Month: March 2013

Hospital Chaplain, Reverend Alan Bulmer, has written to Health Minister for Tasmania, The Hon. Michelle O’Byrne, in response to her draft Abortion Legislation for Tasmania.

As I read his sensitive letter, I was reminded again that the pastoral consequences of the life and death of the unborn are a very real part of a hospital chaplain’s ministry. His letter brings the personal aspect of the death of the unborn to the Minister’s attention and asks for the reconsideration and withdrawal of this draft legislation. Extracts from the Hospital Chaplain’s letter:

I am often called in to mothers who have miscarried.  If the pregnancy is under twenty weeks a birth certificate is not issued and a funeral is not necessary.  I have had several cases where families have requested naming ceremonies and some form of funeral for such babies.   A group of wood workers has produced some beautiful tiny caskets for such babies and I have helped place these babies in them.  I have viewed these babies and in many cases they are perfectly formed and beautiful.  Photos have been taken, locks of hair cut and prints made of hand and foot to keep as mementos.

There have also been instances where babies born at around twenty weeks have survived.  Many more do so at twenty-four weeks.

What is to happen to these babies who are aborted at up to twenty-four weeks (and indeed byond it)?  Will there be a birth certificate?  Will there be a death certificate and a funeral?  Will the parents see their aborted, beautifully formed (in most cases especially if the abortion is carried out because they only want a boy or a girl and this pregnancy is not the gender they want, for example).

I shudder to think of what babies of longer gestation would look like if they are aborted, as the bill allows for this to happen right up to the time of birth. . .

I dread to think of the consequences if this legislation gets through parliament and I urge you, and all politicians who support you, to rethink your position and withdraw it while there is still time.

Read full letter: Abortion

See also, Abortion Law for Tasmania?  and  UPDATE: Tasmania’s Proposed Abortion Law Changes.

A wall poster says, “When the going gets tough, the tough get going”. Interesting, because it can be read both positively and negatively: ‘get going’ is positively ‘get to work’ or negatively ‘get out of here – flee!’

When the going gets tough, the life, death and resurrection of Jesus call us to life and to hope. When the going gets tough, followers of Jesus are to ‘get to work’!

Life is full of uncertainty. It is full of good surprises but also bad ones which can knock us off our feet: a loved one diagnosed with an illness and we are shaken. A bushfire suddenly threatens the area, and plans and priorities lurch to a different tack. It might be an issue with the kids at school, a relationship that becomes hurtful or the prospect of unemployment.

Whatever the situation, the richness of our response is found in our embrace of life and hope at the time of uncertainty.

The message of Easter is a message of life and hope.

Jesus talks about himself as “the good shepherd.” He is not some hireling who will run away when the surprises hit, and the going gets tough. Rather, he is ‘the good shepherd who lays down his life for the sheep.”

At his end, Jesus experiences among the worst of the worst of human existence – injustice, false accusation, flogging and ultimately a most cruel death. Yet throughout these experiences Jesus holds on to hope. And it is demonstrated to be a real hope, not a vain one. When Jesus is raised to new life, life and hope combine.

This hope and life in Jesus calls us, moves us and encourages us.  It empowers us to not abandon those who are inconvenient, difficult or burdensome.  In Jesus we find care, boldness, self-sacrifice and courage.

But unfortunately, we do not always act in this way.

Some difficult questions have been raised within Tasmania this past year. Regrettably, the civil discourse that surrounds these questions has not been marked by hope and life but by belligerence, pride and antagonism.

Social changes which have been brought forward in the name of freedom have appealed not to our common life, but to the apparent almighty interests of individuals. Such a path will not lead to life, hope, or freedom. Such a path does not face difficult circumstances, it avoids them. It takes us to a place where we are more willing to eliminate the inconvenient, redefine the difficult, and silence the provocative.

Jesus did not avoid the inconvenient, the difficult or the burdensome. He did not turn aside but embraced life and hope through to the bitter end and beyond. We would do well to follow him.

