Much of City on a Hill founder Guy Mason’s Sunday night sermon is unusual. It’s held in a pub, for one, with arancini balls, hot wings and chicken tenders served. It comes off the back of a week of intense media scrutiny following the church’s chairman, Andrew Thorburn, stepping down as CEO of Essendon Football Club after just 30 hours in the role. And it includes an apology — Mason regrets comments he made in a 2013 sermon that compared “legal murder through medicine” to concentration camps.
“That particular reference to the Holocaust was not helpful,” Mason said on Sunday evening. “I didn’t intend it to be inflammatory. I was wrong. And I’m sorry for that. And 10 years on, I would use different words.” The sermon remains online but now includes an editor’s note.
City on a Hill is a conservative church that enlists progressive trappings. It was founded just 15 years ago in a pub — so people could “have a beer while we look at the Bible”. A band opens and closes the service, playing songs that discuss kneeling to, submitting to, and most of all loving Jesus. The vast majority of its 80-odd attendees are under 40, with many young and diverse faces in the crowd.
I end up chatting with Mason and director of ministry Stephanie Judd for an hour following the service. They’re generous with their time and are happy to debate topics like sin (though he wouldn’t tell me what his worst one was), the point of conception and the harmfulness of condemning same-sex attraction — responding thoughtfully to my questions about how these views can be cherrypicked to spout hate. The church is incredibly open and welcoming — even to a journalist.
The church is part of the Anglican Church and the US-led Acts 29 church planting network, which holds values including that “God has given to the man primary responsibility to lead his wife and family in accordance with the servant leadership and sacrificial love characterised by Jesus Christ”. Only qualified men can be elders or pastors, with eight white men holding that role at City on a Hill.
Recent sermons include controversial quotes on abortion (it’s “murder”), being transgender (it’s “destructive” and a fault of people’s “comprehension of reality”), and same-sex attraction (it’s “outside God’s intention”).
The church has sought to rectify some of these viewpoints, adding an update to its website advising people its content is being reviewed, with an explainer about the church’s beliefs using vague terminology about love, support and acceptance.
Sermons are picked via an online vote, with churchgoers rating what they’re most interested in. This one was supposed to be about abortion. Mason decided to leave that topic for another day.
He’s media savvy, coming from a background in public relations, and takes a keen interest in what’s being said about him online. A huge proportion of Sunday night’s sermon consists of him quoting what’s been said about the church in the media. He jokes about “framing” Victorian Premier Dan Andrews’ condemnation of the church’s views as “absolutely appalling”, “bigotry” and “intolerant”.
“I think I might frame these words and put them straight in the poolroom,” Mason said.
The church admits that many of its views are now considered counterculture and “minority” viewpoints, but while it will update sermons to discuss things not included in the Bible, such as climate change, its damaging beliefs about the “sinfulness” of gay sex remain unchanged.
Mason is also quick to pivot to victimhood. “I … lament that we’re now living in a culture that suggests that you could be cancelled because of your faith. To be cancelled because of your faith is a very dangerous idea,” he said.
“Blessed are you when people insult you … persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you”.
While it’s clear the church believes it can be compassionate while condemning people as sinners, the sermon is all about “loving Jesus”, with attendees urged to “pick up a Bible” to learn what that means, but there’s little discussion about what living a good Christian life means.
The only example of doing good revolves around praying with a severely depressed man. There are no details about helping him cope with the loss of his wife, rising inflation or solitude, but around converting him to Jesus, which Mason admits was difficult because the man was bent on his “frustration and anger at the health and legal systems that allowed” his wife to pass away.
Many members are quick to point to their gay friends who are also members of the church. They don’t discuss the rate of suicide among the LGBTQIA+ community, particularly for young people coming to terms with their sexuality within the confines of the church.
They also don’t discuss the fact that celibacy and excluding women from religious leadership roles were found to be key drivers of child sex abuse by the Royal Commission into Institutional Responses to Child Sexual Abuse.
While the church is attempting to rebrand itself as more accepting than previous sermons indicated, I don’t believe any of those sipping beer, wine and water walked away fully understanding how condemning those for their lifestyles is compatible with being accepting and compassionate to those their religion tells them are sinful.
As soon as I saw the photograph that is displayed at the head of this article I thought, “Where are the men in the white coats, when they are needed?”
