What is in Kelvin's Head?

Top tips from a Greenbelt Virgin

31/08/2015

I was a Greenbelt virgin until this weekened. I’ve not no good reason why I’ve never been to the festival of arts and spirituality which takes place at the ennd of August each year. However, this year I made it and I had a ball.

Here are my reflections.

1 – The Weather

Yes, Greenbelt is terribly affected by the weather. Saturday was a fine day and ended with a glorious red sunset. However, the shepherds were telling porkies. Sunday certainly wasn’t a delight. The rain started a bit drizzly and turned into a downpour just as i was starting to give my talk. (I did apologise to the crowd – ask a gay person to do anything and you get hurricanes and floods after all). However, the rain didn’t dampen spirits. If anything it just made the atmosphere in the tent in which I was speaking all the more electric.

When I first tweeted that I was a #greenbeltvirgin and asked for tips, most people welcomed me with messages that included the word #wellies. Now I know why.

2 – The Seating
It would have been handy to have brought wellies but it would have been even better to have brought a fold up camping chair. Old stagers knew this. Young stagers and #greenbeltvirgins sat on the grass or later stood in the mud. Having a chair with you is a great idea.

3 – The Organisation
I was really impressed with how it all ran. Even when it did rain, it wasn’t a disaster. Things were run fabulously efficiently. I got to my venue to speak and there was someone to look after me, someone to introduce me, a couple of BSL interpretors and someone making all the audio equipment run well. I can’t always manage this in a cathedral, never mind a field. Full marks to those who have learned how to do this.

4 The Crowd
I found the crowd of people I was speaking to the most receptive audience I think I’ve ever spoken to. They were committed and intereted and up for being challenged to think. People didn’t now quite was coming from me and I suspect that’s what they like. I have to admit to being nervous before the event, but I found people generous, interested and interesting throughout. I did remark during my talk that I was surprised that Greenbelt was not more ethnically diverse and it seems to me that there might be a good conversation to be had about what diversity actually means. (I’m familiar with people thinking something is diverse because they are a bit odd themselves but feel welcome and so presume that diversity has been achieved – there’s more to be said than that).

5 The Surprises
There’s a lot of surprises at Greenbelt. After we cleared out from an OuterSpace (ie overtly gay friendly) Eucharist on Saturday evening which was full of joy, the space was taken over by the Goth Eucharist. Now, that’s not particularly for me, but I loved being in a place where it could happen. Same with the gay drinks reception, which was a hoot. Whole bunch of gay people thinking “I never ever thought I’d be at a gay singles event at a Christian thing and look at all these people – there’s lots of us!” A red straw in your drink meant that you were available. Some had multiple red straws.

6 Churchmanship of Greenbelt
I’ve heard a few people say, when asked whether they are high or low or evangelical or liberal that they are none of those things but are really a Greenbelt Christian. I get that now. This was an event where the ethos would have been very familiar to many who come to my congregation, who just don’t fit into the old fashioned ways of characterising churches and Christians. For a lot of people I sensed that Greenbelt is where they are their most authentic selves and it gives them a boost each year which means that they can cope with the church in all its strangeness the rest of the year. For this itself, Greenbelt is doing a great work.

So, will I be back.

You bet.

Oh and PS – you can do Greenbelt without camping. I can recommend a good B and B.

5 responses to “Heresy hunting”

Nick Brindley

14/05/2014

It is probably helpful to be clear about the distinction between “dogma” (which is best understood as the definition of orthodoxy and of heresy, of the things it is mandatory to affirm and the things it is forbidden to affirm) and “church order” (the rules about how people are to conduct themselves). These are related but by no means the same thing.

“Doctrine” is a third thing again, to my mind. It is the body of teaching that the church affirms but is much more extensive and changeable than dogma.

Of particular relevance is who has the authority to pronounce on these things. Denominational authorities quite properly establish church law and discipline (this needs to be done and there’s nobody else to do it) but would go beyond their proper sphere (in my view) if they tried to establish new definitions in the field of dogma.

Reply
Andrew

14/05/2014

I feel the need to separate praxis and doctrine, but I suppose that is probably a minor heresy in itself, in a church that hides its doctrine in its liturgy. Although I suppose the deftness of the ‘McCarthy Liturgy’ has maybe sidestepped that pitfall as deftly as an 18th century non-juring bishop side-stepping western orthodoxy and the rest…

Reply
Rosemary Hannah

15/05/2014

To a degree I think it is a matter of tradition. Anglican churches have tended (and it is only a tendency) to insist of orthopraxis. Church of Scotland churches have tended (same health warning) to emphasise orthodoxy of belief, call it doctrine or dogma. St Andrews is not of course a C or S institution, but it used to be, certainly in my day, and to a degree in yours, heavily steeped in C of S ethos. St Mary’s trained C of S ministers and that was ALL the training they got, because then they knew Orthodoxy.

Reply
Jimmy

15/05/2014

The links on this post have led me to think of this –

The Inner Party – The Outer Party – The Proles.

The model demands tight control of the middle class, with ambitious Outer Party members neutralised via promotion to the Inner Party or “reintegration” by Miniluv, while proles can be allowed intellectual (and sexual) freedom because they lack intellect. Winston nonetheless believed that “the future belonged to the proles”. Wikipedia.

Reply
Allan Ronald

19/05/2014

There was most definitely a C of S ethos at St Andrews in my day [67-71]. Robin Buchanan-Smith was running a packed college chapel and one president of the SRC and one president of the Union were St Mary’s men who went on to ordination and, in one case, to be Moderator of the Kirk. Perhaps they got their orthodoxy from Matthew Black at St Mary’s and their skill in future clerical politics from their student posts…….

Reply