Noting that “racism is…on the rise in many parts of the world”,

Raimond Gaita––

Emeritus Professor of Moral Philosophy at King’s College, London––

argues that, as a result, there is “an increasing failure of many people to see the full humanity of other people and peoples”.

Alongside this, he suggests, we are seeing other forms of dehumanisation, namely…

“Corrupt forms of nationalism that show in responses to asylum seekers and immigrants”…

and, over the next decade or so, he suggests that we should expect to see… 

“national and international politics…dominated by crises that are caused and inflamed by the shameful gap between the rich and the poor nations, aggravated by the effects of climate change”…

with “strong nations…likely to protect themselves in ways that become increasingly brutal”.

Given this alarming scenario, he argues…

“We are therefore under an urgent imperative to think again and radically”… 

about “what it means to share a common humanity with all the peoples of the earth”…

and about how we are… 

“to respond morally, legally and politically to the fact that mere luck ensures that some people enjoy the fruits of the earth while, again because of luck, others suffer the humiliations and miseries of the damned”.

Sadly, so much of Gaita’s future scenario has…

indeed…

been playing out in our country for some time.

Ever since the Tampa crisis––

eighteen years ago––

we have progressively dehumanised those who have come to us for help and protection;

and, even now, there are men who have been locked up in the hell-holes of Nauru and Manus Island for more than six years.

What wouldit mean, in real terms, for us to respond to asylum seekers out of a sense––

not of our inherent entitlement––

but of our lucky, even undeserved, giftedness?

 

Now, that’s not just a social or political conundrum.

It’s also an acutely religious problem.

 

Religiously speaking, we have a problem dealing with our inherent giftedness––

that is, we have a problem dealing with the concept of ‘grace’.

Throughout Christian history––

almost since the day it began––

we have done our best to water down the radical nature of God’s grace––

revealed and made manifest to us in Jesus Christ––

and to put other things in its way.

So much of our inherited Christian tradition––

notwithstanding the theology to which we might pay lip-service––

has been the imposition of rules and regulations…

conditions…

and expectations…

imposed upon God’s love and God’s forgiveness and God’s mercy.

Only those who believe what we do… 

who worship like we do…

who live like we do…

are truly “saved”:

You must be baptised.

You must not work on Sundays.

You must go to church.

You must read your Bibles and pray regularly.

You must not swear or use bad language.

You must dress modestly.

You must not drink alcohol.

You must not have sex before or outside of marriage…

and you certainly can’t be gay.

You must not get divorced.

You ought to be a stay-at-home mother and not go out to work.

You must not have an abortion.

You ought to oppose voluntary euthanasia.

And on it goes!

Not only have we created lists or moral codes that define who is…

and who isn’t… 

a genuine Christian…

we have implicitly assumed that those who do not follow these rules are estranged from God…

are not part of God’s people…

are not “saved”…

are not going to heaven.

Throughout Christian history we have imposed all sorts of qualifications…

provisos…

and barriers…

upon the radicalness of God’s grace.

At heart, we continue to work with an assumption that God’s love, mercy, and forgiveness…

cannot be freely given without limit or condition.

In some way, it has to be earned.

In some way, it’s only accessible to those who deserve it.

We just can’t seem to accept that it’s freely…

unconditionally…

impartially…

poured out on us all.

 

That’s also what is going on in this morning’s reading from Colossians.

Here, the author––

writing in the name of Paul, but some time after Paul’s death––

is seeking to counter a certain trend that has arisen within the Colossian church.

There are some people who have combined elements of Hebrew tradition…

with ideas drawn from Greek philosophy and religion…

along with developing Christian ideas…

to offer a “package” that the author sees as dangerous.

It seems that it involves some speculation about the role of angels and other spiritual powers––

although how is not clear.

But, what is particularly worrying for the author is these people’s emphasis on asceticism.

It seems that they have been arguing that people should abstain from certain foods and wine…

that they ought to observe certain rituals…

that they should renounce some of their more earthy and earthly desires…

and lead a more simple and Spartan lifestyle…

in order to achieve a more profound mystical and spiritual experience.

In short, they have been arguing that people need to live a life of physical renunciation… 

if they wish to understand God more fully…

if they wish to know God and God’s love more deeply…

and if they want assurance of God’s forgiveness and their “salvation”.

In response, the author of Colossians makes a series of assertions here:

that we were dead, but that God has made us alive with Christ;

that God has set aside all legal demands…

and even the concept that our relationship with God depends upon some legal construct;

that we have been set free from human traditions…

and from social systems and forces that seek to subjugate us…

and lessen our humanity;

that we no longer need to live like we have been living;

that we are––

or that we can be––

new people.

 

“As you therefore have received Christ…continue to live your lives in him”.

In other words, the author is trying to reaffirm the concept of grace;

that we cannot earn God’s love and forgiveness––

because it is freely given;

there is nothing that we need to do but accept it…

and, more specifically…

allow it to shape our thinking and being and doing.

That is what it means to live as recipients of grace.

If there is any “ought” it’s this:

the way that we live ought to reflect what we have received in Christ––

unconditional love and the freedom to live as loved people…

allowing that love to shape how we live.

According to the author of Colossians, being a Christian means knowing that we are loved…

deeply, utterly, unreservedly;

that there is nothing that we can do that earns that love;

that there is nothing that we can do to deserve it;

that it comes to us as pure gift.

Our only obligation––

the only appropriate response––

is to live out of that love.

As Christians, that ought to be the basis of how we live;

that ought to be the very foundation of our ethics or morality––

simply responding to the love of God…

which comes to us as sheer, unmitigated, gift.

 

What that might mean in practice is… 

for each of us, in our own consciences…

to work out for ourselves.

But, at least in the way that we Australian Christians respond to asylum seekers…

it cannot reflect what our politicians are doing in our name.