• Midnight Mass Sermon 2015

    So where did you learn the Christmas story? Where did you first hear about the baby in the manger?

    I’ve been thinking about this a lot since a sermon that one of my colleagues preached earlier this year in which he suggested that in fact more people know about the story of Bethlehem from the film “The Life of Brian” than those who know it from the bible.

    This is a particular achievement here in the City of Glasgow as the Life of Brian was banned from cinema screens for 30 years.

    I remember when I first heard about this 30 year ban asking someone who had lived here then about it.

    He claimed to have seen the film when it was first released. “But how did you see it when it was banned in Glasgow,” I asked.

    “Oh,” he said, “you had to travel to see it. You had to go to the fleshpots on the edge of the city… places like Bearsden”.

    Anyway, I’m sure that it is true that a lot of people do know about the nativity story from a film which was all about a neighbouring boy, Brian, being mistaken for Jesus.

    Say anything about the coming of the Messiah amongst a certain generation and you are likely to get the response, “Oh, he’s not the Messiah, he’s just a very naughty boy”. And that applies to talk about Jesus as the Messiah. Or any Messiah. Or even a performance of Handel’s Messiah.

    It was a film that was promoted with the tagline: “A motion picture destined to offend nearly two thirds of the civilized world. And severely annoy the other third.”

    Yet the judgement of the self-righteous has mellowed somewhat over the years since it was first on show in cinemas all over the world (except in Glasgow). Time has scattered the proud and the haughty in the imagination of their hearts

    This year there was a theological conference on the Life of Brian with an collection of worthies rightly realising that the film was a satire on those who get the wrong end of the stick about religion not particularly a satire on those who do love the Lord.

    And yet there’s still plenty who do get the wrong end of the stick when it comes to understanding what religion is all about. People still often think religion is there to stop people having fun when the very opposite is true. And it is the birth, not so much the death of the beloved child of God who allows us always to look on the bright side of life.

    For the birth of the Christ Child marks a moment when the world could never be the same again. A moment when all the angels sang and all of heaven danced for joy.

    For the birth of the child tells us that God has come into the world and is interested in what it means to be like us.

    Rather than Brian being confused for someone divine, someone divine became one of us. God got all muddled up with being human. So much so that words themselves were not enough to speak of what had happened.

    For the Word became flesh and dwelt amongst us.

    Words were never going to be enough. Only life was enough.

    And so God came amongst us in the form of a child.

    Tonight we celebrate that birth and in doing so we celebrate that life. We celebrate that God loves us in the dark times. That’s why we always mark this moment at midnight I think – when the world is darkest we celebrate that light will always win out. But this moment also marks a time when we know that God loves us when things are going well too.

    That’s the point. God came to earth – came to live one of our lives here on earth and knows, profoundly knows what it is like to be here.

    Knows hurts and sadnesses. Knows joys and delights.

    And the truth we proclaim here is that God’s coming into the world means that God knows you too.

    Knows you and loves you. Whoever you are and whatever you think of yourself – you are utterly and most profoundly loved. Christmas means that that’s fundamentally who you are – someone who is loved completely.

    When we sing out carols at Christmas we are collectively sharing our joy that God became one of us. And the stories tell us that we are only adding our voices to a heavenly choir that sings at the birth of the babe. Announcing it to shepherds on the hills. Disturbing the sleep of Magi even yet on their way to worship. It is a birth that upsets the tyrant and yet comforts the poor and the lonely. A birth that meant that the world would never be the same again

    And all this focussed on the image of a child in a manger. A new-born child who does not yet speak or teach. Does not yet heal or preach or raise the dead.

    Just a babe in a manger who represents the enormous truth that you are completely loved.

    I have no idea what kind of boy he grew up to be. Scripture is mostly silent on his childhood apart from one incident when he seems to have run off from his parents. But I do know that he’s not just a very naughty boy. This one actually is the Messiah. And he loves you very much indeed.

    In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

    Amen.

11 responses to “We should be wary of declaring martyrs”

  1. Eamonn Avatar

    Agree totally. I find myself in a comparable position vis-à-vis the mass canonisations of the ‘martyrs’ of the Spanish Civil War, which assume that all those worthy of commemoration were on the same side.

  2. Michael Russell Avatar

    Anyone killed for professing their faith is a martyr. ISIS is an equal opportunity martyring machine. The various faith communities targeted, including Islamic ones, should build common ground to dismember ISIS. I simply fail to see the point in quibbling about who is a real martyr and who is not.

    1. Kelvin Avatar

      Is it your view that someone is a martyr for Christianity because they cannot recite a verse from the Qur’an?

      It seems to me that whilst some men and women of violence are being claimed to be martyrs if they should be shot by law enforcement agencies whilst pursuing paths of terror that there’s a huge amount to be gained by determining who is a martyr and who isn’t.

