Not at all Pericles.

I am an Australian. My family first stepped onto Australian soil 7 generations ago. While 4 generations are buried in NZ 3 live in Aust. Common traits shared by immigrant Australians and NZers of similar heritage and Indigenous Australians are common and many. It is my belief the land we all live in shapes us. Newer arrivals do not share that experience and tend to have little understanding or appreciation of the depths it extends into the formation of todays unique Australian character.
I recognise we are much more adaptive, have greater connections to land and are far more egalitarian than groups who are more recently arrived in these lands.The voice of these newer arrivals dominate our literary elites and academics. These share now share a cringe beforehand anything foreign and they overwhelmingly promote anything other than our broader Australian culture. and older inhabitants.

Been away for the past 5 weeks.
This essay was/is so one-dimensional, as indeed is most of what is now promoted as religion in this time and place. And yes it sets up a false dichotomy.
Never mind of course that the usual church services are incredibly boring - the equivalent of junk-"food" for the soul.
These related references describe the nature of the consoling self-serving religiosity that Nina promotes.
http://www.dabase.org/up-1-1.htm
http://www.adidam.org/teaching/aletheon/truth-religion
http://global.adidam.org/books/gift-of-truth-itself

Nice article, Nina.
You've helped give some insight into the life, health and vibrancy of a modern church. I'm amused by the reaction you've drawn from some of those who have trouble handling the idea that attending church might just be a positive experience (most probably those who've rarely or never been.) Thanks for taking the trouble to put your thoughts out there.

One often hears news that the church in Australia is weak. That really depends on how what measure you use. In raw numbers of attendees, it is probably a lot down compared to the 1950s. But by other measures, it is very strong, perhaps stronger than it's ever been. Your stats comparing church to Aussies' love for footy are not made up. It's almost a poke in the eye to the Australian media who generally don't seem to want to like Christians.

From the media, you might get the impression that Australia is a country dominated by atheists. I think it's more a case that the media is dominated by atheists.

Another stat that comes to mind is the number of overseas Christian missionaries sent out by the Australian church. I think this compares quite favourably to the US in the ratio of missionaries to population (that's missionaries compared to national population, not missionaries compared to church attendees.) It's a stat which shows the underlying strength of belief. For while church attendance is higher in the US, going can be more socially acceptable there. Here a higher rate of people attend because they truly believe in it.

There's still a contradiction here, imajulianutter.

>>It is my belief the land we all live in shapes us.<<

Absolutely agree. Our entire history stands in evidence for this, does it not.

>>Newer arrivals do not share that experience and tend to have little understanding or appreciation of the depths it extends into the formation of todays unique Australian character.<<

But given your position above, surely you must accept that it is just a matter of time before the assimilation process takes over? I recall very clearly the ghetto mentality of various European groups - Italians and Greeks, predominantly - that persisted for many years through the fifties and into the sixties. A generation or so later, and you wouldn't tell them apart (except while the World Cup is on, of course, when parts of Sydney and Melbourne suddenly turn red, white and green...). I'm sure that the same will happen to what you describe as "newer arrivals" (I suspect you mean folks of Aisan descent), and the recent sign advertising "New: English services" at the church around the corner will become completely redundant.

But I suspect this may be your main problem:

>>The voice of these newer arrivals dominate our literary elites and academics.<<

I haven't seen any evidence of this, even at the recent Sydney Writers Festival. Can you give examples, perhaps? Here's a link to help you along:

http://www.swf.org.au/

Or are you working from another agenda completely?

Pericles

Part of the culture I belong to has a great openess. When someone in my culture has something to say they say it. It is rare in my culture to suspect others motives or to sssign to them the common characteristics of foreigners eg. Racism.

Therein lies our difference.There is ample evidence that this foreigness pervades sections of our culture. It is usually confined to elites and newer arrivals.

People who have roots extending back more than a couple of generations rarely exhibit such stupidity.

People who are more newly arrived do not understand that. As generations pass people here become influenced by the existing cultures and the attachment to land.
This is not something that occurd within one or two generations.
Our literature once highlighted that and once defined us.
That is no longer the case.

Look how few writers poets simply want to publish in Aust/nz. Most aspire to be internationally recognised. To do that the old Australian culture is shredded in the publishing process. Traditionally our Australian voice came from our communities not from academia or the elites .In our communities connections to the Australian culture and the land are still far stronger than the connections of newer arrivals (a self evident truth) and the inner city uni educated elites. Those groups dominate our media from publishing to tv news. And if you libed smong our cultute and communities you would understand the scorn towards these groups. That voice is censored by the elites and academia.

As an example ask an academic or modern poet what they think of simple rhyming verse.

That is a great australian tradition and stil loved by people of my culture.

You'll see from the elites and acadenics open derision and scorn. They all pretty well to a person prefer American Free Verse. And they are so bad at that, because of their conflict, they would be harangued in the same terms used by Poe.

Ps I am not uni educated nor part of any socialist elite. I am egalitarian.