
Grant Hayes    27 February 2012 12:27pm
Andrew Mc @ #8:
The reality is that Christians ought to be the best-looking, the happiest, the wisest, the fittest, the healthiest and the most prosperous people.

Andrew, do you consider yourself to represent what a Christian "ought to be", i.e. best-looking, happiest, wisest, fittest, healthiest, and most prosperous?

@ #14:
In hindsight, the turn I took in the 1990s to join the Anglican church was a wrong turn.

Have SydAngs held you back from realising your full potential in Christ?

#15 of 0 top
Robert James Elliott    27 February 2012 3:35pm
Grant: I am not a Calvinist. I think God is in a providential charge but I do also believe in free will, and that our behaviour brings judgments upon us that are both just and our own fault.

In respect of whether colonisation was or was not God's will, who of us is in a position to know whether it was or it was not? The point remains, however, that in 1788, someone was going to colonise this continent - it was never going to be allowed to remain as it was on 25 January 1788. Great powers expand until they don't.

I am not sure what Andrew is on about in respect of the Sydney dicoese. I am closer to the Vatican than Moore College but I am not sure I understand what "self-abasement" has been conducted by Sydney Anglicans. Am I alone here?

RJE

#16 of 0 top
Robert James Elliott    27 February 2012 3:38pm
Also, I am young/old enough to know of Midnight Oil. Given Peter Garrett sold his soul/beliefs to become a puppet for whatever the faceless men want this week, I am not sure his critique of Sydney is worth much.

#17 of 0 top
Commenting is not available in this channel entry.