David Barnabas Zwartz BTh (ACT) Dip Journalism (Wellington), known to his pals as Barney, is the religion editor of the Melbourne Age. But he also hideth several gleaming lights of his under a bushel, such as his close association with the Australian Presbyterian magazine and a lectureship at the Presbyterian Theological College (’Many stories of faith’, New Life, 22 Sept. 2005). Barney also confesses to have been pursuing a PhD at the University of Melbourne ‘since the early paleozoic period‘. (’Just call me Doctor’, Age, 22 Sept, 2003) Murray Adamthwaite, an occasional contributor to Salt Shakers Journal, claims that while the editor of the Age ‘is about as humanist as they come, … its religious affairs editor is nevertheless a thoroughgoing Presbyterian evangelical‘. (www.evangelical-times.org/articles/mar04/mar04a17.htm)

Now, I don’t care whether Zwartz is a Presbyterian or a Calathumpian, but I expect to be told clearly and often by the Age where its religion editor stands in the theological spectrum. In other words, I’d like Zwartz to ‘declare his interest’ much more openly and frequently, not just in the backwaters of the Australian Presbyterian or the Evangelical Times.

As a general rule, I like reading Barney’s stuff. He covers a wide range of religious issues, writes well, and I’m especially appreciative of the work he and (especially) his wife Morag have done in countering the influence of a pernicious Presbyterian cult known as the Fellowship. But too often he presents a conservative evangelical analysis without identifying himself as a member of that unlovely clan.

Take this para from an article about the film The Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe (’Puritan critics miss the real message of Narnia’s gentle charm’, Age, 27 Dec. 2005):

Certainly, Christians have a specific worldview, which they claim is both reasonable and internally coherent. Others [i.e. secular critics such as Polly Toynbee whom he is controverting here] … disagree - but they do so because they also have a worldview built apart from God.

This innocent-looking paragraph tucked away towards the end of Zwartz’s piece is in fact extremely tendentious, at once signalling to conservative evangelicals through his use of the ‘worldview’ buzzword that he’s a member of their club; and implying his right to speak for other, more moderate Christians, who in fact simply do not subscribe to conservative evangelical philosophy. There is not now, and it is most unlikely that there could ever be a single ‘Christian worldview’. Further, Barney’s assertion that secular thinkers ‘have a worldview built apart from God‘ is weaselly at best and entirely unsustainable. (My own idea of how the universe operates has a place for the concept of a god or gods, although it is not a particularly exalted location.)

Barney’s commitment to conservative evangelicalism often causes him to perform logical contortions that are painful to watch, and which must seem rather mysterious to the average reader. According to Barney, if you want to help someone else, you are demonstrating a ’spiritual hunger’ or ‘faith’, which shows that Australians are still basically religious or quasi-religious or groping towards the transcendent or something that he never seems quite able to put his finger on. (’Come all ye faithful: Australia’s enduring spirituality’, Age, 14-15 Apr. 2006):

… [F]aith, broadly defined, plays a more powerful role in people’s lives than ever. And one of the main ways it is manifested is in helping others.

…[I]nstitutional religion is in trouble, but not all of it, and faith of one sort or another is driving more Australians than ever.

Faith and works come together, and Australians seem to be keen on both.

The idea that people assist other people because the action benefits both parties materially and/or psychologically, and that ‘faith, broadly defined’ often has nothing whatever to do with it, seems foreign to Zwartz. I mean, ‘faith’ and ’spirituality’ have to be there somewhere, don’t they, or what would become of his ‘reasonable’ conservative evangelical worldview? Perfectly normal human actions and feelings thus have to be shoehorned into an ever-expanding concept of ‘faith’ regardless of whether they fit there or not.

So when you’re reading Barney’s articles in future, just remember where he’s coming from and the writing recipe he uses: I’d say about six parts sound material to one part pure religious claptrap.

Filed in: Evangelicals, People