• Sermon preached on 4 August 2013

    I used to work in a church with murals. Well one mural. It wasn’t this church and it wasn’t these glorious murals. It was somewhere else entirely.

    (By which I mean Edinburgh).

    Throughout the late fifties, the sixties and early seventies, a sustained period of liturgical reform had happened. The altar had been pulled away from the wall. The priest now faced the people. The peace was shared and communion started to happen every Sunday. Those of you who have been around for a bit might remember that story from all kinds of contexts. Those who are new to Episcopal worship might be surprised to learn that how we do things is not in fact as old as the hills at all.

    Anyway, these liturgical reforms in this church had left a big space to fill. Somewhere along the way, the East Window had been bricked up and whitewashed over and now there was a giant wall to fill.

    And, of course, just as we can be sure that someone was heartily trying to encourage the congregation to sing Kum By Yah. so, inevitably, someone got to paint a mural.

    Unlike Gwyneth Leech’s paintings, which surround me here in this church. this was a rather less successful piece. (more…)

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

  • World Record Evensong

    Turnout last night at Evensong was thought to be a world record around here for modern times. There were 119 people present, though 5 did leave when they discovered there was no sermon. My hunch is that they were looking for St Silas Church and were perplexed by the exquisite offering of music by Purcell,…

  • The Convent #2

    Watched The Convent again tonight on BBC2. Liked the nun dancing the incense around the chapel during a Magnificat. (Which was to the tune of the Wild Mountain Thyme if my ears did not deceive me).I’m impressed with the nuns from Arundel – they are a good advert for what they do, but then most…

  • Theatre Chaplain

    I discovered just recently that I seem to be the chaplain of one of Glasgow’s theatres. (I’ll refrain from saying which one until I’ve made more personal contact).What fun.