May God give us the wit and will to ‘get going’, to follow Jesus more closely in our chaotic world.

Remember: In Jesus, life and hope combine.

Shalom

+John J

Bishop of Tasmania

From Bill Muehlenberg, Tasmania, Abortion, and Big Brother,

Although abortion has been effectively open slather in Australia for decades now, some states are still moving to give it even greater protected status, and in fact make things much harder on those who would seek to prevent the slaughter of the innocents.

That was certainly the case with the reprehensible abortion bill passed in Victoria in 2008. One amendment after another was voted down, thus making it one of the most hardcore pro-abortion bills anywhere in the world. But it seems the state of Tasmania is trying to take this even further.

On Friday a private members bill was introduced which would make baby killing so much easier in the Apple Isle.

Also references an excellent article from Tasmanian writer Mishka Gora:

“The neighbouring state of Victoria decriminalized abortion in 2008. Ms O’Byrne says that this is the model for her bill. But

• the Victorian bill contains no penalties for conscientious objectors; the Tasmanian bill does.
• the Victorian bill doesn’t mention counsellors; the Tasmanian bill threatens counsellors with jail.
• the Victorian bill doesn’t mention protests; the Tasmanian bill threatens protesters with jail.”

“The Health Minister has been quite disingenuous about the scope and purpose of her bill in her statements to the media. She has mentioned none of these tyrannical measures and has given the public a mere two weeks [Note: under pressure extended by 2 weeks to 5 April] to respond to one of the most far-reaching pieces of abortion legislation ever proposed anywhere.”

Gora concludes, “Tasmanian legislators are being offered a choice between abortion at any stage and abortion at any stage plus criminalizing dissent. The minister wants to make abortion a health matter, not a criminal matter. But she wants to achieve this at the expense of freedom of conscience, freedom of speech, and common sense. After all, if it is a crime to perform an abortion without medical qualifications or a woman’s consent, shouldn’t it be in the criminal code? The law as it stands is quite sufficient, and to alter it is nothing less than tyrannical.”

*Please put in even a brief submission, standing against this draconian bill. See the government site here for all the necessary details: www.dhhs.tas.gov.au/pophealth/womens_health –

**Comments on the draft Bill must be in writing and emailed to public.health@dhhs.tas.gov.au or posted to Population Health Equity, GPO Box 125 Hobart, TAS, 7001.

All responses must be received by 5:00pm Friday 5 April 2013.

See, BISHOP’S PASTORAL LETTER: ABORTION LAW FOR TASMANIA? Update 16 March 2013

Guest Blogger: Revd David Boyd writes,

One aspect of the assisted dying debate is that such measures will always leave some people who fall outside the guidelines pleading for the guidelines to be widened to allow them to be included.

In a parallel situation, the guideline for abortion in Victoria for many years until recently, the 1969 Menhennit ruling that abortion was allowed in situations where the physical or mental heath of the mother were in danger, got widened out to, in effect, abortion on demand. That is, the gateposts which were there to restrict access to abortion were knocked over and anyone who wanted to got through. Laws and guidelines do get widened out in practice and by pleading for exceptions.

Thus, immediately after the new consultation paper in voluntary assisted dying was introduced in Tasmania, the situation of Elizabeth Godfrey a decade ago was discussed at length on ABC television and other media. She was a Christian who believed that the resources expended on her pain should go to others more needy. She did not have a terminal illness, but was in unbearable and unrelievable physical pain, and committed suicide in 2002. Her two sons (one of whom was convicted and received a suspended sentence for assisting her suicide) called for the proposed guidelines to be widened to allow the assisted suicide of anyone – not just those with a terminal illness – experiencing unbearable and unrelievable pain.

Then, of course, the next step would be to ask for it for those experiencing unbearable and unrelievable mental / emotional / psychological pain (ie, suicidal depression). And that can be anyone of any age. And the widening would continue, with pleading for other exceptions, because if autonomy is to be one of our supreme guiding values, then of course everyone can do whatever they like to themselves.

