• Remembering and Forgetting

    A sermon preached on 14 November 2021

    We live in precedented times.

    Oh yes, I know what everyone has been saying for the best part of the last two years. They’ve been saying that we live in unprecedented times.

    Times we could never have imagined.

    Times we could never have foreseen.

    Times that were different to every time before them.

    Yes, said, every newspaper and media outlet. These are unprecedented times.

    But we only think that these times are unprecedented because in order to cope and survive, our species has developed ways of forgetting things alongside ways of remembering them.

    I think I may already have spoken from the pulpit about the dinner that I had just before lockdown when someone connected to the debate about how to address the climate crisis said to me, “We’ve just got to turn to the apocalyptic passages in the bible – it is the apocalypse that makes most sense now”.

    The gospel reading today has more than a whiff of the apocalypse about it.

    Nation will rise against nation and kingdom against kingdom; there will be earthquakes in various places, there will be famines. This is but the beginning of the birthpangs.

    It is easy to get carried away with this kind of thing. Easy to see that it predicts our own panic, our own fears, our own sense of desperation.

    In my wanderings through different religious experiences before I found the practice of faith that I now have, I met the apocalyptic in several places. And prophets too sometimes – prophets of doom who could see the signs of the end times all around. And thought that bad things happened to remind people to turn to God because God is cross.

    And some of them would take it far too far, trying to use all kinds on nonsense to predict the precise time and date on which the world would come to an end and Christ would return to save the saved and damn the damned.

    Many of them were harmless despite their gloom. Some were trouble though.

    And as I’ve grown older, I’ve learned that there’s more to be learned about God by seeing the good things in life as reasons to turn to God in thankfulness rather than seeing the bad things in life as reasons to conjure up a God wants to harm us.

    God never desires our harm. Not for a moment.

    We are God’s beloved. Not the object of God’s anger.

    Beloved in times of war. Beloved in times of plague. Beloved in times of famine.

    Beloved when we need most to be beloved.

    When bad things happen they remind me now that God is good. And God loves us in the places where we are afraid most of all.

    When we turn to the apocalyptic in the bible for our readings – and a lot of them come to us in the lectionary over the next few weeks, it is important to remember that we are not reading fortune cookies. These are not predictions of what’s coming next.

    You can read the apocalyptic in scripture as a foretelling of your own fears if you like. But a more authentic way to read it, I think, is to read it more as an outpouring of how it felt to be the writer in desperate times. It may give us compassion for those who were desperate. It may give us compassion for those who are desperate now.

    And the love of God puts down deep roots in compassionate soil.

    The apocalyptic fascinates us because the human psyche finds it easy to forget where people have gone before. That’s why we sometimes need explicit calls to remember.

    It feels as though our time is particularly barbaric, particularly cruel, particularly insidious.

    And yet reading the apocalyptic can maybe remind us that it has often felt that way. Maybe that it has always felt that way.

    Modern newsgathering and social media have particular ways of amplifying the horrors of the current age. The apocalypse comes to us in newsprint and on our phones in bite sized tweets daily, hourly, by the second.

    And yet, a human being is less likely to die in battle than at any time in recorded history. Thank God.

    And yet, modern science makes facing this pandemic utterly unlike facing any before. Thank God.

    And yet, we have means of communicating with one another that have given us companionship and connection that we could never have dreamt of before – even allowing us to worship like this today. Thank God.

    Apocalyptic writing is a tool for us not a statement of fact.

    It is, and probably always was, both a statement of fear and a call to action.

    When we hear wars and rumours of wars – we are called to peace.

    When we hear of earthquakes and natural disasters – we are called to exercise compassion.

    When we hear of destruction and devastation just around the corner – Climate Change is our most present example of a dawning apocalypse – we are called to change our ways and make change happen on a global scale. Called to love this planet. Called to exercise redeeming love.

    These things are attributes of God. Peace. Compassion. Redeeming love.

    We are made in the image and likeness of God. These things are hard-wired. We have them within. And we can let them roam free in this world.

    The apocalyptic writing that we hear in today’s gospel and the apocalyptic writing that we see in today’s newspapers are, each alike, calls to join in God’s mission.

    Peace. Compassion. Redeeming love.

    For all people. For every place on earth. Forever.

    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

  • The sun comes up it’s a new day dawning

    At about 4.30 this morning I found myself awake, wide awake in my hotel room in Edinburgh. The sun was streaming into the room despite the curtains trying to block it out. And my first thought was words that we sang at morning prayer yesterday in the General Synod meeting. The sun comes up, it’s…

  • 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…

  • Sermon preached on 7 June 2015

    St Mary’s is a special place for all kinds of reasons. This place is a joy and a wonder and it is a place where I really enjoy preaching. I almost never come away from a Sunday or a feast day without feeling moved, inspired and thankful for the worship that we manage offer here…

  • Dear Deans – a Scottish Response

    Within the last week, a rather provocative blog post emerged about the experience of going to cathedrals. It was particularly focussed, I think on the experience of going to a cathedral in England. (You can find it here: Dear Deans – by A Reasonable Enthusiast). Richard Moy, its author writes rather articulately about going to…