• Pride Meeting Point – A Correction

    6630575919_77b0a72d1b_z
    This coming Saturday there will be a Pride march in Glasgow. There will be a gathering of Scottish Episcopalians (and friends) marching together in glad array.

    Last week I announced that we would meet at the southern end of the Wiggly Bridge (which is the Tradeston Pedestrian Bridge), which is not the Squinty Bridge (which is in fact the Clyde Arc).

    However, it has since been pointed out to me that there is no Wiggly Bridge (which is the Tradeston Pedestrian Bridge) in Glasgow. The bridge that we will meet by is the Squiggly Bridge and it is in fact called the Tradeston Bridge, not the Tradeston Pedestrian Bridge.

    We will continue not to meet anywhere near the Squinty Bridge.

    Is that clear?

    The muster time is 0915.

    [Photo from David Brossard – (c) Creative Commons – Attribution-ShareAlike 2.0 Generic]

7 responses to “Sermon – 1 June 2008”

  1. Di Avatar

    It seems to me more and more important for us to rediscover the idea of the divine inspiration of the reader of scripture as well as that of the authors.

    Thank you for this, Kelvin. I agree with you wholeheartedly. After all, only the author truly knows what was in his head when he wrote it and indeed, where the inspiration came from.

    Oh, and I enjoyed the rest too.

  2. Marion Conn Avatar
    Marion Conn

    Once again I’m listening to this late at night. Definitely food for thought and prayer. I was outside in the rain tonight, I really like the idea of that I was not just wet, but drenched in Grace. Thanks Kelvin.

    Good Night.

  3. Jonathan Ensor Avatar
    Jonathan Ensor

    I believe that everyone has a right to freedom of thought. Freedom of speech is a circumscribed fact of life in the UK and it is certainly an interesting idea that reading can be inspired, but who is the arbiter of what is inspired and who is the arbiter of what is apostate. I may believe with all my heart that I am divinely inspired, but I still have to convince other people that this is the case and that I am not being grandiose etc. If I pontificate about a text in the common domain, I may well have to justify myself and/or defend my position at some considerable cost, which I may or may not be willing to pay.

  4. kelvin Avatar

    Thank you for your comments.

    Jonathan – I think that I was suggesting that we see both the authorship of texts and the reading of texts as activities that can be inspired. I think that there has to be some dialogue between author and reader.

    I also think that in the history of looking at biblical texts, some people have emphasised the value of the text to the individual whilst others have read the text in community. (We might also presume that the texts themselves were gathered in community). I don’t think that I’d like to lose sight of that idea of inspiration coming when a community reads a text together. That idea is important to me as it counters against the idea of individuals thinking that they (alone) are divinely inspired.

    It seems to me that more people have believed that they alone were the only proper source of truth or inspiration or legitimacy than has actually been the case.

  5. Elizabeth Avatar
    Elizabeth

    Having heard this text spoken of many, many, many times in the context of Luther’s reading, I must say it was an enormous relief to hear this other way of reading. This tempts me to return to other texts of Paul’s that might be worth re-reading without Evangelical/Calvinist/Lutheran-coloured glasses.

  6. Jonathan Ensor Avatar
    Jonathan Ensor

    Kelvin, I agree that there has to be a community, but pretty universally in churches I have been to the Minister has preached and the community has continued to be fragmented. Also there is no chance of dialogue with dead authors and in the realm of art, once a work is in the public realm it is available for multiple interpretations which the artist may well never have considered. Even legal documents which attempt to define the law are interpreted by the judiciary. There is little chance for art or literature or the bible to be consistently read because the implications of certain phrases or sentences may reside in the way that they are written rather than in the mind of the author and the definitions may be too loosely drawn.

  7. kelvin Avatar

    Many thanks for your comments.

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • Dolls – National Theatre of Scotland

    To the Tramway last night for Dolls a production from the National Theatre of Scotland. It is perhaps singularly appropriate that a production adapted for the stage from a film turns into such a mixed media event as this. Not so much a play as a ballet with a few words. Not so much a…

  • The Love for Three Oranges – RSAMD

    The Love for Three Oranges is the strangest of works. Surreal in fact. So what could be more natural than a staging which took is visual reference points from surreal and pop art. Dali, Magritte, Duchamp and Warhol were all referenced in this wittily directed production. Indeed, it was a very visual production in which…

  • What are you listening to?

    Oh, thank you for asking. Its been a while since you did. (Just for your information, I’ve now stopped listening every day to the recording of me on Radio 4  – we all have to move on sooner or later). Right at this minute, I’m listening to Prokofiev 6 but simultaneously thinking about the brilliant…