Unlike some people of faith, I am careful about calling lots of things slippery slopes, but I believe this one really is a slippery slope, and this has been demonstrated in other places where assisted dying has become legal.

I believe this one really is a slippery slope, and this has been demonstrated in other places where assisted dying has become legal.

This last Friday submissions closed for responses to a consultation paper put out by Hons Lara Giddings and Nick McKim in their aim of introducing euthanasia – what they call “Voluntary Assisted Dying” (VAD).

————————————————————————————–

The Anglican Submission is set out as follows:

1 The VAD Paper: Unashamedly Prejudiced

1.1 Ignoring The Main Question

1.2 Demonstrable Double Standards

1.3 A Biased Process

2 The Anglican Diocese of Tasmania as Respondent

3 Flaws in The VAD Philosophy

3.1 Misrepresenting Compassion, Mishandling Autonomy

Autonomy Made to Violate Life

Simplistic About Suffering

3.2 Destructive Implications

Implied Value Judgements

Cruel Real Choices

4 Flaws in the VAD Paper

4.1 Unquestioning Use of Sources

4.2 Misused Data, Poor Logic

4.3 Opposing Arguments Misunderstood

5 Flaws in the VAD System

5.1 Subjective Safeguards

5.2 Unrealistic Criteria

The Coercion Criteria – Voluntariness

The Inability to Choose Criteria – Mental Competence

The Not Sick Enough Criteria – Nature of Illness

6 Recommendations

6.1 Recommendation #1 – Withdraw the Proposal

6.2 Recommendation #2 – Improve the Health System, Especially Palliative Care

6.3 Recommendation #3 –Improve Awareness about End-of-Life Care

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

BISHOP’S PASTORAL LETTER: ABORTION LAW FOR TASMANIA?  UPDATE 16 March

Greetings in the name of our Lord Jesus Christ.

I have updated my letter of yesterday on this issue due to a) the Minister’s decision to extend the submission’s date and b) some editing to improve the text.

I regret that I have to write to you again to encourage you to write to our political leaders over a matter of great concern.

Last week Tasmania’s Minister for Health, The Hon. Michelle O’Byrne released a draft bill and consultation paper dealing with the legal framework for the termination of pregnancy.

As stated in my Pastoral Letter yesterday, 15 March, the paltry allowance for public consultation on the draft bill was reprehensible. I am pleased to say we received advice after my letter was distributed, that the Minister had agreed to extend the deadline for submissions on the Abortion law reform bill for two weeks. The new deadline is FRIDAY APRIL 5.

In presenting this draft legislation the Minister claims that she is not dealing with matters of principle, but simply making adjustments.  This is a facade.  The proposal is being brought as a Private Member’s Bill and is attracting a conscience vote for a reason: it deals with significant matters: matters of life and death.

The Bill provides for pregnancy termination on request until 24 weeks gestation and pregnancy termination with medical approval from that point until birth.

The Bill restricts freedom of conscience for medical professionals so that they are bound to facilitate access to termination providers.  Moreover, the Bill threatens anyone who provides any form of counselling (including church workers) with criminal sanction if they also do not facilitate access to termination providers.  There are a number of other restrictions on freedoms of conscience and freedoms of speech.

These measures may seek to move away from criminalising abortion, but they move towards the criminalising of dissent and disagreement on this matter.

There are some issues that are worthy of consideration in this Bill, including the issue of whether criminality is an appropriate form of regulation in some or all circumstances.

However, the proposal, in the main, can only be described as extremist.  It is far removed from even that position to which some hold as a pragmatic compromise, that termination should be “safe, legal, and rare.”

Up until 24 weeks a simple request for termination is required but there are no checks and balances to ensure that coercion of the mother is not apparent.

While rightly affirming the rights of women, this proposal simply ignores the humanity of the unborn children involved.  Up until 24 weeks gestation termination of the unborn is allowed on any grounds, including the gender of the child.

