This story is part of a series. For the full series, go here.
Australians entrust their political leaders with extraordinary powers in our secular Commonwealth, and Australians deserve a clear understanding of the major influences that guide their decisions. This applies to secular influences — such as their political philosophy, campaign donors and formative experiences. It also applies to the religious influences that sway them as they discharge their duties.
But when we start asking questions about Scott Morrison’s religious beliefs and their impact on his political behaviour, some Australians start to feel nervous — as if they are intruding on an entirely private domain. As a fellow God-botherer — indeed, as someone who attended the same Christian fellowship as a member of Parliament — let me assure you that it is wholly legitimate to want to understand what drives your prime minister.
There is nothing unreasonable, let alone anti-Christian, about having an open and honest discussion about the role of faith in politics, so long as this debate is grounded in evidence, fact and reason.
In Morrison’s case, the reasons to have this debate are manifold. The prime minister is an ideological chameleon who follows the prevailing winds of polling on most aspects of public policy. His wholesale junking of any semblance of fiscal or economic conservatism is just one case in point. Indeed, his only consistent stance appears to be that he is a devout Pentecostal who draws political inspiration from that faith.
Morrison was eager to play Christian identity politics by inviting cameras into his church during the last election campaign. But he has steadfastly refused to explain how his politics are informed by his Pentecostal faith — a branch of the Christian family tree about which most Australians, even most practising Christians, still know very little.
If Morrison is a thoughtful Christian, it shouldn’t be difficult for him to fill in the detail. When I was in opposition, I wrote a 6500-word essay on faith in politics because I believed that, as a prospective national leader, voters deserved to know what they might be buying. There is no reason Morrison shouldn’t do the same — unless, of course, he thinks that Australians won’t like the answers.
Pentecostals can be found across the political spectrum and, as in most denominations, individual worshippers are good, honest folks with a variety of political backgrounds who also may accept or reject different tenets of the Pentecostal tradition. However, the worldview of a number of Pentecostal leaders can often be well outside the Australian political mainstream.
These leaders often preach a highly individualised “health and wealth gospel” that if you are godly, then you will also be healthy and wealthy. For example, Hillsong founder Brian Houston’s book You Need More Money infamously linked divine blessing to being a “money magnet”. This is often accompanied by a deeply fundamentalist attitude to questions of human sexuality and reluctance to embrace basic science on critical questions such as climate change and human evolution.
Australians should not feel intimidated about asking questions about Morrison’s relationship with Houston, whom he publicly describes as his spiritual mentor. Morrison has a well-known blind spot where Houston is concerned. In 2017, a royal commission found the preacher did not report his father’s admissions of child sexual abuse to police and ignored other church rules to protect him. Despite this, the prime minister sparked a minor international incident by attempting to secure Houston an invitation to Donald Trump’s White House. After he was rejected, Morrison evaded questions about whether he had even sought the invitation.
Houston has since been charged by NSW Police with concealing abuse (his lawyer says he will plead not guilty). This is but one of a series of troubling allegations raised against prominent Hillsong pastors around the world in recent years.
Australians — progressive and conservative, believers and non-believers — treasure our secular democracy and fear it being chipped away by the sort of religious fundamentalism seen in parts of the US Congress. This is not an unrealistic fear, given how Pentecostal churches have become an active recruiting ground for conservative factions of the Liberal Party — a self-appointed God’s Army intent on pushing their party further to the far-right and further marginalising the dwindling band of secular Liberals on the centre-right.
Sadly, instead of leading through openness and honesty about his religious beliefs, Morrison has left Australians in the dark to speculate about his worldview by interpreting grainy iPhone footage of his remarks to the Australian Christian Churches earlier this year. And that secret speech causes me some concern about Morrison’s respect for the separation of church and state. As prime minster of a secular state, you don’t give secret speeches to any group.
First, Morrison in that speech spoke about physically involving Australians in religious rituals, such as laying on of hands, without their consent. When the prime minister tours natural disaster shelters, he is there in his secular office, not as the nation’s high priest. If he wants to lay hands on people to impart the healing power of prayer, he can ask their permission; that he doesn’t seek consent implies he already knows how they might react.
