Shhhhh! Don't Mention the Aboriginal Problem!

The Sydney Episcopalian Diocese has long struggled to have an effective ministry to Aboriginals. This is sad when one considers the geographic area of Australia that became Sydney had been the area of establishing European Settlement and has thus presented European Christians in Sydney with the most eduring contact and association with the earlier inhabitants of the land.

This will be admitted by Sydney Episcopalians who are genuine in confronting reality. Stephen Judd and Kenneth Cable acknowledge the early failing of Sydney Episcopalians in their book 'Sydney Anglicans'. On page 13 of the book they say "But in the main the Church, and its patrons, were not frontier-conscious. Some clergymen were; most were not: it had become a matter of individual interest. The same applied to concern for aboriginals." Little else can be found in that book to help attain a worthwhile understanding of how Christians failed to 'reach' Aboriginals in suitable scale.

Love demands that evaluate our approach to evangelising Aboriginals because we certainly need to improve. So we need to learn from the failings of the past and we also need to avoid exacerbating the problem by giving further insult to our 'Brothers in Adam'.

In this latter category are those of the Sydney Episcopalian Church who adopt a Theistic Evolution view of origins. The Book they present to Aboriginals as the Word of God, inspired by God's Holy Spirit, gives clear indication that, according to the genealogies contained therein, the world is well under 10,000 years old. Immediately a discordance arises in the mind of Aboriginals because they are being taught, even by Theistic Evolutionists, that Aboriginals have been on this great island for 40,000 years or more.

Having had a long association with land, the Aboriginal is inclined to favour the older date and this immediately calls into question, in his mind, the integrity of this so-called 'Word of God'. Further, difficulty arises when Theistic Evolutionists, as they logically must, question whether Aboriginals are actually descendants of Adam.

Dare I say it - 'There is nothing knew under the sun' - the problems of yesterday will visit today and all they while Sydney Episcopalians will continue to fail to have an effective evangelical ministry to Aboriginals.

A help to redress the problem is to draw from the ministry of the late Reverend Lancelot Threlkeld (not Episcopalian) as recorded in the book; - 'Australian Reminiscences & Papers of L.E Threlkeld - Missionary to the Aborigines 1824-1859', Edited by Niel Gunson published by Australian Institute of Aboriginal Studies, Canberra, ACT 1974. It is a two volume work and I thoroughly recommend the work for understanding the times before and after the introduction of Europeans to Aboriginals. Lancelot Threlkeld was missionary to Aboriginals in the Lake Macquarie region of New South Wales, just north of Sydney.

For the sake of brevity I can only draw out a few anecdotes to make my case.

In his introduction, Niel Gunson reflects on the failure of Christians in evangelising Aboriginals. He adequately addresses the morality of non Christians having ill effect on Aboriginals as well as the patronising approach adopted by the white man to the Aboriginal. But it is two other points he makes which I want to mention.

On pages 8 and 9 Gunson says - "Secondly, Christianity as preached to the Aboriginals was simply a new mythology which seemed to have less bearing on their environment than their own traditional religion. In Polynesia the Calvinistic pantheon of Jesus and Jehovah could be put to the test against the Polynesian pantheon Ta'aroa and Tane, and if the old gods visibly failed, the new ones could be proved superior. Naturally, as in all such cases, the new gods triumphed. The missionaries took over from that point. Such tests could only be made in a polytheistic society. It was impossible to shift the Aboriginals from their almost mystical sense of their own religious experience. They possessed their own spiritual values, and the white man's religion as presented to them in Evangelical terms did not make much sense. Christianity, in its traditional form, was only significant to the Aboriginal when he had lost the 'old faith' of his ancestors. This is in part a judgement on Evangelical doctrines as they usually postulate a cosmology which is both arbitrary and and improbable. Christianity could only be relevant to the Aboriginal when he came face to face with a Christian spirit in the context of his own traditional religion. With the Polynesians it was easier to make a clean sweep - demolish all the old gods by the methods used by Elijah with the priests of Baal. With the Aboriginals, their awareness of the universe was too real to withstand the arbitrary claims of Western Christianity. It was not necessarily Christianity which had failed, but the missionaries because of their limited vision.