The 24 week threshold is not determined, as some might think, on the basis of the potential viability of the child.  It is on the grounds that tests for disability, including cleft palate and other less severe congenital abnormalities, cannot be conclusively undertaken until after 20 weeks gestation.

From 24 weeks the criteria for terminating the unborn baby are “the (two) medical practitioners must have regard to the woman’s current and future physical, psychological, economic and social circumstances”. Termination in late-term requires medical consent, not because of the child, but because termination in that period can have significant medical impact on the mother.

There is no balanced consideration of the child.  There is no consideration of the child at all.  Late-term termination necessarily requires that significant harm be done to the child in order to effect the termination.  The rights of that child, even limited rights such as a requirement that the child be anaesthetised before it is eliminated, are simply irrelevant to the proposal that Ms O’Byrne has tabled.

It is notable in all the information from the Minister that the sobering phrase ‘abortion on demand’ has been scrupulously avoided!

This proposal eschews any sense of responsibility that women (and men for that matter) should take in their sexual activity and so treats sexually active people as less than adult. The act of sex always retains a chance of pregnancy, no matter the precautions taken. It is never responsibility-free. There is no such thing as the right to pregnancy-free sex.

There is no mention in relation to the care of those women who have had abortions and have suffered trauma and guilt. We need to care for them.

One aspect of this horrible legislative rampage from a member of the Tasmanian Government is that it is not clear what role the public hospitals are expected to play in this process

Ms O’Byrne does not acknowledge that it is not only the potential legality of the procedure that is stopping doctors; it is that many doctors do not wish to provide the procedure or refer patients for a termination. This will not change with the legislation as much as the Minister believes it will.

It is interesting that in Victoria we are seeing anti-smoking advertisements for people to stop smoking as it could hurt their unborn baby. In NSW they are thinking about laws that could apply to drivers who kill unborn babies in drunk/reckless driving accidents. There is a certain irony in creating laws to allow the termination of pregnancy while at the same time spending money to protect unborn babies!

For every complex problem there is a simple solution… and it is wrong. Henry Mencken (1880-1956)

This is an abhorrent piece of legislation introduced by a minister in a government whose priorities appear to be the imposition of personal values during a rapidly disappearing time/ window of political opportunity.

I encourage you to write to the Minister, voicing your disapproval of this measure and outlining your concerns in your own words.

The Draft Bill and Consultation Paper can be found here: http://www.dhhs.tas.gov.au/pophealth/womens_health

Feedback must be in writing via email to public.health@dhhs.tas.gov.au or a hardcopy posted to Population Health Equity, GPO Box 125 Hobart, TAS, 7001.

All responses must be received by 5:00pm Friday 5 April 2013.

YOU HAVE UNTIL 5PM FRIDAY, APRIL 5 TO RESPOND. PLEASE RESPOND!

Yours sincerely in Christ’s service

Shalom

+John

Bishop of a deeply troubled Tasmania

http://www.examiner.com.au/story/1352311/give-us-time-church/

http://www.themercury.com.au/article/2013/03/09/374164_tasmania-news.html

http://www.smh.com.au/nsw/manslaughter-counts-for-unborn-babies-20130209-2e56k.html

My Pastoral Letter of 15 March (yesterday) is here.

REVD PETER GUILDFORD NORTH

Revd Roger Hesketh took the funeral of the Revd Peter Guilford North at St John’s Launceston on Thursday 21 February 2013.  Roger writes:

Peter will be deeply missed by his wife Joan and family.

Peter was a faithful servant of Christ serving for years as a lay reader before being ordained after his retirement as a Mining Engineer at Mt Lyell on the West Coast.

For the past decade and a half Peter’s ministry, very often complimented by Joan’s keyboard skills, has radiated out from Launceston taking services from St Helens to Queenstown, from Georgetown to Ross and seemingly most country churches and Nursing Homes in between.  Peter was always cheerfully willing to help out with a service wherever he might be asked.