Second, Morrison expressed the view that humans can’t fix the world’s problems; it is God’s responsibility, and what the world simply needs is the growth of the church. At the very least, this logic may explain Morrison’s disinterest in effective climate action. It could also hint to Morrison’s belief in the apocalyptic tradition among some Pentecostals that political action to resolve human or environmental problems is redundant simply because Christ’s eventual return will herald the end times. When voters cast their ballots, they deserve to know whether Morrison believes mortal problems can be solved by mortals.
Third, there is a broader question about how Morrison views the relationship between his office and God. Morrison’s speech suggests he identifies with the kings and prophets of the Old Testament who claimed God spoke to them directly. Morrison’s speech recalled receiving a message from God through a painting of an eagle during the last election campaign, reassuring him of divine support in his partisan struggle against the Labor Party. Again, Australians deserve to know from Morrison: how does he believe God communicates with prime ministers?
Morrison shouldn’t be attacked for his faith; rather, he should have the political courage and moral fortitude to open up to Australians about how it informs his worldview. It shouldn’t be hard — unless, of course, he has something to hide.
I remember the days when (especially new) leaders were expected to give extended interviews (up to an hour) with respected (not sycophantic) TV journalists in order to expand on their world view, formative influences, plans for Australia etc. Indeed, many sought the opportunity, but today, they would rather hide under a rock than engage in what is still regarded as required activity in many other “democracies”. I could suggest that the media should demand it, but that would be naive.
We need to ask why this no longer happens in Australia, and in the same vein, why do we no longer have election rallies, unlike most of the “democratic” world? Our leaders (sic)- pathetic little creatures, hiding from any notion of accountability to the people who employ them.
The demise of election rallies mostly reflects the collapse of mass movement politics. Go back several decades and the major parties had much larger branch memberships and were healthier for it, and the public was also much more likely to attend public meetings or rallies and pay attention to what was said. Now the branches are easily taken over by small unrepresentative groups of very strange people, even without the pernicious practice of branch stacking.
The other major development over the same time is a collapse in the major parties of any respect for parliamentary democracy. Parliament was supposed to be the sovereign body where the voice of the people would be heard through their representatives, calling to account the executive etc etc. Now it is treated as an annoying and obsolete obstacle, tolerated only because it is too difficult to abolish it. Debates are poorly attended and nobody cares what is said, the voting is determined beforehand anyway. Government annnouncements that should be made first to parliament are instead made to the press or social media; a clear display of contempt. The government restricts the sitting of parliament, prevents debates, blocks inquiries and abuses its control of the parliamentary timetable. Parliamentary committees are stacked with government stooges who sabotage their work for partisan advantage. Nobody cares, it’s all routine now.
Elections are equally corrupted and nonsensical. Any politician with a clue does not seek public support but instead works through the party system to achieve the sinecure of a safe seat. The results of elections are not decided by the electorate as a whole, instead there is a fierce fight to tip a handful of votes in a very few marginal seats, by whatever means it takes, while the rest of the country is ignored. It’s a total farce.
Thanks SSR. Deeply sad reading of content. Who would have thought our parliamentary system now no more than a tool for aspirants to rape.
The product of Dumb and Dumber is an easily achieved dishonestly elected dictatorship. We have examples of successful minority governments in this country and overseas. The exceptions appear to be in countries with a religious base or a non-representative press.
A classic example of the power of the press can be seen in the free ride given to a Liberal government in NSW and its assistant the PM that has been the incubator of all the Delta strain breakouts . Aided and abetted by the right-wing press when the s—t hits the fan because of failure to lock down it’s all hands on deck and its “where can we beg borrow or steal vaccines” on the QT..They did not handle the Ruby Princess disaster despite weeks of advance notice and when the Delta variant arrived there was no control of arriving flight crew leading to the export of Delta to other states and N.Z.The right-wing press massively underreported this. In whose best interest was this.
Compare this to the Victorian situation. In the very early days of the pandemic, the PM advised the Vics we have planes in the air with people who will need to be quarantined, and it’s your job to accommodate them within the next 36 hours. There were problems that resulted in many deaths. The majority of these deaths were in understaffed nursing homes controlled by the Morrison government. The right-wing press led by the usual pathetic media Barrons continues to attempt to score points from a distorted presentation of the facts to benefit the Liberals’
We do not have the luxury of elected dictatorships continuing to obfuscate as the world speeds to the climate change tipping point. The leadership required is out there. The ABC program Q and A has over the last weeks has shown this. By far the most impressive leaders have been the nonparty young and brilliant people who will have to suffer our greed-induced climate change
Listen to Twiggy Forest,Simon Holmes a Court, ,Helen Haines, Zalli Stegall Andrew Wilkie,Senator Patrick and others or prepare for the ravages of climate change.
