• David’s Lamentation – a sermon preached on 12 August 2024

    David the King, was grieved and moved
    He went to his chamber,
    his chamber and wept
    And as he wept, he wept and said…

    Oh, my son, oh, my son
    Would to God I had died
    Would to God I had died
    Would to God I had died
    For thee, oh Absalom, my son, my son

    Victory that day was turned into mourning
    When the people did see
    how the king grieved for his son
    He covered his face and in a loud voice cried…

    Did you ever meet someone who was better at something that you are and admire them just for that?

    Meet David King of Israel who is better at doing something than I am and I love him for it.

    We’ve been reading stories of David for the last couple of weeks and seen much that is unlovable. Much that we would turn our eyes from.

    Two weeks ago, we heard of him sending a man to certain death in battle so that he could make off with his wife.

    David’s behaviour in that reading is so outrageous that I had complaints from members of this congregation for allowing it to be read.

    I tend not to believe in providence but I do believe in comeuppance and last week we saw David being confronted with righteous anger by Nathan the Prophet pointing the finger at David for his wicked behaviour. And turning David into a snivelling wreck.

    David often isn’t a terribly attractive figure.

    And yet he can do something that makes me admire him 3000 years since he last drew breath.

    David could lament like no-one else. His cries of lament over Saul his mentor and David is lover and Absolom his son move me. Move me very deeply and make me love him despite all else we know of him.

    The version of David’s Lamentation that I just sang is just one of many settings of his words thoughout the ages. His sorrow is written in the history books of the scriptures and recorded in the Book of Psalms, the hymn book that Jesus sang from.

    And lament is important.

    It is sometimes said that we have forgotten how to lament. Maybe we have forgotten how to lament in public, but I know that this congregation is one where lament is seldom absent in private.

    Lament for the horror of wee girls killed at a dance class.

    Lament for the horror of fascists turning that into something to attack those who have come to this country seeing refuge and safety.

    Lament for those the stirring up of race riots online.

    And Lament for schools hit by missiles in Gaza.

    And people who are members of this country express lamentation for events that go back months and years as well as weeks.

    Lamenting over the Russian invasion of Ukraine.

    Lamenting for the national boundaries that Britain left behind in Africa.

    Lamenting for a world being roasted by the sins of climate change denial and ignorance.

    And lament for ourselves and our own sins.

    For we like David have done things which we ought not to have done and no done things that we ought. And there is no help in us.

    And lament for our griefs for all of us bear them.

    David puts into verse his grief, He lets his troubled soul sing.

    And it makes me love him.

    It makes me love him because lamentation is the expression of the depth of our capacity to love. For grief is the name for love that is stronger than death.

    Lament is the song of the hopeless and the despairing. But it is an urge to give voice to the deep, deep knowledge that things should not be this way. Paradoxically it contains within it hope. Hope that it will not always feel like this.

    Deep in the pit, lament shines a little light on sadness and from that light, please God may seeds of hope be nourished. That knowledge that things should not be this way is the beginning, the fragile and tender beginning of doing something with the recognition that not only will all things pass but that all this could be different, better.

    The hope that justice may be known.

    The hope that righteousness may flourish.

    The hope that peace will prevail.

    The hope that the rawness of grief might change.

    These are the seeds nourished by lamentation.

    Christianity never denies death or grief or tragedy. Indeed, it says that all of these are all too real.

    However, it says that they will not win in the end. It says that resurrection isn’t just possible but inevitable. And it says that a world put right is not just something we are called to make real but that we are called to enjoy and delight in it forever.

    “Love wins” isn’t just a slogan that some of us carry about in rainbow colours at Pride. It is also the truth that those of us who bear the name Christian live by. It is our two word creed.

    In the gospel reading this morning, Jesus talks about eternal life being our destiny. I am the bread of life he says. And whoever eats of me will have eternal life.

    We eat of him week by week and are nourished by the comforts of the Eucharist at this table. And as we receive the bread each week we receive the challenge to make the world one in which everyone has enough to eat, people to love them and joy in great abundance.

    I believe that lamentation is important and needs to be part of our song. But I also believe that lament will not be the last song that we sing.

    There are alleluias to be had in putting the world to rights. There are hosannas to be sung in worship in sharing the business of a God who wills goodness and love for everyone who draws breath.

    I am aware of the deep despair that people have been feeling about the world recently.

    Lament and do it well. But lament and live.

    In this place, every week, before we eat of the bread of life, we hear the bidding, “Lift up your hearts!”

    As we hear that this week, let us hear it as a command.

    For God is good. And goodness will prevail. And love wins.

    Always and forever, love wins.

    In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the holy Spirit. Amen.