      1. Bro David Avatar
        Bro David

        Not being able to explain a quranic verse was merely a way of discerning if someone was not Muslim. However, is it not just as great a presumption to think they weren’t martyrs, as to think that they were.

        The early church seemed to accept that all who were crucified or sent to the lions for their Christianity were martyrs. Perhaps not all did so as a statement of faith, but were nominal Christians caught up with the rest. But the church didn’t seem obliged to footnote who didn’t qualify.

        I’m not sure that I understand why your are hesitant. It seems a quibble. I don’t think anyone is leaning toward canonization here, just speaking of them as a whole.

  3. Jo Avatar
    Jo

    The SEC still keeps the feast of Charles, King and Martyr. I don’t think we get to be too narrow in defining who is or isn’t a martyr.

    1. Kelvin Avatar

      Actually, Jo – that’s not quite right. The SEC keeps the commemoration of “Charles I, King, 1649”

      There’s no mention of him being a martyr in the calendar (and the current calendar superseded and replaced the one in the prayer book). There are plenty of people who are named as martyrs such as Agnes the week before Charles or indeed “Charles Mackenzie of Central Africa, Bishop, Missionary, Martyr, 1862” the very day after Charles.

      It would appear that rather careful thought was given to whether to describe Charles as a martyr and though he is included in the calendar (not least for founding one of our dioceses) any notion of martyrdom is absent.

      1. Jo Avatar
        Jo

        Thanks for the correction, I hadn’t realised there was that detail of difference between the SEC and CofE.

  4. Father David Avatar
    Father David

    Of course, King Charles was a Martyr and is commemorated as such on January 31st each year. The trouble is that Anglicans have no real mechanism for declaring people to be saints or martyrs. Having referred to two recent horrific incidents on the African continent where Christians were slaughtered simply for being Christians, I wonder what the Provost of Glasgow thinks about the Ugandan Martyrs of the 19th century and would you personally regard them to be martyrs? As you know 23 Anglicans and 22 Roman Catholics were killed by the Kabaka for refusing to submit to King Mwanga’s corporal intimacies. The Roman Catholics were beatified in 1920 and canonised in 1964 but what of our Anglican Ugandan brothers – where they equally to be regarded as martyrs, or would you deny them that honorific title?

    1. Kelvin Avatar

      The Scottish Episcopal Calendar is again very clear: “Charles Lwanga and his companions, 1886, Janani Luwum, Bishop, 1977, Martyrs of Uganda”

      I have no idea why anyone would say that the SEC has no means of declaring someone to be a martyr. Not only do we have such a mechanism, we use it.

  5. Father David Avatar
    Father David

    It would be interesting to know how this mechanism works in the SEC in deciding who is eligible to join the noble army of martyrs? Bishop Edward King of Lincoln is widely regarded as a saint South of the Border. I think it was Archbishop Lang who was asked how it was decided that Bishop King had reached sainthood status and the answer was that he was given a Collect, Epistle and Gospel to commemorate his saint’s day – 8th March, the day of his Heavenly Birthday.

  6. Harry Campbell Avatar
    Harry Campbell

    “We strongly condemn such atrocities, whether they are Ethiopians are not,” the Ethiopian communications minister Redwan Hussein told AFP.
    http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/apr/19/isis-video-purports-to-show-massacre-of-two-groups-of-ethiopian-christians

    What a shame the Archbishop couldn’t have said something similarly inclusive about the victims of the Kenyan massacre, and all such massacres, without caring about what their religion affiliation may or may not have been.

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • Ten Conversations about St Mary’s

    I hear these conversation starters quite a lot…. Wow, it is so beautiful. I never expected it to be like this. I’ve passed it every week for years but never thought of coming in. Isn’t that the one with the nice music? Isn’t it closed down now? What does Episcopalian mean? Is that the one…

  • Abishag the Shunamite

    One of my favourite characters in Scripture is Abishag the Shunamite. I’ve never seen her portrayed in art though. Anyone know whether there is a window or an icon anywhere?

  • Marrriage Myths

    Was at a very good consultation last night run by the Equality Network on proposed changes to marriage law in Scotland. I was very struck by how little people understand about marriage law already. It makes it quite difficult sometimes to have much of a coherent discussion about proposed change when everyone has muddled ideas…

  • Meeting with Bishop Gregor re Same Sex Marriage consultation

    Our bishops in the Scottish Episcopal Church are behaving rather differently towards the same-sex marriage consultation than the leaders of some churches. Instead of fulminating publicly about it, there is a different response which seems to me to be a bit more grown up. This week, Bishop Gregor is offering an opportunity for members of…