What is in Kelvin's Head?

  • Coping with horror

    I don’t mean how does the country deal with terror attacks. I mean how do we cope with news coming onto our screens that contains horrific events.

    There have been a number of news items this week which have just been horrible. The suicide of a right-wing activist next to the altar of Notre-Dame Cathedral in Paris. A feminist protest the next day in which a “mock suicide” was staged in the same place in the same cathedral. The continued terror attacks in Iraq – bombing after bombing. And now this ghastly murder on the streets of Woolwich.

    How do we cope with hearing these things without becoming brittle? How do we cope with these things without becoming desensitized to the horror of what we see?

    There are obvious political moves that are needed, such as the condemnation of those who would make capital out of such horror and try to use it to bring hate to the streets. The resurgence of the far-right, particularly in the south of England is a frightening reality in itself. But how to cope as a human being with hearing stories of horror?

    Here’s some ideas for trying to live with it all:

    • Don’t block out the news, try to take it in. But don’t sit listening to the endless repeated loops of 24 hour news stations.
    • Read the opinions of those with whom one does not immediately agree.
    • Know that the answers cannot always be found merely in words and thoughts – music and art and religious practice can be places where answers are to be found.
    • Remember that faith and history teach us that horrific murders have always been part of human experience and remember that this does not excuse them.
    • Try to judge people by their ideals rather than by one’s own fears.
    • Be kind. Use bad news as a reminder to be kind.
    • Pray for the peace of the streets and remember those whose vocation is keeping that peace.
    • Write. Talk. Discuss. Listen. Understand. Act justly.
    • The only acceptable revenge is living well.
    , ,

10 responses to “The Tim Farron Question and the Archbishop of Canterbury”

  1. Bro David Avatar
    Bro David

    This brings up an interesting memory with the long-time leader of Changing Attitude England (CA). This leader was taken in by Andrew Marin, founder of the Marin Foundation (MF) when he visited the UK in conjunction with some big outdoor Christian festival you lot hold anually. Marin and his followers were attending Pride Marches/Parades around the US and getting their photos taken hunging GLBTQ folks in the marches. His foundation claims to be attempting to build a bridge between the LGBTQ community and conservative Christian communities.
    Marin was invited to comment on the CA blog. He spouted his pablum message of love for LGBTQ folks. Then, in a comment, I point blank asked Marin if he believed that we LGBTQ folks were sinners and needed to repent and become straight. He refused to answer the question. He said that I was asking the “wrong” question. Then he gave this answer verbatim from the Marin Foundation website;
    “We call these the “Big 5.” They are:
    Do you think that gays and lesbians are born that way?
    Do you think homosexuality is a sin?
    Can a LGBTQ person “change?”
    Do you think that someone can be gay and Christian?
    Are LGBTQ people going to hell?
    “The one common theme of these “Big 5” is that they are all close-ended, yes-or-no questions. Each of them must be answered with one word and they are all meant to end conversation. Based solely on one’s close-ended answers, it is easy to label, judge and dismiss the other community entirely. Thus we dehumanize a community based off of a word rather than create a productive conversation. In essence, by close-ended answers either the conservative or the LGBTQ community judges who you are, what you believe, whose team you’re on and how you should be treated.
    “Rather than answering close-ended questions, The Marin Foundation seeks to elevate the conversation and continual fruitful dialogue, as tense as that may be. This is a model taken from Jesus throughout the Gospels. Of the 25 times Jesus was asked close-ended questions, only three times did he respond with a yes or no. These three times were only after he was arrested and admitting he was the Messiah. Prior to this, Jesus never answered close-ended questions with a yes or a no. Instead, he elevated the conversation.”
    I spent the next three days searching the MF website and reading through articles and white papers. I realized that it was a ministry to the LGBTQ of wolves in sheep’s clothing. These people were trying to love vulnerable LGBTQ folks into their embrace, to slowly chip away at them until they had brought them to realize that their sexual/gender orientation was false, acting upon it was a sin and they needed to seek the help of Jesus to beome heterosexual and accept their gender assigned by birth.
    I posted my findings on the CA blog and was promply chastized and barred from further posts. In a personal email from the leader of CA I was ripped a new arsehole and declared anathema. Sadly, even LGBTQ folks in prominent positions are taken in by these folks. I think that we need to continually ask the Big 5, of everyone, epsecially those non-LGBTQ folks who profess to be our allies and supporters, secular or religious.