     

78 responses to “10 questions arising from the misogyny of a “headship” bishop”

  1. Kelvin Avatar

    I think it is time for this discussion either to draw to a close or return to the 10 questions that I posed in the original post.

    I’ve chosen not to allow a number of comments through. These include one which indirectly compared me (and presumably “the liberals”) to paedophiles, a number which were of the “The bible plainly states that women are subordinate to men” type, another which was verging on proof-texting and another one which was trying to suggest to me and my readers that the payment of money to a particular religious leader in Africa who was able to cast spells would sort out a number of our problems.

    It is my blog, and I chose which comments to allow. Discussion of my commenting policy is not necessary.

    1. Kimberly Avatar
      Kimberly

      But casting spells… You’ve never had that offer before. Are you sure you aren’t tempted?

      1. Kelvin Avatar

        You think my own are not sufficient?

  2. Tom W Avatar
    Tom W

    Fair enough – answers to the 10 questions:

    1. To Members of Parliament: Are you really comfortable with 1 million children being educated every day by an organisation with these values?
    A: Apparently yes; there being faith schools (both Christian and Muslim) that teach ethics that you would find objectionable. Part of free speech, I guess.

    2. To candidates in the next election: Will you support the disestablishment of the Church of England because organisations which behave in this way should have no privileged place in parliament?
    A: I’m ambivalent about disestablishment; I think it will happen during the time I’m a C of E priest. But yeah – why not? – let’s disestablish rather than let non-Christian politicians ride roughshod over Christians’ consciences.

    3. To the Archbishop of Canterbury: Do you realise that this makes you personally look like a misogynist too as suffragan appointments are always personal to the bishop involved?
    A: I’m certain he is aware how this measure would be attacked, and that despite that he proceeded.

    4. In the General Synod of the Church of England: …. and if people ask for a bishop with racist views to represent them, will we do that too?
    A: No one is doing so. Nor would they be able to with biblical warrant. Fallacy of reductio ad absurdum.

    5. To the BBC: Why are you not covering this story as a major news item?
    A: Because this is unremarkable now, given that it was agreed months ago in the run up to the measure being put before Synod.

    6. To those who serve in Church House, Westminster: Why do progressive changes to the Church of England have to go through years of debate at General Synod and regressive ones don’t?
    A: This isn’t a change; the novelty was in not having complementarian bishops since +Wallace Benn retired.

    7. To Primates around the communion: Why is this novelty and abuse of the episcopate acceptable when the appointment of a man who happened to be gay was so unacceptable?
    A: Because the majority of the Anglican Communion worldwide see this measure as consonant with biblical convictions, but the appointment of a gay bishop as not being so.

    8. To the Prime Minister at Prime Minister’s Question Time: Does the Prime Minister share the concerns of many in this country that the Church of England is institutionalising misogyny.
    A: Presumably he, like the unanimous Dioceses committee and the Archbishops don’t think this is misogynistic.

    9. To the silent Church of England Bishops who believe themselves to be liberal: How do you sleep?
    A: They may indeed find it objectionable, but have chosen to honour the promises made in the Guiding Principles for the greater good of the Church.

    10. To the first woman to be consecrated as bishop in the Church of England: Was it worth it on these terms?
    A: These were the only terms available after the legislation failed in 2012.

    1. Penelope Cowell Doe Avatar
      Penelope Cowell Doe

      Sorry, not on the 10 Qs but if you will allow I do want to respond to Ender’s post. I did not say that God was not interested in sexual relationships. I said I didn’t much care what people got up to with their genitalia. Textual criticism means being attentive to the text!

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • Daily Prayer resources – Passiontide

    Whilst working from home, I’m going to be updating the Daily Prayer resources that I make available. Here are the files you need for saying Daily Prayer at the moment. Kalendar for March – June 2020 The Suffering Christ – Passiontide – Morning Prayer The Suffering Christ – Passiontide – Evening Prayer Compline in Lent

  • Daily Prayer Resources

    Whilst working from home, I’m going to be updating the Daily Prayer resources that I make available. Here are the files you need for saying Daily Prayer at the moment. Kalendar for March – June 2020 Returning to God – Morning Prayer Returning to God – Evening Prayer Compline in Lent Some days are particular…

  • The Provost’s Perfect Pancake Receipt

    Here’s the perfect pancake receipt one more time. Ingredients: 100g plain flour pinch of salt 2 large heggs 200 ml milk 75 ml water 50g melted butter Method: Sieve Whizz Fry #pisky

  • Review: Nixon in China – Scottish Opera – ****

    Do we make history or does it make us? Scottish Opera’s co-production of Nixon in China is a timely and intelligent piece that asks questions about things that many in the audience will remember yet provides no easy answers. This is not a simple morality tale, nor a love story, nor a tragedy. It is…