• 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.

11 responses to “Providence and Vocation for Liberals in Public Life”

  1. David Evans Avatar
    David Evans

    I was one of the Lib Dems who did foresee the calamity in 2015 and actively campaigned to get the party to change leader – after 2011, 2012, 2013 and 2014 it wasn’t difficult for anyone to see, but it was difficult for many nice Lib Dems to own up to the fact that they had allowed it to happen. I failed, but I don’t think it was part of anyone’s plan that I did (except possibly Ryan Coetzee and a few other true believers).

    There’s a lot in your points I can agree with, particularly regarding the naivety of referring to God’s plan, when many Christian’s have a view that his/hers/its plan is to let us get on with it and find our own way to salvation. However, the most interesting question is when you say “The trouble is, these are not side issues, these are my rights.” Do you really mean that you have the right to force someone else to marry you who doesn’t want to and believes it is wrong, even though you have the right to and can get someone else to do the same job for you? Do individuals have the right to insist on being married by the registrar of their choice, or just the right to get married? Are you not perhaps just a bit assuming that your tree is that bit taller than the other guy’s?

    1. Kelvin Avatar

      I think that people should be able to expect individual people who represent the state not to discriminate against them in any of the protected categories. I think that the equal rights tree is bigger than my tree and the registrar’s tree.

      I don’t claim that individuals should be able to force registrars of their choice to marry them, not least because I don’t think it is a very real question – few people want to be married by someone who doesn’t want them to be married. I do think that local authorities have not simply the right but the duty to remove public officials who can’t serve every member of the public due to their personal prejudices.

      1. David Evans Avatar
        David Evans

        I think you are rather changing your ground here from your original piece. You started with “The trouble is, these are not side issues, these are my rights.”

        You have now moved onto “I think that people should be able to expect individual people who represent the state not to discriminate against them in any of the protected categories.” So we now have a right to expect, but only against a person who works in the public sector, and even if it is against that person’s conscience and only if you are in a specially protected category.

        It gets even more tenuous then as you accept when you then say “I don’t claim that individuals should be able to force registrars of their choice to marry them.” So the right is not to a person wanting to be married at all.

        Finally we get “I do think that local authorities have not simply the right but the duty to remove public officials who can’t serve every member of the public due to their personal prejudices.” So the right is not to an individual at all, so definitely not “your rights” but to a public sector organisation. Hardly a human right, more of an employer’s right by your own statements.

        I rather think that your equal rights tree, however high you think it is, has decidedly peculiar roots.

        1. Graham Evans Avatar
          Graham Evans

          David, I thought most liberals accepted the view that in the provision of services to the general public, whether provided by the public sector or private sector, a policy of non-discrimination was an essential ingredient of a progressive society. I accept that there is a notable exception to this rule in terms of the provision of abortion, but this arises from the broad range of medical procedures undertaken by one type of doctor or another. Surgeons are specialised medical practitioners, as are nurses who assist them, so it is most unlikely then anyone who opposed abortion on conscience grounds would actually be faced with having to refuse to conduct an abortion. The provision of most services to the general public is also a specialist activity, and no-one forces people to engage in any particular activity. The idea that a registrar should be able to opt out of undertaking a civil gay marriage represents the thin edge of a dangerous wedge. If such people wish to opt out of doing so, then they should act as part of a religious community, such as a deacon in Anglican Church, which has the legal power to conduct religious marriages, are still recognised by the State.

          1. David Evans Avatar
            David Evans

            Quite simply Graham I disagree with your view that this is a level of discrimination in the provision of a public service of anything like the scale you imply makes it essential that every individual has to comply with it. The “go with it or get out” philosophy demanded of the state by so many in pursuit of their personal view of their rights is to my mind a greater threat to liberty than the fact that Fred or Freda don’t agree with something and don’t want to do it but George, Georgina, Harry, Harriette etc etc etc etc can do it instead. Ultimately you aren’t stopping someone from exercising their right; you are preventing someone from imposing their requirement on someone else.

            However, I note Kelvin hasn’t responded to my substantive point and I await that with interest.