Quite clearly, anyone who takes this religious nonsense with any degree of seriousness whatsoever is in urgent need of medical attention. The people who are the focus of this article are more to be pitied than condemned. My guess is that they are unlikely to represent any immediate threat to themselves or to others.
I am no stranger to mental health issues. Decades ago I was a welfare officer with a federal government instrumentality. At that time I dealt with staff who suffered from these sorts of problems. (I recall thinking at the time, at least these people are employed and have the chance to be referred to an appropriate clinic; what happens to the poor wretches who are on the streets and who suffer from a similar condition?)
Also, I have had close friends and family who have also been sick in this way. Clearly, the people who are the subject of this article (any religious believers actually) are not well.
None of us are well. We are all sinners in need of a Saviour (Jesus).
You’re using “we” to refer to religious believers right, specifically Christian religious believers?
I’m referring to every single human on this planet.
Judging ? Interesting ! Who gave you that right?
Peter, there are no limits to the ‘rights’ that religious followers (think they) have. They are completely delusional.
That role is like the ceo of essendon. Self appointed.
How very dare you!
Speak for yourself, the only person for whom you may be qualified to so do.
Even that is doubtful.
its a godbot
Thanks for the term. I am so going to call believers that now.
Pretty basic model, zeta rather than beta mode.
Thank you
How can you be referring to “every single human being” when so many are not in agreement with your views ?
Don’t go down that line. You see, when all sin is equal, no sin matters. That is why you will find a lot of people of faith equate choice of clothing as being on the same par as sexual assault. They’re incapable of understanding that serious crimes are much worse than dress codes. That is why they are so incompetent at preventing sexual abuse in their institutions. They cannot understand why we don’t blame the victims for their “sins”
Utter twaddle.
As long as we look inward and not outwards to help others, we are not obeying the COMMAND of Our Lord. Seems a very selfish way to worship a loving inclusive God
Bgo, thanks for your reply but I have nothing further to add (at this stage) to my original post.
I am certainly ima sinner in the narrow minded definition of churches like City on a Hill. But certainly do not need somebody called Jesus to save me.
No other major religion, there may some strange cults of which I am not aware, premises its very existence on sin, that brought about by “The Fall of Man” the “Original Sin”
For as a marketing device OS has done very well it has led to a belief in the general condition of sinfulness of the human race from birth, hence the Church is able to claim that it and only it is able to save those sinners.
OS as devised by Paul was continually used to beat those early followers of the erstwhile Jesus about the head & soul. But there was no evidence of OS until Paul came along.
Where did the erstwhile Jesus talk of OS? Where in the OT is there a mention of OS?
The Early Church took to it seriously as a way of controlling the flock. So seriously that later it was worked up into doctrine by Iraneus.
Understandable then why later on Pelagianism did so well. For if one can be at all rational about any religion why should it be accepted that a “sin” supposedly committed at the very beginning of “creation” can effect a new born child by placing them at birth in the general condition of sinfulness
Of course this was opposed, for it was cutting into the Church franchise in the Holy Roman Empire. Then along comes Augustine, the “saint” who wrote “Lord grant me chastity, but not yet” to argue against Pelagianism.
So much so that the early Church may have ended up like the Shakers. Augustine was definitely down on sexuality. Like all those Southern evangelists, who having wallowed in sin and fornication decide that no one else should.
Obviously if Augustine had had enough that was it for everyone else. He railed against concupiscence. But the Church needed all the “faithful” to reproduce to keep the franchise going, so much of what was in Augustine’s arguments was swept under the carpet.
However the later Protestant sects of various sorts took to Original Sin in a big way, following the Augustine line concerning concupiscence and ramping up the guilt trip.
Luther asserted that humans inherit Adamic guilt and are in a state of sin from the moment of conception. But somehow interestingly enough he also subscribed to that strange doctrine of the Immaculate conception.
Calvin believed that humans inherit Adamic guilt and are in a state of sin from the moment of conception. But he took it even further, for it is the basis for the Calvinistic doctrine of “total depravity.”
Resulting in a complete alienation from his, Calvin’s God, and the total inability of humans to achieve reconciliation with his, Calvin’s God, based on their own abilities.
Not only do individuals inherit a sinful nature due to Adam’s fall, but since he was the first representative of the human race, all whom he represented inherit the guilt of his sin.
What is that about “a sucker born every minute…
I knew the USA was in big(ger than I’d ever previously imagined) trouble early during the 2016 campaign when I began seeing more & more young people at Trump rallies.