Can you imagine any of the current batch of pollies being capable of speaking extemporaneously?
On a range of subjects without notice?
And then portraying a vision or even a plan worthy of the name?
That thought did occur to me. In the same vein, imagine a parliamentary debate on foreign policy, you couldn’t assemble three speakers who’d ever read a book on the subject. They might have coloured one in.
Re rallies: in addition to the collapse of mass movement politics, perhaps compulsory voting plays a role (the Yanks and the Poms can still put on a decent rally)- no need to fire up the base to in turn motivate the potential non-voter? And, I think we can rule out a witty (Menzies or Whitlam-like) riposte to any smart-arse interjector.
Thank you Kevin for your clear insight. For me, the individualised “health and wealth gospel” feels distinctly un-Christian. Where is the care for the poor, downtrodden, abused and disabled?
Christians might kid themselves that Morrison is on their side, but his form of Christianity is far from the world view of mainstream Christian churches.
And for throwing the money lenders out of the temple, rather than creating new temples for them alone.
The “health and wealth gospel” is not really so far from mainstream Christianity, at least from the time the Church achieved state recognition and became the doctrine of the Roman empire. It owes a lot to the ‘just world fallacy’ that is evident in the views of many people of all backgrounds (not only Christians) who are convinced that the personal condition of each of us must be, at least to some extent, exactly what we deserve. This should not be surprising when these Christians begin with the premise their God is omnipotent, loving, good and just. Therefore it is absurd to think there is any injustice in the world. It is of course a very comforting view to hold because at a stroke everything is all right and needs no remedy, even if it does not quite look that way at first glance.
It’s also worth taking a look at how far the medieval Catholic church went to crush factions that tried to argue against excessive or ostentatious wealth. They were literally put the sword and their leaders sentenced to death for heresy. The Franciscans narrowly survived but mostly these groups were obliterated. In modern times the Catholic church crushed ‘liberation theology’ for much the same reasons.
I think they need to bring back indulgences, ssr.
They don ‘t need to, they are now called donations, bequests and tithes. The lifeblood of joints like Hillsong.
Donald Trump himself Wes amassed at this nice little he’d missed out on.
I actually thought the prosperity religions sprang from a pentecostal televangelist who misheard or misunderstood a line from the Nicene Creed ( AD 381 revision) as being “Who spake by the profits” and saw that as a means of justifying the massive personal estates accruing to those who, like him, lived on the proceeds of deceiving the unwary.
I always like to look at the new Zealand view of matters impacting both nations.A recent poll in N.Z.on the public trust in religion placed the Evangelicals at the bottom of the list and Buddhists at the top of a list of approximately ten .
Our PM has made it very clear that he is the one selected by his God to be PM .How much of his decision making does he believe is guided from above . Someone is not doing a very good job at the moment could this be the PM or has his God deserted him .Has the PM lost the plot
I always thought if I was held down and tortured and made to choose a religion/ belief system, then I would have to be a Buddhist. Seeing I’m not a stupid,mean and nasty bastard evangelicalism could not be for me.
I would resit the torture and go to my grave. Changed my mind think I will go into politics .
Morrison’s type of Christianity looks very suss to me – and I went to Anglican schools.
Mr. Rudd did briefly refer to the child abuse / child rape issues, which indicate that these churches have moved into the realm of genuine christian religions. With a bit more expansion, pentecostalism will begin to be equally as evil as the religions run from Rome and Canterbury.
Except not as powerful yet. We don’t see anglican or catholic leaders being charged for similar crimes.
OK, so Brian Houston is in Australia to defend his failure to act appropriately by reporting his father to the police for child sexual abuse.
The Pentecostals are richer and certainly more powerful than the average Anglican church in Australia.