  2. Iain Brodie Browne Avatar
    Iain Brodie Browne

    Firstly thank you for your posting.
    I have been expressing my concern elsewhere that the main voices we have heard in the debate about Tim’s faith have been firstly from those who think that it wholly a private matter and because his opinions are sincerely held and are derived from his faith the rest of us should back off and secondly those who seem to imply that having a religious faith at all is a negative factor. Until your contribution I am not aware that anyone has directly addressed the issue from different Christian understanding.
    I cut my political teeth at the end of the 1960s opposing the all ‘white’ rugby and cricket tours from South Africa. The dominant voices from the churches were from Trevor Huddleston and David Sheppard. They effectively contested the assertions of those who told us (and they did) that apartheid was part of God’s plan.
    Earlier in that decade Michael Ramsey spoke up clearly in support of what was then called homosexual law reform. David Steel, who pushed through the 1967 Act did so at a time when he was regularly introducing Songs of Praise.
    I regret that equal marriage and the removal of other discriminations against gay people –including the issue you raise about Registrars- have not been as effectively championed by Christians as those earlier reforms. It is fair to say that in the minds of those who you describe as ‘decent people in society’ Christians are seen as opposing these reforms. The priority for the churches appears to be to gain protection for those who oppose such reforms. Imagine if that had been the approach to apartheid.
    My own experience gives me hope that things are changing. Our local church got a new vicar who immediately began to pray for the defeat of the Equal Marriage legislation, got up petitions and lobbied. His views on women priests were no more in tune with ‘decent society’. In common with many churches these matters had not really been properly discussed. It was heartening how many members did openly contest his views and a significant portion of the congregation felt so strongly the eventually relocated to other churches. There is a good deal more support for liberal values amongst church goers than is popularly conceived.

    My view is much the same as expressed in the Independent’s editorial this morning which endorsed Tim but added the rider that : ‘It will be for Mr Farron to make clear to party members, the public at large, and this newspaper, that his faith can indeed be reconciled with a liberal view on matters of birth, marriage and death.’ If faith is the opposite of certainty then I have enough to believe that can be achieved but if would be of assistance not only to Tim but to others struggling to reconcile their faith with liberal views if more church leaders provide a Christian narrative as effectively as did Michael Ramsey and Trevor Huddleston did in their day.

    http://birkdalefocus.blogspot.co.uk/2015/06/influencial-divine-former-libdem-ppc.html

  3. Andy Avatar
    Andy

    Personally, as a non-Christian, I find the attack on Tim Farron’s Christian faith distasteful, even disturbing. With the issue of gay marriage, something I wholly support, it is clear to me that Farron was trying to protect freedom of religious thought whilst also legislating for LGBT equality. There is nothing illiberal about that. Freedom of religion is one of the most fundamental human rights, and something liberals should defend. Any definition of liberalism which does not include freedom of conscience, is one I have no interest in supporting.

    1. Kelvin Avatar

      Thanks for commenting, Andy.

      I’m not aware of people attacking Tim Farron’s faith. I am aware of people questioning whether someone who apparently has anti-gay views is an appropriate person to represent the Lib Dems as leader.

      When it comes to the vote about the registrars, that can either be interpreted as defending religious thought or as defending discrimination. I come to the latter view because if I substitute a couple who are gay for a couple being say mixed race (something many people would once have objected to on religious grounds) then I see clear discrimination at work.

      It is a strange day when people are arguing (as some are) that the leader of the Liberal Democrats has the right to hold distasteful views about gay people in private so long as he defends their rights in public. He does have that right but not the right to be taken seriously as well.

      1. David Evans Avatar
        David Evans

        Sadly there have been many who have been attacking Tim’s faith, some directly and some more with disdain. Comments such as listening to his sky fairy are not uncommon. Also portraying his views as apparently anti-gay are without doubt over egging it massively as opposed to the simple fact that as a liberals we should all have views which take into account the “balance of fundamental values of liberty, equality and community” and that this inevitably leads to differences of judgement on lots of individual issues, but do not undermine the fundamental decency and liberalism of many people like Tim, who have proved it over a great many years.

  4. David Evans Avatar
    David Evans

    Kelvin,

    It is a great disappointment to me that you have not come back to me with any further reasoning in response to my post on 30 June 02:19. Have you changed your views, reinforced them with new vigour or simply moved on?

    1. Graham Evans Avatar
      Graham Evans

      David, perhaps you could clarify what your substantive point is. Having reread the whole thread it’s certainly not clear to me.

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • Somewhere over the rainbow

    I’ve just heard that I’ve been included in the Independent on Sunday’s Rainbow List. This is the new name for the Pink List – a list of gay, lesbian, bi and trans people whom the newspaper wants to celebrate as people who have made a difference in the past year. To be honest I’m surprised…

  • Becoming a Welcoming Cathedral

    Someone who is visiting Glasgow at the moment and who has been to St Mary’s a couple of times, said to me this week, “Well, whatever you are telling those people about Welcome, they are actually doing it.” It reminded me of someone in the congregation who said early on in my ministry here, “You…

  • Sermon for Dedication Sunday 2014

    26 October 2014 – Dedication Sunday from Kelvin Holdsworth on Vimeo. You have come to something that cannot be touched – in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen I suppose I should give the full verse of the text that I want to preach on this…

  • La Cenerentola – Scottish Opera – Review

    This review first appeared at Opera Britannia. Rating: A couple of top-notch singers rescue Scottish Opera’s new production of La Cenerentola from the doldrums but sadly it is a production that lacks a sense of direction and purpose from the word go. Uncertainty in the pit and a very mixed bag of voices contribute to…