• Youse are the Salt of the Earth – sermon preached 9 February 2020

    In the name of Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Amen.

    I seem to have reached a particular age.

    I seem to have reached the particular age which is that whenever I got to the doctor about anything I come out with a prescription for another regular medicine and an instruction to give something up.

    Red meat was one of this first things. No more red meat.

    Red wine was the next. No more red wine. (Though I’m not that much of a drinker anyway).

    [This being St Mary’s I can see several doctors in the congregation working out what prescriptions I got for which pills too]

    But then it was caffeine that had to go. No more ordinary tea.

    And the latest of course was salt. Cut down, cut back, give up on the salt.

    Now, I have, or at least had, rather a liking for salt on my food.

    It makes other things tasty.

    So being told to cut it down and try to cut it out was something of a bitter blow.

    What’s a poke of chips without a good sprinkling of salt after all.

    Oh, and I know what comes next – it’ll be the chips next. First they came for the red meat. Then they came for the salt. Then they came for the chips…

    Steak and chips nae mair, nae mair.

    But the salt thing really got to me.

    I took myself off to the supermarket straight away to find an alternative. And sure enough someone produces this stuff. Lo Salt it is called.

    And it has all the attributes of salt. Except one.

    It looks like salt. It feels like salt. It sprinkles like salt.

    It is perfect in every way except the rather necessary requirement.

    It doesn’t actually taste like salt.

    It proudly says on the tub that it contains 66% less sodium than regular salt. And by my reckoning you need about three times as much of the stuff for it to actually taste the same.

    And, well, the truth is, I’ve kind of lost heart with it as a substitute. It has been sitting in the back of the cupboard for a year or more largely unused. Better to retrain my tastebuds to do without salt than to be disappointed with ever sprinkle.

    This stuff is what Jesus is talking about in the gospel today. Salt that has lost its savour.

    And it is good for nothing.

    Well, except for one thing of course. Real salt doesn’t ever really lose its savour. Real salt itself can’t go off. You can keep it as long as you like and it will still be salt.

    And, well, that’s just one of the points that Jesus is making.

    In the gospel words we have just heard, Jesus says, You are the Salt of the Earth.

    But the wee periscope, the section of the gospel that we heard did not really make it clear to whom he is speaking.

    Jesus isn’t talking to the church – it hadn’t been invented then. Nor is he talking to a congregation in a synagogue. Though he went to such places, he was outside when he preached this sermon.

    Nor was he talking just to his disciples.

    For this is part of the sermon on the mount.

    He’s speaking to those who crowded around him to hear.

    He’s speaking to the crowd as well as to his friends.

    You are the salt of the earth. You are the light of the world.

    Might it make a difference to how we hear the sermon on the mount to remember that he isn’t speaking only to us. He isn’t murmuring the sweet nothings of a personal saviour who has come just for me as an individual.

    This isn’t just about my relationship with God.

    He’s speaking to the crowd. To all of us. And more.

    To all of us and a lot more.

    To the forgotten and the poor and those with no influence and no power.

    And he says, you, all of you, are the salt of the earth and the light of the word.

    The crowd are the salt of the earth. The crowd are the light of the world.

    When he’s talking about you, he’s not just talking to you.

    In Old English, he’s talking to ye – all of ye.

    In Southern American English, he’s talking to y’all – or even all y’all.

    In Glasgow he’s talking to youse. Yes, all of youse.

    Jesus seems to see human dignity and worth in every member of the crowd.

    Each was part of being the salt of the earth. Together they were light to the world.

    Every member in the crowd is made in the image of God and that gives us innate human dignity.

    Dignity that Jesus sees and proclaims.

    There are so many occasions when we can see simply the worst in people.

    There are so many occasions when we experience a crowd as simply being the mob.

    But Jesus looks with compassion at every soul there and says you – you collectively are the salt of the earth. You, yes, all of you are light.

    What a world we would have if everyone was able to contribute to making the world tasty and full of light.

    What a world we would have if the special dignity and gifts of every soul were recognised and affirmed and known.

    What a world would we have if the innate goodness of everyone was visible and shining out like a light on a hill or a lamp put on a bushel basket.

    Evil and sin abound are oh so real. Yet Jesus looks at the crowd and seems to see the vision of a kingdom altogether different and altogether new and altogether built on the goodness of every soul.

    So, let your light shine in this city. Let your light shine in this land. Let your light shine in this world.

    In loving you, God knows the light that is already in you. And God wants that light to be what you are known for.

    Until the light illuminates everything and all wrongs are put right, and the tears are wiped from every eye so that every eye sees clearly that love has conquered. And love reigns supreme.

    Look for the best in people.

    Look for the love in people.

    Look for the light in people. For the light in people is simply the sign of the love that is in them that connects them directly to God’s own being.

    Look especially for the light in people in whom you don’t expect to find it.

    And set that light high.

    High on a bushel basket

    And let it shine. Let it shine. Let it shine.

    In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

    Amen.

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.

  2. Peter Davison Avatar

    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’?

  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.

  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.

    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.”

  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).

  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?”

  7. 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?

  8. Bruce Gulland Avatar

    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!

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • Freshers: How to Choose a Church

    Every year at this time I find myself thinking about freshers coming to Glasgow to one of the higher education institutions. One way or another I was involved in freshers’ week quite a lot over the years. I did three degrees so went through it myself three times, then in subsequent university years I was…

  • The Joy of Evensong

    There are reports in the media today that a service of Choral Evensong in Bath Abbey was abandoned last Sunday because those inside the Abbey couldn’t compete with amplified music coming from outside the building. It is a bit of a sorry tale and I’m surprised that the police did not deal with it as…

  • Not in my name. Not in my city.

    Last night I was in the centre of Glasgow to see a film (the brilliant Pride movie) and then to have a drink with a couple of folk from church. This meant passing through George Square a couple of times. It was obvious that there was something up – a small group of people had…

  • The morning after the day before

    Yesterday was an extraordinary day in Scotland. I don’t think that any of us really knew how tense it was all going to get until the day itself. There is much to celebrate in the turn-out, which was phenomenal. In recent weeks, people have engaged in a political process in ways I’ve never seen before…