Thirdly, from the beginnings of contact, the missionaries were affected by their own pessimistic beliefs regarding the Aboriginals. This pessimism was closely related to the theological views prevailing in the early nineteenth century, particularly among the Calvinists and Wesleyans. There was a strong belief, founded on a literal acceptance of everything in the Old Testament, that some tribes lay outside the scheme of salvation. One of the reasons for the Protestants neglecting missionary enterprise in the Reformation period had been the belief that the primitive races of South America were given over to damnation because of the sins of their ancestors [the curse on Canaan]. The same suspicions were held of the Aboriginals. Thus the Reverend William Walker, who had been appointed missionary to the Aboriginals by the Wesleyans wrote pessimistically to the Reverend R. Watson, in October 1821, that the Aboriginals were 'the progeny of him who was cursed to be "a servant of servants to his brethren" ', and he listed reasons why he believed them to be 'emigrants from the same stock that shall soon stretch out its hands unto God'. Similar statements could be collected from the correspondence of other early religious leaders in the colony. Even the most successful missionaries seemed to be tainted by these views."

Gunson intimates not so with Lancelot Threlkeld. On page 91 an extract of Threlkeld's memoranda for Wednesday 14 December 1825 reveals "At this period the general opinion of the Colony was respecting the Blacks, was that they were incapable of instruction, this Mr [Samuel] Marsden frequently avowed. Others supposed that they were species of Baboon, and had no regular language. A French man of war arrived, and the medical Philosopher, (falsely so called) endeavoured to confirm the opinion. Saxe Bannister Esquire in a postscript to a note sent to me at this time states, that: 'The French medical Gentleman has confirmed my opinion of the innate deficiency of these poor people by a careful examination of many heads.' I ventured my opinion in the following postscript to that Gentleman: Perhaps the Aborigines think that there is an innate deficiency in the bulk of white men's skulls, which prevents their attainment of the native language. I feel exceedingly happy that the French examination ended in the head, for my business lies wholly with an organ that has escaped their notice, namely: The Heart; but, had they even searched, and found an innate deficiency in that organ, I would have then smiled, and retorted, my trust is in him who has said: 'A new heart will I create within them.' May the heads of the French be more clear to see the state of their hearts, at present ignorant of the Divine influence of the Spirit of Christ to bring men from nature's darkness into his glorious light.' [It appears that Threlkeld makes a later note in this segment of his memoranda. He says in 1838] I have no reason to alter my opinion of the capabilities of the Blacks at this date 1838 nor of the perfectness of their language."

The reminiscences are rich with anecdotes of how Lancelot Threlkeld regarded the Aboriginal as his fellow man albeit, to that time, far removed from relation from God in belief and habit.

If Gunson is right to describe as literalists those who were pessimistic toward the hope of Aboriginals for salvation then I must say they were literally limited in their reading of Scripture. It is really stretching the curse on Ham's son Canaan to exclude all his descendants from salvation - for, is it not "God ... who wants all men to be saved and come to knowledge of the truth"? Indeed, are we not to accept that Rahab, the prostitute of Jericho, has been adopted into the Lord Jesus? Was she not of Canaan? As the Reformers prescribe, we must interpret Scripture with Scripture and those who failed to do this when considering the curse on Ham's son Canaan have most dangerously squandered evangelistic opportunity and, in the exteme, have themselves cursed the descendants of Canaan.

As concerning Gunson's point about evangelising Aboriginals we can only concur in criticising any methodology which uses only part of the Gospel. Many Sydney Episcopalians warrant criticism for emphasising the New Testament almost to the exclusion of the Old Testament. This will not work well enough with the religious belief and legends of the Aboriginals. The Biblical Creationist has a cosmology and world history which can be rightly explained through the filter of Aboriginal culture and history. One example is the flood in the time of the man Noah. This relates well with the Aboriginal legend of a great flood with only a few survivors. Indeed the New Tribes Mission has developed the 'Firm Foundations' method to evangelism which is the whole of Gospel message for remote area cultures.

