What is in Kelvin's Head?

Back from hols and quick theatre reviews

16/01/2014
I’m back to work at St Mary’s today after a post-Christmas (well, post-Epiphany) week off. I’m writing this at the point just before I go into work, say morning prayer and open up the emails that have come in to me whilst I was away.

It has been a busy week. I managed to fit in a trip to Yorkshire to see family and a wee theatre trip to London.

Here are a few quick theatre reviews of what I saw.
- Matthew Bourne’s Swan Lake at Saddlers Wells – by some distance the most exciting thing I saw. I’ve come rather late to this one but loved it. (Except the ending which reminded me of Brokeback Mountain – how often gay couples only end up together when they are dead).
  Rating:
- Ghosts at the Trafalgar Studios – A very good production of this Ibsen play though I was surprised when I got in that I’d already seen a strikingly similar production of the same play at the Citz a while ago. Outstanding question – why did the maid and her father sound as though they came from Govan when they were supposed to be rural Swedes? Apart from that, all made sense and this was quite gripping.
  Rating:
- Not I, Footfalls and Rockaby – the Beckett trilogy at the Royal Court. This was the one I booked in advance and indeed the one that prompted me to book the trip. A rare chance to see Not I, not least because of how difficult it is – the actor hangs upside down on the stage and delivers a monologue “at the speed of thought” whilst the only illumination in the whole theatre is a tiny pencil spotlight on her lips. This was chilling, fascinating theatre that plays with your mind.
  Rating:
- From Morning to Midnight – a German expressionist piece at the Royal National Theatre. Brilliantly done. But should it have been done? I was far from sure. Reminded me of that terrible production of the Seven Deadly Sins that Scottish Opera did a few years ago.
  Rating:
- Mojo – a relatively new play at the Harold Pinter Theatre. This one didn’t work for me at all – far too shouty. Odd that the people in the stalls seemed to think it was hilarious and those in the Royal Circle didn’t. How does this happen?
  Rating:
Not a bad trawl. Add to that three big sung services in musical churches in London, a hour or so looking at favourite things in the National Gallery, some good food and good company and you’ve got a flavour of what I was up to.

I was in London for three nights, by the way and managed to come back without blisters.
Footfalls, From Morning to Midnight, Ghosts, Matthew Bourne, Mojo, Not I, review, Rockaby, Swan Lake

25 responses to “New Statement from College of Bishops”

Dennis

10/12/2014

If you want a good resource for changing things start with Moyer’s Movement Action Plan. It was the bible for social change training movements for twenty years in the US for local and organizational politics and informed some of the organizing.
https://www.indybay.org/olduploads/movement_action_plan.pdf

You might also look at the Midwest Academy’s Manual for Social Change
http://www.midwestacademy.com/manual/

And the granddaddy of them all: Saul Alinksy’s Rules for Radicals (1971) http://www.amazon.co.uk/dp/0679721134

and while you are waiting for it to arrive, start an invitation only discussion list going for those in your church who support change and organize those training sessions in more than one diocese.

Reply
Daniel Lamont

10/12/2014

Dennis makes helpful and pertinent suggestions. It may be inappropriate as an Anglican living in England (albeit hoping to move to Edinburgh when he sells his house) to ask if there is anything we can do anything now such as writing to bishops.

Reply
1. Kelvin
  
  10/12/2014
  
  Writing letters can do much good.
  
  Reply
Steven

11/12/2014

I am an outsider in two senses on this. Firstly, I don’t live in Scotland and am not Scottish. I am not a member of the SEC. Secondly, my faith (such as it is) varies between committed humanism to Quakerism (via Zen) to liberal Christian (all of which represent positions that I deeply admire). I am an honest doubter on the edges of Christianity (a noble calling I share with your own former Primus, Richard Holloway). However, I do love Scotland and visit Edinburgh and the Islands on a regular basis. When I visit I always try and go to church. I usually go to Old Saint Paul’s or St John’s in Edinburgh. I consider myself an Anglican in Scotland (much like the Queen becomes Presbyterian…). I do so because the Scottish Episcopal Church has always represented – to me at least – the most progressive, open minded Christian community on these islands and which retains, at the same time, the beauty and ritual of the Catholic tradition. I must have been mistaken. I would never have thought the Scottish Bishops (all intelligent and sensitive individuals as far as I can tell) could produce such a document – which completely misses the point. I know Bishop David a little bit because he used to be rector of Seagoe Parish in Northern Ireland and I went to school with his children. I served on the vestry in that Parish after his departure to Scotland. I have followed his blog since. While I have a huge amount of respect and admiration for Bishop David, I can’t help but wonder why he remains silent on this issue. Do Bishops ever reveal where they stand on any issue of controversy? The Bishops need to know that real people want change and that documents like the one released simply confound and mystify those of us who see that a prophetic church would be leading the way on inclusion rather than entrenching the old prejudices. Bishop David and all the Scottish Bishops, for the love of God, say what you mean and mean what you say! Do not be afraid.

Reply
1. Fr John E Harris-White
  
  11/12/2014
  
  Steven,thank you for your comment. Exactly my thoughts. Together with sadness, and hurt.
  
  Reply
Craig Nelson

11/12/2014

I wonder if the College of Bishops feel the need of a holding operation. In any case I hope change comes. It may come from the people rather than the Bishops. Still very disappointing.

Reply
Ritualist Robert

18/12/2014

Though I agree that the tone of this isn’t particularly helpful (but then, has a communique from a group of bishops ever been particularly helpful?) I read it more as guidance on how clergy can (indeed must) avoid breaking the law.

I don’t think it would do anybody a favour if a same-sex couple came an SEC priest, were purportedly ‘married’ by him/her when, in fact, that priest was unable to do so under the law.

I think the bishops’ letter was in large part an attempt to protect both clergy and same-sex couples. But, as I say, I agree that the tone of the communique isn’t particularly helpful, especially when it comes to ordinands, for example.

Reply
1. Kelvin
  
  19/12/2014
  
  I don’t think anyone at all has a problem with the bishops giving guidance on bit breaking the law. That really isn’t the issue at all. It is about the tone and the other aspects of the guidance and the fact that this was withheld until a week before the law changed. Oh, and making pronouncements about people without consultung them.
  
  Reply