Australia’s Largest Christian News Site

The best expression of the unity, love and forgiveness the Lord has for Australia is to vote No on the Voice, say two Christian leaders, one Indigenous and one non-Indigenous.

Kurt Mahlburg and Ps James Dargin

On Saturday 14 October, Australians will be asked whether or not they support altering the Constitution to establish an Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Voice to Parliament.

The question in the upcoming referendum is about more than recognition for Indigenous Australians, which most Australians support. What will be asked is if a new body should be established in Canberra, made up only of Indigenous people, that will influence the federal government in its decisions, policies and laws.

Christians have a special interest in the Voice referendum. Jesus commands us to be salt and light in the world, which includes taking part in the political process. Jesus also teaches us to love, help and care for those in need, which in an Australian context includes Indigenous people, particularly in rural and regional areas.

Of course, the Bible is silent on exactly how we should vote on the Voice. But Scripture does give us many principles to consider as we decide whether to vote Yes or No.

Love of neighbour, selflessness and justice are some of the more obvious principles we must weigh. But Christians should not neglect the many other biblical principles that inform this debate.

Below are ten forgotten principles: ten reasons we believe Christians should vote No on the Voice.

1. Stop judging by mere appearance

Subtly or otherwise, the Yes campaign implies that being Aboriginal or Torres Strait Islander means supporting the Voice. The Uluru Statement from the Heart — the document behind the Voice — is presented as the consensus view of Indigenous Australians.

But this one-dimensional view wrongly equates skin colour with political affiliation, assuming people think a certain way because they look a certain way. In truth, Aboriginality is a question of ancestry and culture, not politics.

The words of Jesus are relevant here: “Stop judging by mere appearances, but instead judge correctly.” (John 7:24).

Judging correctly, there is no “Indigenous viewpoint” on the Voice. The Voice is a very divisive subject even among Indigenous Australians, with many prominent Aboriginal leaders coming out strongly against it. I (James) am not behind the Voice.  Another Indigenous leader who is not behind the Voice is Warren Mundine AO. He recently wrote:

The Uluru statement was endorsed at a convention attended by just 250 delegates selected from 14 community “Dialogues”. These were capped at 100 attendees with only 60 per cent of places allocated to Indigenous people. Attendance was by invitation only, which, according to the Referendum Council, was to ensure each dialogue reached a consensus. In politics the word for that is stacked. Despite being hand-picked, several delegates rejected the Uluru statement and walked out of the convention.

To say Christians should vote Yes since “that is what Indigenous people want” is to judge by mere appearances — something we should not do.

2. Avoid hypocrisy

Australia is premised on the idea that all of its citizens, Indigenous and non-Indigenous alike, are subjects of the British Crown and share this land together. That’s why it’s called the Commonwealth of Australia. We have not always lived up to this vision but it is our sure foundation for national unity.

By contrast, the Uluru Statement calls the discovery and settlement of Australia an “invasion”, and says, “The taking of our land without consent represents our fundamental grievance against the British Crown.”

Christian leaders who advocate for the Voice tend to agree with the stolen land narrative. For example, one Sydney pastor even singles out non-Indigenous Christians, writing, “We have benefitted from their dispossession, building our churches and schools on their lands.”

So where are the Christians and churches giving back their “stolen lands” to Indigenous groups? If the land was stolen, those churches should be handed back and knocked down. While we’re at it, maybe we should knock down the Sydney Opera House and the Sydney Harbor Bridge, too!

By the standard of Scripture, everyone who believes they are on stolen land but does not return it are thieves. Worse, they are hypocrites — saying things to gain popular approval with no intention of making right the “sins” they have confessed.

Jesus warned, “Be careful not to practice your righteousness in front of others to be seen by them.” (Matthew 6:1). In the same sermon, Jesus went on to teach that one good deed done in secret is worth more than a thousand righteous-sounding sentiments announced from a street corner.

According to the logic of the Voice, if non-Indigenous Christians vote Yes, they are admitting they live on stolen land and should surrender that land immediately. Until they do, they are in the spiritually dangerous position of living as hypocrites.

3. Children aren’t guilty for their parent’s sins

The Bible teaches that sinfulness is an inherent human trait, passed down from generation to generation because of the disobedience of the first human couple, Adam and Eve (Genesis 3, Romans 5, 1 Corinthians 15). This is known as the doctrine of original sin.

The Voice goes further than original sin, also teaching what we might call the doctrine of white guilt, which is not in Scripture.

The Voice infers that all non-Indigenous Australians alive today bear guilt for the “violent dispossession” and “relentless inhumanity” committed by their ancestors, who began arriving in Australia in the late 1700s. It charges “non-Aboriginal Australians to take responsibility for that history”.

