Like the final Act of a play, we join God’s story by improvising the final act of this story of Scripture – staying consistent and true to Scripture, but being led by the Spirit towards the fulfilment of the story in God’s kingdom.

For most First Nations peoples in Australia, the Queen is a symbol of British imperialism under which we were colonised, who failed to rectify the wrongs of her forebears. But the church is also complicit.

The inauguration of King Charles III is a reminder that Australia has a public religion - the Church of England, with its head as our political sovereign - which is the grounds of legal and political authority. ‘Religious freedom’ is therefore private. But we often get it the wrong way around.

We seem to want to hide our scars, imperfections and wounds. But now I wonder if, ultimately, it’s those quirks, wounds, scratches and imperfections that make us a more interesting and meaningful society – and a humane one.

Does Ruth's ‘your people, my people’ require forgetting one’s origins? Can one embrace the interweaving of diverse cultural experiences? And how can we allow the migrant experiences of sacrifice, grief and loss transform our readings of Scripture?

It’s easy to dismiss those who hold to conspiracy theories as ‘irrational’. But there are background factors that draw some, especially Christians, to alternative explanations for world events that focus on the ‘dark side’ of humanity while offering hope in the shadow of a cataclysmic future.

It's not enough for us to be non-violent; we need to be non-dominant, ‘taking on the form of a servant’, spending our lives enabling, equipping and empowering others. What does this mean for you in your relationships?

What is the connection between the recent mass shootings in the US, America’s violent history and ‘White Replacement Theory’? And is there a common thread to the actions and motivations of the ‘lone wolf’ shooters?

The conference concerned: same-sex attraction. The question: how should we (the Church) respond?

David Griffin responds to Jim Reiher’s and Joanna Cruikshank’s responses to his article on cancel culture and puritanism.