As with the pic above – few of those visible would be over 30, 35 tops – how have they come to be there?
Whenever one hears of a religious conversion, esp to even wilder shores of the wide Sarasso sea of becalmed, stagnant cognitive function – a Bermuda Triangle of lost souls – it is never when they have been bopping along happily, content with life & its vitality & vicissitudes but always when at their most vulnerable and, arguably from the evidence of such a poor choice, lacking in judgement.
Religious youth groups were just another opportunity for borders at a same sex private school to get out and mingle with girls.
Probably much the same today, for those, as you say, vulnerable, and I add, lonely. They get invited by a friend and suddenly they have belonging and emotional amenity. Just add singing. Yay for group activities.
It’s well known that those from single sex schools go wildest, fastest as soon as they are released into the wild.
Co-educational school students are more circumspect, as they’ve become accustomed to the Other when growing up and have few,if any, illusions.
Perhaps those who attend single sexed schools are more cashed up? I am sure the curriculum is excellent for those who wish to learn.
not so as… Private Schooling money not well spent, as shown by this…a study by Monash University which found students from public schools outperform those from private schools when they reach university.
A survey of 12,500 first year Monash University students revealed public school students who left Year 12 with lower marks than their private school rivals overtook them academically at university.
….Once on a level playing field, students from non-selective government schools tend to do much better…
NB non selective, so they come from the standard state schools.
…Private school students have an advantage at exam time in Year 12 because they have access to more resources. However, this advantage evaporates when they reach university…
It is called spoonfeeding which operates well before Year 12. I worked in an Academic Library and am aware of the disparity between the students from the different systems.
….Once at university, public school students performed better academically in their first year compared with private school students who received similar ENTER scores.
Again no spoonfeeding.
…on average, government school students performed about five percentage points better than students from independent schools…
The study confirmed that private school students generally received higher Year 12 marks than those from the public system but showed that any edge gained was lost in the first year of a bachelor degree.
Again no spoonfeeding.
‘Secondary schooling, tertiary entry ranks and university performance’
Dobson, Ian; Skuja, Eric: People and Place,Vol. 13 No.1 April 2005 pp 53-62
ISSN 1039-4788
Australian Forum for Population Studies (Monash, Swinburne) Clayton VIC
Victoria at that time was the state with the highest percentage of students in so called , but in fact tax payer “independent” schools
Well hellalujah Freyja.
While it wasn’t your direct point, I will slightly counter this to say that while these people aren’t an immediate threat, they nevertheless are attempting to progress us down the same path as the (abused, politicised) evangelical Christians of America concerning restricting bodily autonomy. And this does in the end have deadly consequences for the women caught up in anti-abortion legislation.
It is a particularly useful time to have non-religious Australians step forward and say “enough is enough” and “keep your religion to yourself”. As such, stripping a religious figure of a public position isn’t victimization. It is common sense, just 50 years later than it ever should have been applied.
Sorry but CEO of an Aerial Pingpong Club isn’t a “public position”.
Not so as the AFL plays a significant public role across Victoria.
They even have a public holiday the day before the AFL Grand Final!
That’s just Victoria and the Grand Final is only held in Melbourne. It’s supposed to be the Australian Aerial Ping pong Association and even then, it’s a private company not a listed one. CEO of Essendon is not a “public position” really.
“Blessed are you when people insult you … persecute you and falsely say all kinds of evil against you”.
So this how such Christians bless gay people?
The things said about this mob are hardly false. Seems they have caught the Trump false news virus.
The tortured illogicality of this ‘religious’ nonsense is infuriating. ‘We do not hate gays. We just characterise them as ungodly and sub-human’. WHAT?. And when reasonable humans who are not gay but subscribe to human equality point out that brutal illogicality, these nutters immediately adopt victimhood. If you believe your imaginary friend (god) is opposed to the laws of your society and that there is definition of humanity that excludes many humans, you are not religious or pious, you believe in hatred, the very thing Jesus allegedly condemned.
The tortured illogicality of this ‘religious’ nonsense is infuriating. ‘We do not hate gays. We just characterise them as ungodly and sub-human’ … y’know, like cats
Very Sydney Anglican-like with its clever informality and use of PR obscuring some harsh ideas.
So, they’re against ‘condemning same-sex attraction’, they like pointing out that there are gay members in the congregation, but they see gay sex as ‘sinful’. Contradiction here, anybody?