What is in Kelvin's Head?

  • General Synod: Come for all now is ready

    I’ve commented before that you can tell almost all you need to know about a Christian community by the way that they invite people to communion.

    Yesterday, General Synod started to meet in Edinburgh and by some distance the most significant theological statement came, not in the debates about how we will talk about same-sex couples and marriage, not in the considerable theological reports that we had but in a tiny little exchange used in the liturgy.

    Come all people: this is Christ’s table to which all are invited.
    Come, for all is ready.
    Thanks be to God.

    Now, the reason this is significant is that this isn’t what we usually say in church. This isn’t what is part of the regular liturgy.  So far as I could tell, it was used yesterday at the Synod Eucharist simply by the sanction of the nodding of seven bemitred heads gathered around the altar.

    It was a joy to me to find such a thing said.  I’ve believed this way for quite some time.

    In St Mary’s we say, ‘everyone is welcome to Communion in this church’. Occasionally I get people asking whether we really mean it and I always say ‘You bet we do!’

    Now the thing is, it is uncommon. Some churches make theological demands – all those who are trinitarian Christians are welcome to receive the bread and wine.  For others, one sacrament acts as both a barrier and a key to another – all those who have been baptised are welcome to receive communion. Still others make Church membership the key.  And for others still it is good behaviour,  for example, the terrifying – all who are in good standing with their church are welcome…

    Yesterday at our set piece Eucharist when we are all on show and amongst ecumenical and interfaith friends, we said that it was for all people. It was hugely significant and hugely welcome.

    But the thing is, liturgy changes us.  That’s part of the idea.

    If we say things like this then it will change what we do.

    The church is currently debating whether to change what we do with regards to marriage.  Is it open to straight couples or in fact something that is open to any couple?  Are gay people fully accepted as God’s children, whose relationships God will bless or not?

    We’ve got to the stage of discussing that seriously at last.  This isn’t my conversation any more.  It felt like that for years. Now it is the church’s conversation.

    If we start to behave in the Eucharist as though the gifts of God are for everyone then there must be rising hope that we will apply the same to all our sacramental thinking.

    The debate is happening.  Real change is possible.  It started most particularly in that little exchange at the mass.

    Come all people. Yes, come all people.

    That’s the kind of church I want to belong to.
    Thanks be to God.

5 responses to “The Primus’s Radio Interview about the Columba Declaration”

  1. Benj Avatar
    Benj

    I’m not sure Chillingworth gave a clear answer to Beattie’s question of what is wrong with the declaration beyond its discourtesy and rudeness. What does he mean when he says it is putting at risk the leadership of Christian faith communities at a critical moment in the ‘story of Scotland’?

    Reply
    1. Kelvin Avatar
      Kelvin

      I can’t speak for Bishop David but my view is that this debacle (the discourtesy and rudeness and the rest) has had a serious knock on effect on the ecumenical life of Scotland. To put it bluntly, trusts and friendships that have been built up over years have been very sorely tested. I think that this risks poisoning ecumenical life in Scotland for a generation and I’d say that does seriously compromise the way in which church communities and leaders will be able to speak to Scotland.

      Reply
  2. Richard Avatar
    Richard

    It also speaks volumes for the contempt with which the Church of Englandshire holds for the Scottish Episcopal Church.

    You struggle to see the shining truth through his words because his words lack honesty and integrity. Not that anyone in Englandshire really cares- most probably haven’t even heard of the Scottish Episcopal Church and if they have, it will be as an unknown backwater entity. To sweep aside the Scottish Episcopal Church must have taken breathtaking arrogance.

    Reply
  3. Iain McLarty Avatar
    Iain McLarty

    I can totally understand the SEC concern about the CofE barging into territory that isn’t theirs. However, there are perhaps a few things to bear in mind about why a relationship between the CofS and CofE is important where that isn’t really relevant.

    The first is that the CofS has a presence in England. Having spent a few years in a CofE congregation in Denmark I witnessed first hand how important the Porvoo agreement was in that context for enabling local worship and mission and similarly it could be hugely beneficial for the CofS congregations in England to be able to develop more formal relationships with their local Anglican partners.

    Secondly, there are a number of areas where the CofS and CofE are already working together and developing closer relationship such as on training and fresh expressions. These are areas where the relationships have developed naturally due to the two churches dealing with similar areas of concern and where there should again be no encroaching on SEC ground.

    Thirdly, the CofS and CofE work closely together in ecumenical circles through both CTBI and the WCC where both are significant players. It does seem strange that these two churches don’t recognise each other when their place in the wider ecumenical scene is so closely linked. That is not to deny the SEC’s ecumenical importance.

    Obviously no one is denying that the way this became public has been badly handled but I struggle to see what more can be down than the very sincere apologies and frank criticisms of what happened which have been offered. In terms of what real issues there are, I have yet to see anyone pin down specific parts of the Columba agreement which are concerning to the SEC, with all the comments either much more vague or else being fears about issues (such as interchangeability of ministry) which are not actually part of the agreement. In my experience (through ACTS, WCC etc.) the relationship between the CofS and SEC is one of the strongest ecumenical relationships and it would be very sad if this was jeopardised because of miscommunication rather than substance.

    Reply
  4. Jeremy Bates Avatar
    Jeremy Bates

    It’s not just Scotland. A lot of people are struggling to see truth in the words of the Archbishop of Canterbury these days.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • Hustings

    Congratulations to the St Mary’s Justice and Aid Network who staged last night’s Scottish Election Hustings in church. Speakers from the main political parties were present and there was a good turnout to hear them. I’ve been in the position of being an election candidate addressing a hustings meeting, so I know what it feels…

  • Hand Holding and other PDAs

    [UPDATE: Don’t miss the Guardian’s Kissing in Public Live Blog relating to the incident described below]   As I’ve already indicated, I spent quite a bit of the past week in that London. It’s unusual for me to take a holiday just before Holy Week, but it felt like quite a while since I’ve had…

  • The Royal Wedding #1

    Now, take a good look at the picture above. It’s the Early Learning Centre’s Royal Wedding Set. I expect that you’ve already purchased your own set already. Taking a look at it though, what do you notice? What I notice is that there’s something missing – namely, any connection with the church. They’ve managed a…

  • Mr Beamish

    I was in church in London at the weekend. I chose to go to a parish on Sunday morning that I’d never been to before. Its not one that I’m going to name here, but its the kind of church that you might expect a wandering provost to go to in London. Clouds of puff,…