Further, is this not the approach used by the Apostle Paul when the Athenians could not at first grasp the message of a crucified Christ (Acts 17). On this point I provide another extract from page 62 of Lancelot Threlkeld's Reminiscences: commenting on the Scriptural passage 'The world by wisdom knew not God.' Threlkeld said "it matters not whether Athens, or Australia, the fact is the same, an unmistakable evidence of the truth of holy writ as declared by the Apostle Paul ........ In that classical region called 'the shop of the Gods', 'a city crammed with temples, a country so filled with deities that you may easier find a god than a man, a pantheon of the world having one temple in common to all the gods,' and one altar with this inscription: - 'TO THE UNKNOWN GOD' whom they ignorantly worshipped until the despised babbler, the Apostle Paul, declared him unto the men of Athens: - What, then, could be expected from men sunk into the lowest scale of degradation in regard to the knowledge of the Almighty as the Aborigines of Australia ......... Speaking to M'Gill, the aborigine who was with me in the boat, on the subject, and supposing that he were in a canoe and overtaken with such a gale of wind as was then blowing, and if he were sinking, on enquiring of him was there any being on whom he would cry? He said. 'yes, there was Koun'. On asking him what he would say, his reply was, 'Koun tia;' - literally ...... meaning look to me, or save me, just whatever the mind intended to the understood ellipses. This led me to further enquiry and the description given to me was that he had three names; - Koun, Tippakál, and Por-ang, that he was a male being, who was always as he is now; in appearance like a Black, that he resides in the thick bushes or jungles, occasionally appearing by day but mostly by night .... Tippakál the name of the male being, kál the masculine termination .... Koun is a name remarkable from its singular construction, the word is pronounced so as to rhyme with the English word cone. According to the structure of the language K denotes Being; O, purpose; U, power; N, potentiality, which combined forms, the name of the unknown Being, KOUN .... Porrang taken from Pórr, the root of to fall down, to drop, to be born, and no doubt has reference to his drop[p]ing his prey by the fire-side unhurt."

Surely this presented an excellent opportunity for evangelism.

Another example whereby Biblical Creationists have the message to fit the beliefs of Aboriginals (and other cultures for that matter) concerns some creatures they encountered which do not fit the world's view of reality. On page 78 Gunson, in a footnote, says that "Bunyip stories rivaling those of the Loch Ness Monster were a commonplace of Aboriginal lore in the coastal regions of southeastern Australia." Gunson also includes the following quote from a French researcher of the days of the Colony: "Dans l'eau le War-wi monstre amphibie qu'ils décrivent comme un crocodile pour la longueur, et qu'ils disent habiter les revieres d'eau douce d'ou il sort quand il lui plait pour se saisir des enfants, et qui retourne ensuite sous l'eau pour les devorer. Sur terre, le Coupir monstre a forme humaine qui habite les cavernes des collines rocailleuses. Il a le pouvoir de se saisir des noirs, mais laisse passer les blancs sans leur faire de mal."

I do not speak French so a friend a little more adept in the language gave me the following translation: "In water War-wi the amphibious monster which they describe as like a crocodile because of its length, and which they say lives in fresh water rivers from where it leaves when it pleases it to seize children, and returns again under water to eat them. On ground the Coupir monster has human form and lives in the caves of the rocky hills. It has the power to seize blacks, but lets whites pass without doing them harm."

Now, the alleged sightings of the Loch Ness Monster in Scotland describe a creature resembling that of the Plesiosaur. Yet, the world view says that Plesiosaurs died out about 65 million years ago. Thus Theistic Evolutionists will discard Aboriginal belief in a creature of such description in their ancestors' time as mythology. What an affront to the Aboriginal! The Biblical Creationist can affirm the existence of such a creature in the time of man (whether such creatures still exist is not yet established) and would not therefore discredit this Aboriginal belief. Further, the Biblical Creationist could even add to the belief by citing the findings of scientist Mary Schweitzer which are of T-Rex bone, not fossilised and containing red blood cells and soft tissue.

Returning to the matter of the alleged 40,000 plus years of Aboriginals inhabiting this land I believe the issue for the Aboriginal is a desire for recognition of their antiquity and long attachment to the land, long before European arrival. When the failings of the inbuilt assumptions of carbon dating are explained while maintaining Aboriginal antiquity and long attachment to this land (albeit under 10,000 years) and, at the same time, affirming our brotherhood through Adam and potential brotherhood in Jesus Christ as Sons of God - all this is a message attune to the Word and Will of God and is thus in tune with reality.

In summary, the Biblical Creationist has much in Aboriginal belief and experience to work with in presenting the Word of God and has greater hope of working to the good of the Aboriginal. The Theistic Evolutionist has only a 'half baked', inconsistent and potentially insulting message to deliver.

Sam Drucker