What is in Kelvin's Head?

Honorary Fellowship Citation

05/06/2019

This afternoon I was admitted as an Honorary Fellow of the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow. I found myself in the most extraordinary company and still can’t believe that this happened to me.

Below is the citation which was read as part of the ceremony by the Registrar of the College, Roddy Neilson – also pictured here. It may not be exactly word for word what was said but is certainly the gist of it.

It has been a very moving day.

Madam President, I have the honour to present to you the Very Reverend Kelvin Holdsworth for the award of the Honorary Fellowship of the RCPSG.

Born in Yorkshire but educated mainly in Scotland, Kelvin is a priest in the Scottish Episcopal Church and is currently the Provost and Rector of St Mary’s Episcopal Cathedral in Glasgow, a post he has held since 2006. In that role he has contributed significantly to the dialogue in Scotland and the UK surrounding the opening of marriage to same-sex couples and for this he is most widely known, campaigning firstly for changes in Scots Law to allow such marriages and then changes to Canon Law to allow them to take place in church. He was the first Anglican priest outside North America to hold a license to marry same-sex couples. Kelvin has used his position to influence public policy on issues affecting LGBT people and is considered one of the most influential LGBT people in the UK.

While Kelvin’s public persona and position is well documented what is less well known is his commitment to excellence in all aspects of Christian worship and his desire to make the Church open, inclusive and welcoming. These are the words used in all St Mary’s literature and the ethos put forward at every opportunity by Kelvin. Those values were exemplified by an event two years ago in which local Muslims and Christians came together to share their stories about the birth of Christ in St Mary’s Cathedral – an event which garnered worldwide publicity and led to Kelvin receiving death threats.

St Mary’s Cathedral in Glasgow has seen its attendances rise significantly during his tenure indicating his approach clearly works. Under his stewardship St Mary’s has become a centre of excellence in liturgy, music and art as well as providing valuable support to the local community in the West End of Glasgow. Kelvin has said that healthy people require healthy institutions and his own ministry both inside and outside his Church has demonstrated the appropriateness of this comment. As the Royal College of Physicians and Surgeons of Glasgow is an institution dedicated to the health and welfare of others both in and outside the city, it is fitting that the College recognises the efforts of other institutions and individuals who contribute to that. As an adopted son of Glasgow, a committed campaigner against discrimination of any sort and an advocate for the disadvantaged and dispossessed he is well worthy of recognition by the College.

Accordingly, Madam President, I invite you to confer the Honorary Fellowship of the RCPSG on the Very Reverend Kelvin Holdsworth.

7 responses to “The BA Cross Story”

Tim

25/11/2006

Hmmm. You’re the first person I’ve seen to view it this way around.

Different, and I agree about “witnessing to the passengers” (I don’t particularly want proselytising, least of all on a plane) but I’m not sure I agree with your conclusion.
A cross need not be particularly outlandish; many people wear them, some of whom don’t even regard themselves as christian (heirloom, etc), and who’s going to ask their motives before declaring it still a religious symbol?

It’s unfortunate that this has come about with someone who sees the cross as her witness, but if this stands, companies will be allowed to have discriminatory uniform policies, and it doesn’t matter who the parties are, it’s just discrimination whichever way I cut it; all the more so when it leads to *a society* in which one hides from others rather than embracing them.

Reply
kelvin

25/11/2006

As I understand it, the BA uniform policy has applied to all jewelry hanging around someone’s neck. It would not be fun to get one’s Cross, Crescent, Star of David or string of pearls caught in the check-in machinery.

It is interesting that the principle sign of Christian membership in most parts of the various churches is essentially ephemeral – baptism by its very nature is invisible in material form once performed.

When I was in Egypt, I was quite impressed with the tattoos that many Christians had done in order to identify themselves to one another. At more than one Christian gathering I went to, the locals were vetted at the door by showing their tattoos – the presumption being that no member of any group that the Church people were frightened of would ever have a cross tattooed on their skin.

Reply
Anonymous

26/11/2006

Yes, you’re quite right. A uniform is a uniform. If one absolutely wanted to wear something other than a uniform at work, then joining the Army mightn’t be the best place for me.

Similarly, if joining the BA ranks implies wearing a uniform, and I insist on wearing some additional contraption, then , patently, possibly a position without a uniform would be better. Possibly as a clergy person?! That is if I were a compulsive proselytiser.

Anent compulsive proselytising. There is this church building on the facade of which a sign threatens one and all with everlasting hell fire. No doubt those of that congregation consider it to be their loving duty so to do. However, to my mind, it is a most egregious assault on the urban landscape … and myself, every time I have cause to walk by.

Yes. Yours is a most refreshing viewpoint. All the more so as it comes from within the ranks of the clergy. Possibly a reason why I’ve kept on coming back to this your blog…

All the very best,

Clyde Lad

Reply
Alex

26/11/2006

The real problem is that BA’s policy is inconsistent: turbans are allowed, hijabs are allowed and apparently Hindu bangles are allowed.

For a uniform policy to be reasonable I think it either has to allow all, or allow none. I’m not fussed which they choose, but consistency is important.

Reply
Ali

26/11/2006

I think the difference between turbans, hajibs and bangles are the difference between a requirement of following a particular faith (or, rather, a conservative branch of a particular faith as with the hajob and the bangle), or a desire because of one’s faith. A cross is worn out of choice, rather than a requirement of orthodoxy.

I talked a little about this in the sermon this morning – on a day where the church celebrates the feast of Christ the King, surely a greater sign of being a member of that Kingdom, or a follower of Christ, is the way in which we treat this planet given into our care and all who inhabit it, rather than becoming sidetracked in petty bickering about which poppy is the most Christian or the “right” to wear a cross at work regardless of uniform policy.

Reply
Alex

26/11/2006

“A cross is worn out of choice, rather than a requirement of orthodoxy.”

I’m not sure that this is a difference that removes the inconsistency from BA’s uniform policy. Whether or not the turban, hijab or bangle is perceived as a ‘requirement’ of membership of a faith, it is still my choice whether or not to observe it.

This is not to say that I think Ms Ewelda has taken the best course of action. My personal view is that she has made a mistake – instead of a greater witness, she has contributed to the perception of Christians as petty and whinging. I may have my differences with Paul(!) but I think his “Greek to the Greek, Jew to the Jew” approach has a lot to be said for it.

But our disagreement with her position on how crucial to the Christian life is the wearing of the cross doesn’t change the fact that the policy applied treats her differently from members of other faiths.

Reply
Mysterious stranger

27/11/2006

I am with you on this one.I do not like all the badges,ribbons,bands etc with uniforms.I also felt extremely uncomfortable with yesterdays interview.She has been offered the right to wear the cross on her lapel not round her neck.She can wear it inside her uniform and go with the lapel badge.

Her fundamentalism grated.Sorry.

Reply