The Uluru Statement transfers centuries-old guilt to people living today when it declares, “The invasion that started at Botany Bay is the origin of the fundamental grievance between the old and new Australians.”

The Voice divides us — Kurt and James — into the categories of “old” and “new” Australians, holding Kurt guilty for what his ancestors did to James’ ancestors.

By contrast, God declares in Ezekiel 18:20, “The one who sins is the one who will die. The child will not share the guilt of the parent, nor will the parent share the guilt of the child.” Here, God is clear that we do not inherit guilt from our ancestors. He holds each of us responsible for our own sins, not for sins committed by our forebears 235 years ago. Put simply, guilt should not go on and on and on.

Some Christian leaders point to Exodus 34:6-7, which says God “punishes the children and their children for the sin of the parents to the third and fourth generation”. However, that warning was spoken to the covenant community of Israel, not modern Australia.

Even if the Exodus passage did apply it today, how would it be fair for first generation migrants from Vietnam or Sudan to be punished for British deeds committed in the 18th century? Should I (Kurt) be punished for the sins of my German ancestors who arrived in the 19th and 20th centuries? Or are the only people who deserve punishment the 20 per cent of Australians who trace their ancestry back to British convicts?

All of these mental gymnastics are silly. Better the plain truth of Scripture — that God doesn’t hold children guilty for the sins of their parents, and we shouldn’t either.

4. Keep away from those who cause division

Promoters of the Voice say it will help unify Australia. Unfortunately, this is little more than marketing spin.

The Voice is premised on division. It divides us — Kurt and James — along racial lines. It divides the whole country along racial lines, and replaces a single Australian sovereignty with two competing sovereignties.

“Our sovereignty preexisted the Australian state and has survived it,” the Uluru Statement declares, adding, “It has never been ceded or extinguished, and co-exists with the sovereignty of the Crown”. The statement goes on to call for “two sovereignties to co-exist in which both western and Indigenous values and identities are protected and given voice in policies and laws”.

Essentially, the Voice establishes a form of separatism and ethno-nationalism.

Though many people support the Voice for genuine reasons, the Voice itself was designed with a radical agenda. It is not just causing conflict between non-Aboriginal Australians, but turning Aboriginal Australians against each other, too. To me (James), the Voice appears to be an act of revenge.

Perhaps most concerning is how the Voice has been influenced by the world’s deadliest ideology, Marxism. The Voice divides Australians into two Marxist classes of oppressor and oppressed. It is no coincidence that two prominent figures who contributed to the referendum and are campaigning loudly for the Voice — Thomas Mayo and Teela Reid — are openly pro-Communist.

In the face of all of these facts, God’s Word declares, “I urge you, brothers and sisters, to watch out for those who cause divisions and put obstacles in your way that are contrary to the teaching you have learned. Keep away from them. For such people are not serving our Lord Christ, but their own appetites. By smooth talk and flattery they deceive the minds of naive people.” (Romans 16:17-18).

Division posing as unity is no unity at all. Christians are far wiser to support one country, one law, one people and one Australia, and reject racial and ideological divisiveness.

5. Do not show favouritism

Whether voting Yes or No, all Australians can agree that our nation’s darkest chapters were marked by injustice. It was deeply wrong for earlier generations and institutions to show favouritism to white fellas, while depriving Aboriginal people of their full rights and dignity as God’s image-bearers.

Despite their many faults, it was Christians who took a strong lead in setting right our nation’s wrongs. Followers of Jesus were at the forefront in providing aid, protection, education and hope to demoralised Indigenous communities. What motivated them was the Bible’s teaching that “God does not show favouritism” (Romans 2:11) and that we should treat everyone equally (James 2:1).

The mistake the Voice makes is to resurrect the favouritism that caused so much damage in Australia’s past. The Voice plans to turn favouritism in the opposite direction to favour Indigenous people today, giving them an elevated seat at the table.

Sadly, that is an unbiblical idea based on vengeance. It is a case of Australians importing American critical race theory, whose vocal proponent Ibram X. Kendi declared, “The only remedy to past discrimination is present discrimination.”

Christians should not support vengeance (Romans 12:19). We should not create new injustice to replace the old. We are commanded not to show favouritism, even if that favouritism claims to correct historic wrongs. We must not favour one race and forget the other.

To those who would elevate one class of people over another, God asks in James 2:4, “have you not discriminated among yourselves and become judges with evil thoughts?”

6. Let no one take you captive by hollow philosophy

White guilt and critical race theory are examples of hollow philosophies that Scripture urges us to avoid: “See to it that no one takes you captive through hollow and deceptive philosophy, which depends on human tradition and the elemental spiritual forces of this world rather than on Christ.” (Colossians 2:8).

