And thus John kosci provides a prime example why this article won't help the church.

Put simply - if the church wishes to reverse its decline, it will need to engage people outside the religious focus - articles that simply state that the church is failing because it isn't accepted as an absolute truth won't engage anyone but devoted Christians.

They will only generate a chorus of agreement from those already enmeshed within that belief framework.

Those who aren't convinced will hardly be engaged with such blatant disregard for other ideologies.

Mr Sellick. What Australian Church please? I've heard of many but never an Australian Church. Is it a new cult or just another like the Exclusive Brethren that hides in the shadows and follows lifestyles more relevant to cave men than today's humans?

If you are so desperate for martyrs why don't you volunteer?

That way we wouldn't have this garbage being printed at all.

Hands up anyone who agrees Pete should be at the head of the volunteer queue? After all he really wants someone to die so the church can validate itself.

Now Pete. I'd suggest a cross would be best. And let's nail you to it and stand you at the top of a small hill. Say, near Parliament House where Howard and Rudd can prove their Christian values by worshipping you. Oh, and they could spirit you away to a doctor and then claim resurrection. Now why didn't anyone else think of that?

And do remember Pete that there actually was a supposed martyr for ALL christians. Or doesn't he count for Aussies?

"If the gospel is about truth how come students are expected to decide for themselves? We do not undermine other disciplines in this way. What if we told them that they must make up their own minds about chemistry or history?"

Maybe a deal with the state which allows myth to be taught to impressionable children as one view of truth. Perhaps the gospel should be treated on the basis of what is verifiable and consistent with the observed universe. We could then treat it in a similar manner to the way alchemy is treated in the chemistry classroom.

If historical precident is important perhaps we should be teaching about the dreamtime as truth, it has a far longer history than Sell's more recent unproven truth.

R0bert

To see why we need a separation of church and state, read this article. Every religion has its zealots dreaming of blood and martyrdom, but no sane society allows that kind of mentality to drive public policy.

This whole argument is a kind of curious reversal of what I think of as a normal view of the world. That is, most of us PREFER to live in a country where religion is not a life or death matter.

"Wars are not about religion? How about Ireland's ‘troubles’? Iraq’s religious war. Recent bombings in India. Israel and Palestine."

Get a life ybgirp! Like the 'humanitarian interventions' in the former Republic of Yugoslavia, underpinning the 'troubles' in Ireland and the other 'Economies' you cite are the 'strategic' plans by the Capitalist colonisers-imperialists to divide local populations and exploit their coveted natural resources and 'cheap labour'.

'Religious intolerance' is simply a smokescreen

Poor Sells, from the vehemence of some of these responses, martyrdom may not be such a remote prospect!

We should treat our martyrs carefully. Yheir commitment and courage are inspiring, but we should beware the creepy sado-masochism that infused some of the preoccupation with martyrdom in the early church, middle ages and reformation. Some of the gory paintings of martyrdoms from old European churches would make Tarantino blench.

Fanatics court transformative death and suffering, and it can be is a short step from being willing to die for one’s faith, to being willing to kill for it. Fox’s book of martyrs may have been inspiring, but it was also coarse propaganda filled with lurid exaggerations that fuelled the persecution of Roman Catholics. In our era, suicide bombers exemplify the potentially toxic mix of (perceived) purity of purpose, totality of commitment and willingness to die for a cause.

Old soldiers may have fond memories of the comradeship of battle even if they the true horrors of war. We may wish for the effects shared suffering produces, we should not wish for the suffering itself.

I agree the Church has a prophetic duty to critique society. We can’t do that if we’re too comfortably integrated into social structures around us, nor if we stand to gain too much from the patronage of the establishment. Nor should we be intimidated into silence by those who interpret the principle of separation of church and state as meaning that the Church has no legitimate voice in politics. But a touch of humility might be called for, as we consider both the diversity of views on most political issues within the churches, and the dumb and ill-informed political comments some church leaders are wont to make as they seek to use their positions to impose their ideological prejudices.

Christians are members of society not just commentators on it, and – as the protestant martyrs of the reformation understood very clearly – Christ’s message is best communicated to people in language they understand and though the culture and symbols of their everyday lives.