A heart attack and a two year battle with cancer did not daunt his spirit nor his tireless service, it was not at all uncommon for him to take a couple of services in the Fingal Valley or the Northern midlands and then turn up as a member of the congregation at the evening service at St Johns.  Just a few days before his passing he was agreeing to take an Ash Wednesday service at a local nursing home, only to be headed off by the wiser head of Joan as she realised what was happening.

Peter’s family chose the very apt words of St Paul for his funeral service, “I have fought the good fight, I have finished the race, I have kept the faith.  Now there is in store for me the crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous Judge, will award to me on that day and not only to me, but also to all who have longed for his appearing.” (2 Timothy 4:7-8).

Well done good and faithful servant…enter into the joy of your master. 

God speaks. God speaks life. God speaks life to us.

Tasmania is experiencing a tumultuous summer. This new year has seen already many parts of our beautiful state affected by the destruction of bushfires.

As I mentioned in my pastoral letter at the time, in the wake of the bushfires have come ‘tear-streaked faces of broken dreams and the charred ruins of hard-won homes, businesses, farms, shacks and community facilities.’

In times of adversity our so-called ‘first world problems’ fade away.  The rawness of human frailty and the true sense of our community are revealed.  What we have seen on display are deep human bonds, generosity, empathy, goodwill, and cooperation from Tasmanians in all kinds of circumstances.  Such qualities are a deep blessing, for which we are grateful.

Tasmanian Anglicans have shared in the aftermath of this tragedy both directly and indirectly.  I am very grateful to the ministry of the local church teams, chaplaincy response through the Tasmanian Council of Churches, and Christian individuals who have demonstrated the love of Christ in practical ways.

Please continue to support their ministries in prayer, hands-on assistance where appropriate and through the Tasmanian Anglican Bushfire Appeal.  Some of you have already given to the Appeal and I am very grateful as this allows direct support through grass roots parish pastoral support to those affected by the bushfires.

In the midst of this tragedy I have been heartened by the witness of Christians who have faced the bushfires and bear loss.

As followers of Christ we are not immune to tragedy. Yet, we have a faith, a trust and a hope which strengthens us. The sure hope which Christ gives enables his followers to walk as he did, actively embracing and assisting the hurt and the vulnerable. This is so even when we have suffered ourselves.

Trusting in Christ’s strengthening presence we work and pray for the healing and recovery of our communities.

It is not without poignancy that our current bushfire season so soon followed our celebration and remembrance of the incarnation of Christ at Christmas.  As Christians we confidently call upon God in the midst of trauma and pain because we know that God knows of trauma and pain.

‘Immanuel: God with us’ is the heart of Christmas. Christ is ‘God with us’ and Christ lived this earthly life and experienced its joys and sorrows.

Our encounter with God in Christ is the key to our capacity to respond to suffering.

The Tasmanian bushfires, coming so hard on Christmas, remind us of Christ’s call to ‘come follow me’ in every circumstance of life and his promise, ‘I am with you always, to the end of the age’.

Truly, Christ is with us always, even in this bushfire season, assuring us of the strengthening and comfort of his presence, ‘Come to me, all you who are weary and burdened, and I will give you rest.’ (Matthew 11:28)

As we emerge from this tumultuous season of tragedy and trauma, let us not forget the burden of those who will need to rebuild and those assisting them.

We walk together in the sure hope and assurance of Christ’s presence that sustains us all: ‘Immanuel, God with us’.

May the Holy Spirit burn into our heads and hearts the promises of Christ in all the circumstances of this year.

** To read all the articles from the Tasmanian Anglican magazine, February 2013, please read here.

Local advocacy group, RealDignityTas, have recently published the following youtube clip.  It is  a response to the recent paper produced by Lara Giddings and Nick McKim, Voluntary Assisted Dying: A Proposal for Tasmania.

The Giddings-McKim paper accuses those who oppose euthanasia of relying on flawed and biased evidence.  This video demonstrates that the shoe is actually on the other foot.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VEwv0ajk0Zw[/youtube]