Another hollow philosophy Christians should avoid is inherited victimhood. As an Aboriginal person, I (James) want to say this: it is misguided to view me and all Indigenous people alive today as ongoing victims of British settlement. It is superstitious to see us as representatives of our Indigenous ancestors who suffered centuries ago.

A simple thought experiment makes this clear.

Picture a successful, affluent and contented businessman in one of Australia’s big cities. One day, he discovers his great-great-grandmother was Indigenous. Adopting the logic of inherited victimhood, he suddenly sees himself in a whole new light. He is a victim. He is disadvantaged. He has grievances with non-Indigenous people he never knew he had before.

The truth is this person has adopted a fiction about his life that has no bearing on reality, and will only bring him misery.

Yes, he is 1/16th Indigenous, but he is also 15/16ths non-Indigenous. Having Indigenous heritage is great. But does such a small percentage of DNA justify a new, resentful outlook? Is he partly a victim but mostly a culprit? Does part of his personality have to apologise to the other part for British colonialism?

Again, the mental gymnastics are silly. It is impossible to unscramble the egg that is modern Australia. In other words, inherited victimhood is a fiction. It is exactly the kind of hollow philosophy warned about in Colossians 2:8.

It is true that many Indigenous people alive today — particularly those living on the lands — are at a significant disadvantage in many ways. I (James) can tell you that first hand. As Christians, we have a special interest in their welfare.

Yet even as we extend love and care, we must be careful not to adopt hollow philosophies like inherited victimhood, white guilt or critical race theory, which sow division and resentment.

7. Put off falsehood and speak truthfully

To propose an Indigenous Voice to Parliament is to infer that no such voice exists yet — but that is not true.

There are already many Indigenous voices advising the government on issues that affect Indigenous people, including hundreds of native title bodies, dozens of land councils, and over 120 other Indigenous agencies.

Representing all of these voices in unison is the National Indigenous Australians Agency, which reports directly to the executive branch of government — the Prime Minister’s Cabinet.

Australia also has 11 Indigenous members of parliament in Canberra. Statistically speaking, “Indigenous voices” are overrepresented on Capital Hill. As former boxer and Rugby League player Anthony Mundine has said, “We’ve got people in parliament, we’ve got senators, we’re already making our voices heard.”

To suggest Indigenous people can only have a voice if the Voice referendum is successful is the opposite of truth-telling: it is dishonest.

Here, Christians would do well to apply the words of Ephesians 4:25: “Therefore each of you must put off falsehood and speak truthfully to your neighbour.” Let’s stop listening to lies. Instead, let’s listen to the truth, and the truth will set us free.

8. Get rid of bitterness

Those supporting the Yes campaign often express their hope that the Voice will be an avenue for reconciliation. One Christian leader, for example, writes that “the Voice opens us all to the possibility of a truly reconciled Australia”.

Reconciliation is a great cause for Christians to support. But will a Voice to Parliament achieve what so many other initiatives have not?

We have had decades of land rights, the 2008 National Apology, a national curriculum that elevates Indigenous issues, a dozen significant Indigenous dates annually, and Welcomes to Country everywhere we go.

For many Indigenous Australians like me (James), these initiatives are already more than enough. Some even find it tiring or patronising.

By contrast, the Uluru Statement effectively negates all those efforts and puts reconciliation back at square one. It says, “In order for meaningful change to happen, Australian society generally needs to ‘work on itself’ and to know the truth of its own history.”

Hasn’t Australia done that already?

If all efforts towards reconciliation so far have failed to bring meaningful change, why would we think the Voice will achieve reconciliation?

Here’s a little-known secret: the Uluru Statement admits the Voice is not the endpoint. The endpoint is actually Treaty: “Makarrata is another word for Treaty or agreement-making. It is the culmination of our agenda.”

In turn, Treaty means reparations, which would likely take the form of a fixed percentage of GDP paid to Indigenous Australians.

Indigenous Australians already receive over twice as much government funding as non-Indigenous Australians. This has been the status quo for many years, yet there is still a huge gap. It is doubtful that more money in the form of reparations will help.

The Commonwealth spends $33 billion annually on Aboriginal people, as recently highlighted by Warren Mundine. He believes this equates to nearly $1 trillion over the last 50 years. Mundine has called for much better accountability for these funds. Sadly, very little of this money gets to Indigenous people at the grassroots and instead funds a bloated bureaucracy. What if the funds already set aside for Indigenous Australians were better managed and better spent?

No, a treaty and reparations will not help reconcile our country. As Stephen Chavura has pointed out, “A treaty will bring not peace or reconciliation, but anger and division. Just imagine the kind of debate we see every year around the date of Australia Day, and then multiply it many times over.”