Pell
To Helll
Remember that morrison’s form of christianity underpinned oppressive witch hunts such as RoboDebt and the decision by the leader of his church that ultimately led to that person (morrison’s self acknowledged mentor who was the person about whom morrison lied on national television in regard to attempts to get that person invited to the White House, then occupied by trump) is being charged in relation to a decision not to report a pedophile to the police. I’m sure that there is a form of christianity that one can respect but that doesn’t appeear to make the grade
Christianist is the term used by Andrew Sullivan a conservative, gay, Catholic author and blogger in 2003 concerning the then President, Dubya, The Faux Texan and his push concerning a “Faith Based Administration”, as we can see now here in Australia with The Happy Clapper and his Brethren.
“I have a new term for those on the fringes of the religious right who have used the Gospels to perpetuate their own aspirations for power, control and oppression: Christianists.
Interestingly Sullivan first used the word “Christianist” in 2003 to describe Eric Rudolph, the US religious terrorist, convicted for a series of anti-abortion and anti-gay-motivated bombings across the southern United States between 1996 and 1998, which killed three people and injured 150 others. Rudolph also planted the bomb at the 1996 Atlanta Olympic Games.
“Christianism is an ideology, politics, an ism. The distinction between Christian and Christianist echoes the distinction we make between Muslim and Islamist. Muslims are those who follow Islam. Islamists are those who want to wield Islam as a political force and conflate state and mosque. …It is the belief that religion dictates politics and that politics should dictate the laws for everyone, Christian and non-Christian alike.”
“But any pretense of a religious foundation for Christianism breaks down on many of the issues Christianists now consider their highest priority — cutting social services, blocking access to health care, lowering taxes, undermining public education, repealing restrictions on the ownership and use of firearms, endorsing harsh law enforcement methods and restrictions on the right to vote in communities of color, defending the Mexican border, and closing the door to refugees, to name a fe
I profoundly disagree with Rudd staring Morrison should not be “attacked” because of his faith. I reserve fully the right to criticise ( my interpretation of attack ) his religious beliefs. I’m firmly in the Hitchens school – all religions are inherently evil. I don’t care if its tub thumping prosperity gospel Pentecostals ( headed by child abusers), the Catholics ( an international organisation protecting criminally abusive clergy while supplying them with generatiin after generation of fresh victims), fundamentalist Muslims, Hindu fundamentalists or rapacious monks in Buddhism. They are invariably men ( women and children almost invariably being relegated to lower status ) with a list for power who con others into believing they have a special conduit to the almighty. Or worse – are so delusional they believe the almighty communuicates to them. Australia is a deeply secular country. Of the Census religious option questions were not drafted to deliberately but artificially inflate their numbers, our secular stats would be more accurate. I point to the Voluntary Assisted Dying debates as an example of how religious extremism subverts democracy. Poll after poll shows 80%+ support for VAD. Yet for decades VAD legislation was held back by anti democratic religious fanatics seeking to impose their religious values on a massive majority who do not want to be bound by polling religious views. The VAD delaying tactics just succeeded in NSW – so its off the agenda till next year. The religiously based attacks on democracy, free will, science and reason require trenchant counter-attack.
As Karl Marxs said religion is the opiate of the Masses .It was a means of control. Nothing has changed and we should worry when religious minority groups distort the political process.I believe we are entitled to ask, does the person of faith believe God created the world in six days? If so are decisions be made in the belief God will save us because it will only take a day to repair the damage done by the refusal to address climate change? Who is making the decisions Man or God ??
Given that many seem to be preadapted to accepting faith over evidence, and/or have been raised in a social system that accepts indoctrination of our youth into the beliefs of their parents, then we cannot really heap blame on those subjects of religious indoctrination. Similarly, there is evidence that individuals vary considerably in their attitudes to self reliance or cooperative behaviour, both through genetic and social factors. Hence, we might argue that individuals can’t be blamed for the religious or political views that they hold.
However, we, the human population, face huge problems in overpopulation, global warming. habitat destruction, decline in social capital and rising inequality, all of which threaten our well being. If someone has accepted a belief system that lacks or defies evidence, then it seems their capability for rational thought has been compromised. This may not matter; some are able to quarantine those beliefs from their general activities, others may turn their religious beliefs to worthwhile causes, but if we are to survive the threats to our existence we desperately need more rational and communitarian behaviour amongst our leaders. This present lot in Australia seem to lack both of these qualities, and their behaviour is antithetical to our survival on the planet. .