Here’s the video of yesterday’s sermon – somewhere along the way I’ve managed to lose the text, but the video is here in full. It is about Adam and Eve and about how their story is about now not then. There’s a nod to temptation and a chocolate boutique. I had the atonement in the back of my mind when I was writing it. Oh, and I included a semicolon. See if you can spot it.
Kelvin – that cracked me almost as much as your last tweet on the left of your blog ;-)!
Ryan, although you address your comment to Kelvin like I am not there. I assume you are referring to my poem, I can assure you that it does not crack me up watching you making any opinion you may have untenable.
No Jimmy – I think Ryan was indeed referring to my last comment, above.
Thank you Kelvin and Sorry Ryan.
No worries! Was indeed referring to the v.amusing coming out day tweets at the side.
I’m not sure there’s ever existed anyone, anywhere,at any time, of whom it could be said that *all* their opinions are ‘untenable’, so such rhetoric is dehumanising at best. Apropos nothing, I was moved to google the poetic stylings of the great David Brent. Who needs Auden? š
http://murfinsandburglars.com/2009/04/14/bad-poetry-for-tuesday-david-brent-edition/
Kelvin; no, I think it distracts. It simp;ly reminds us that this is how your mind works: you make connections and delight in that sort of word-play. However, to sharpen up my point. Thank you for helping me to realise that, for some, ‘family’ is not a positive word in the way in which I experience it. For my part, this willl mean that I will be more careful about its use when others might feel excluded (and therefore hurt). Mutatis mutandi can you accept that I feel offended by what seems to be merely a casual linking between family and the f word? These are sensitive areas, but sensibilities are by no means confined to those who find family a painful or unhelpful concept.
I am slightly nervous aboaut the alternatives to the 1982 Liturgy, not because I don’t share the inclusive sentiments expressed above (I do). I fear that, as so often in the history of the church, the steps we take to avoid one kind of mistake in the way we talk about God can lead us into another. The avoidance of pronouns as a measure to achieve inclusivity produces inelegant, strained and stilted English. How would it be if one were to use it in day-to-day speech? ‘I saw John this morning. I asked John’s how John’s health was. John said that John was over his flu, and hoped to be back at work on Monday’. This may not in itself seem to be a problem. But in fact, what very quickly happens when we adopt this idiom in addressing/expressing God, is that the very idea of a personal God begins to recede. My basic instinct is that the church’s language of pulbic prayer is properly anchored in that of the scriptures. There are dangers in departing from this. The perceived problem (rightly perceived) is perhaps better tackled by good teaching about the nature of God, than by linguistic contortions that produce stilted prayers, and possibly a less real and vivid idea of God.
About the family imagery – another reason to drop it in church is for the sake ones who, like me, do actually have the signifying family relationships.
There is too much pressure on day to day life with children when that life is forced to serve as some kind of example or testimony or witness to the world – or more likely one’s church friends – about the nature of God.
I think it sours love because in that kind of scheme loving children is more fundamentally a means to an end.
We move on to discuss the report on the implementation of Journey of the Baptised and New Century New Directions. Alison Peden begs us to stop sniping at TISEC telling us that it has received excellent reports from those who validate it for the Ministry Divison of the C of E. [One wonders whether it…
We move on to a canon removing age discrimination from the canons. I get up to say that I support the motion, butĀ ask whether there are any other forms of discrimination which would be allowed in the church which would not be allowed in another workplace. I’m told that they will take this question to…
The question of clergy employment comes up yet again. We are told once again that clergy are not employed, even though there have been recent circumstances where clergy haveĀ been treated as though they are employed in the law. A question is asked as to whether or not we need to deal with every employment…
Just to report the success of yesterday’s great innovationĀ – we had the main Synod Eucharist in the place where we meet rather than in the Cathedral Church of St Mary (Edinburgh) just down the road. Yesterday’s service was splendid. James Macmillan’s lovely mass setting rang around the synod hall. The bishops huddled in splendour around…
Leave a Reply