I have been lucky. For the last ten years or so I have attended a church without discovering the political beliefs of the two ministers in charge during that time; this despite having been on Parish Council for the past five years and having participating in lots of Bible-study sessions. Alas, after only a few months, I am already making educated guesses about the political beliefs of the new minister. No names no pack drill.

In the last weeks I have had to put up with a reference to climate change and following that to rising sea levels. Apparently, he doesn’t at all like capitalism, I also learnt. This is seriously mistaken. There is only one alternative system to capitalism and that system produces abject poverty and untold misery. For sure, nuance can be brought to bear. This or that aspect of capitalism is bad and should be countered or compensated for, etc. But to my mind being anti-capitalist and a Christian is a contradiction in terms. Though many manage it, including the Archbishop of Canterbury and the Pope. C’est la vie – in today’s world.

I found it interesting on Sunday last that the minister saw a trade-off between caring for the world and caring for the people of the world. Obviously thinking that where economic progress occurs environmental damage inevitably occurs. But under an enlightened western culture and well-regulated capitalism we can have both. The Thames is cleaner than it was, etc. Fewer trees are cut for firewood and whales killed for their oil, when we have electricity fuelled by coal or gas, or by nuclear if CO2 worries you. Hint: best to steer clear of non-religious subjects in church and stick to God.

However, my point has nothing to do with Christian ministers have political beliefs, however misguided they might or might not be. It is to do with them being aired in church. In church we come together as a community, putting aside all differences, to praise God and be thankful for the grace given to us through the sacrifice of His Son our Lord Jesus Christ. Within that context, it is appropriate to pray for the poor and disadvantaged and for a just peace to prevail where there is conflict. That can be done, as it is laid out in the Book of Common Prayer or the Australian Prayer Book, without at all being political.

On Sunday we were also told that the Bible is very political, while also being told that Christ was non-political neither being a socialist or a Republican. Leaving aside the latter category error, I suppose bad and goods rulers and wars are part and parcel of the Old Testament. If that is political, it is political, but it hasn’t the least to do with our present day politics. Christ offended the Jewish authorities of his day. Clearly it would be nonsensical to drag that into any present-day political context. So the minister was right. Christ can’t be politically typecast. There is another clue in there about the way to conduct church services.

The minister claimed to be conservative. Only to define that as wanting to conserve the things he valued. E.g., “I want to conserve Aboriginal culture.” Now, Aboriginal people aren’t museum pieces. However, if some Aboriginal people want to preserve their own culture, in the sense of living it, so be it, provided it is not outside the law (e.g., mistreating womenfolk or spearing) and provided they don’t expect others to pay for it. Mind you, I simply don’t know what Aboriginal culture looks like in Australia circa 2024?

I notice Jacinta Price mentions cherishing indigenous culture in today’s Australian 60^th anniversary magazine. She might well have a better idea than me about what that means. Would it be like English Morris dancing or reenacting jousting on horseback like knights of old, or the occasional singing of traditional songs and cooking traditional foods. Is it a matter of remembering old ways and of ceremonial corroborees and the like? Clearly it cannot be living like Aboriginal people used to live before white men came. No one wants that.

In Romans 13, Paul instructs his followers to obey authorities. This strangely led in church to speculation from the pulpit on whether the Chinese should revolt or continue to be loyal to the Chinese communist party which, after all, “has lifted hundreds of millions out of poverty.” Yes, at this point, I wondered why in church on Sunday morning I was grappling with the poser of whether the CCP should or should not be overturned via violent revolution.

Finally to Mark 6: 11, where Jesus instructs his disciples to shake the dust from their feet when leaving places which do not welcome them. The minister noted that this was happening in Israel and claimed that Jesus was effectively remaking Israel into a land of those who believed in Him. He was “redefining what Israel meant.” “The land was no longer relevant.” OK, maybe, I don’t know. But to end with: “sadly, I don’t have the time to discuss the geopolitical implications of that for us today,” was somewhat pregnant with intimation.

What geopolitical implications does it have? None so far as I can see. But, rightly or wrongly, an Israeli might form a jaundiced view. Best to say nothing if you are not going to expand on the point. Or, to the point, simply best to say nothing.

Look, priests are entitled to hold political views, even those which differ from mine and yours. They should avoid preaching them from the pulpit, that is all. I would feel the same way in the highly unlikely event a Christian priest while sermonising extolled the political views of Donald Trump.