What if the Voice represents just a subset of Indigenous Australians, who have a special interest in keeping a spirit of resentment alive?

What if continually re-opening old wounds is preventing the healing our nation needs?

What if endless calls for reconciliation only reinforce the idea that we are not reconciled?

What if reconciliation efforts are undermined by an unwillingness to forgive?

What if nothing in this life could ever atone for the sins in Australia’s past, because Jesus Christ has already atoned for them?

What if Ephesians 4:31-32 shows us a better way?: “Get rid of all bitterness, rage and anger, brawling and slander, along with every form of malice. Be kind and compassionate to one another, forgiving each other, just as in Christ God forgave you.”

I (James) am passionate about forgiveness. I grew up with bitterness, especially against white people and Pacific Islanders. But God changed my heart and replaced my unforgiveness and bitterness with His forgiveness and love. I’ve been sharing this message around the nation for a few years now.

The Voice is not sharing God’s forgiveness. It’s bringing bitterness out of Aboriginal people. Bitterness is poison. We have to come to God for Him to deliver us from bitterness. The only way to achieve true national unity is through forgiveness. As I (James) often say, one “I forgive you” is worth a thousand “sorrys”.

9. Don’t seek the praises of men

The Voice enjoys very strong support in the upper echelons of society. Many people with power and influence have endorsed it, including celebrities, sporting heroes, academics, CEOs and major media figures. The No campaign has much stronger support away from the centres of power.

This presents a unique temptation to Christians. Voting Yes is overwhelmingly the path of least resistance. Socially speaking, it is “the right thing to do”. Voting Yes — and being seen to vote Yes — is a sure way to win the praises of men. But Christians are told not to do this.

In Galatians 1:10, the apostle Paul wrote, “Am I now trying to win the approval of human beings, or of God? Or am I trying to please people? If I were still trying to please people, I would not be a servant of Christ.”

In John’s gospel, we meet Jewish leaders who believed in Jesus — “But because of the Pharisees they would not openly acknowledge their faith for fear they would be put out of the synagogue; for they loved human praise more than praise from God.” (John 12:42-43).

Many Australians will vote Yes on the Voice to be perceived as nice, or to avoid feeling like a social misfit, or as a sentimental and symbolic gesture, or because it feels like the politically correct thing to do.

All of these are terrible reasons for Christians to vote Yes. The church has never stood out by trying to fit in with the world. God calls us to please Him, not seek the praises of men.

10. Deliverance is in Christ alone

The Uluru Statement presents the Voice (along with Treaty and Truth) as the only real hope for Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islanders. It looks forward to the day “when we have power over our destiny” in place of what is currently described as “the torment of our powerlessness”.

Of all people, Christians should be most wary when earthly solutions are presented as the answer to eternal yearnings.

As we have already mentioned, Christians have historically played an important role in relieving suffering for Indigenous Australians, and we have a mandate to keep doing so. But we send the wrong message if we simply endorse the Voice with its salvation-like claims.

Worse still is if we endorse the Voice as the answer to Indigenous suffering and, like earlier reforms, it fails to live up to its promises. Then we will have created a false hope, and a false hope is more damaging than no hope at all. Stephen Chavura has asked: “What feelings of betrayal, hopelessness, and cynicism will follow? I think we’ll soon find out.”

Non-Indigenous Australians can also make the mistake of seeing the Voice as a form of self-salvation. Many will vote Yes to relieve their guilty conscience and to regain the moral standing they feel they have lost due to “white guilt”.

We may live in a post-Christian Australia, but our country still thinks in Christian categories. To Indigenous people, the Voice represents deliverance from suffering. To non-Indigenous people, the Voice represents deliverance from guilt.

But to the Christian — Indigenous and non-Indigenous — deliverance is found in Christ alone. In fact, this message is not just for Christians but for all Australians. Australia’s Constitution had it right all along: our only hope is “humbly relying on the blessing of Almighty God”.

The good news of Jesus is this: “He has delivered us from the domain of darkness and transferred us to the kingdom of his beloved Son, in whom we have redemption, the forgiveness of sins.” (Colossians 1:13-14).

Our suffering is relieved, and our consciences are clean, not because of what we do but because of what Jesus has done: “How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death, so that we may serve the living God!” (Hebrews 9:14).

When considering the Voice with at a more complete set of biblical principles, we believe the best decision a Christian can make is to vote No. We believe that voting No is the best expression of the unity, love and forgiveness the Lord has for us in this nation.

What about you? How will you vote, and why? Are there any other biblical principles we have missed that should inform the Voice debate?

Let us know in the comments section below.

___

Image via Unsplash.