    Reply
  2. Peter Davison Avatar
    Peter Davison

    Good column.
    So who is entitled to express opinions on ethical issues? I’ve long understood it’s the duty of all of us to have INFORMED consciences and to obey them. We may wish to consult people we believe to be more informed than we are, such as our presumed leaders, but in the end, when asked, we should at least be ready to state, however firmly or tentatively, where we stand. As for our leaders, they may or may not be better informed than we are; but we also know that ‘experts’ may be people who know more and more about less and less – and that politics often intrude into our public morality. Much of ethics is situational. That said, Jesus seems to have had much more compassion for alleged ‘sinners’ than for those who chose to label them as such. And much of our present troubles seem to stem from our desire to label and scapegoat people who appear to be different. What would happen if we simply accepted people for who they are and learned to accept that love is indeed ‘a many splendoured thing’?

    Reply
  3. Graham Evans Avatar
    Graham Evans

    A very interesting new perspective and certainly a question that should be put to all the Anglican bishops who sit in the house of Lords.

    Reply
  4. The Rev Sr Helena Barrett, OSB Avatar
    The Rev Sr Helena Barrett, OSB

    Absolutely spot on, Kelvin. The ABC should be asked The Question until he is sufficiently exhausted to give a clear and honest answer (whatever it may turn out to be) instead of the usual yards of ecclesiastical flannel.

    Reply
    1. June B Butler Avatar
      June B Butler

      “The ABC should be asked The Question until he is sufficiently exhausted to give a clear and honest answer…”

      Justin Welby wails piteously: “I’m not the pope.”

      Reply
  5. the Rev. Grant Barber Avatar
    the Rev. Grant Barber

    I always wondered how the preachers in Pepys’ diary could preach such long sermons. I think I understand better now. So glad we’ve already settled the matter in the Episcopal Church. (Oh, the answer can be a succinct “no, not sin just by its nature).

    Reply
  6. Bernard Silverman Avatar
    Bernard Silverman

    if I asked an archbishop whether deliberately stamping on someone’s toe is a sin they would give a direct answer. So they should be asked the Farron question over and over again until they do similarly. If the Prime Minister can do that so can they. Indeed the question should be “the PM thinks that gay sex is not a sin. Was she right?”

    Reply
  7. Alan Wilson Avatar
    Alan Wilson

    Spot On…

    Reply
  8. Kate Odling Avatar
    Kate Odling

    Very interesting. I always think that if someone does not give a clear answer to a question that they have something to hide or that their true belief/thought would be unpopular. I think the ABC has looked very uncomfortable when any direct questioning about LGBT issues are raised. So someone should ask & not accept anything but a straightforward answer. My final thought is that we are all qualified to have an opinion – what’s wrong with that?

    Reply
  9. Bruce Gulland Avatar
    Bruce Gulland

    Whatever I think about the answer to the question, I did rather enjoy the style of your post – you had me on the edge of my seat!

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Previous Posts

  • Pill 5

    I am not going to give a pill by pill commentary on each of the 20 pink pills that the Vet has entertainingly suggested I put into the cat. However, Pill 5 was a good one.Madam likes hard, crunchy cheesy cat treats which she sometimes gets from my mother for Christmas. They are very smelly.…

  • Sermon – 5 March 2006

    When I was in Sunday School, I remember singing a little song which went like this: When you see a rainbow, remember, God is love. When you see a rainbow, remember, God is love. And the truth is, I’ve found it hard ever since to look at a rainbow without that going through my head.…

  • Viral Marketing

    Know about viral marketing?Wikipedia defines it as follows:Viral marketing and viral advertising refer to marketing techniques that seek to exploit pre-existing social networks to produce exponential increases in brand awareness, through viral processes similar to the spread of an epidemic. It is word-of-mouth delivered and enhanced online; it harnesses the network effect of the Internet…

  • Ash W

    Last night’s Ash Wednesday service was slightly out of the ordinary. At five minutes to go, there were 8 in the congregation. This leads to the priest coughing and spluttering and wishing that he has not given up cursing for Lent.Of course, these 8 were distributed evenly from the front to the back of the…