What is in Kelvin's Head?

  • For the cartoonists

    I used a cartoon, and a religious cartoon at that, on, my blog yesterday and yet I live.

    I sometimes pray for satirists – those who come to occasional services in St Mary’s may occasionally have heard me do so. They don’t usually get enough prayers. Today, sadly, the thoughts of the world are with them.

    The killing of the journalists and cartoonists in Paris today made me think of a divinity class I was in long ago. We were talking about feminism and ethics, that being the stuff I was made on. We had discussed non-violence and non-violent protest. Inevitably we had made an excursion around Ghandi and Martin Luther King Jr and had probably had a go at whether Bonhoeffer was justified in getting involved in the plot against Hitler. We noted that these were all men, of course, and and talked about whether that was inevitably so.

    Eventually, someone said, “Yes, but what about real tyrants. What do we have to say to people facing real tyranny. Do we tell them to go floppy in the middle of the road as part of a protest when they will just get killed for it? What about tyrants – how do we deal with them?”

    There were no answers forthcoming from the class but there was from the person teaching it.

    “Make people laugh at them” she said.

    I’ve never forgotten that answer and I don’t forget it today, for all its problems.

    I realised then that words and ideas were always more potent, always more powerful than force. It was a moment when something significant made sense to me for the first time. Humour can be savage and sometimes needs to be.

    The killings in Paris do no honour to any god. They dishonour our common humanity.

    And so I turn back to my prayers.

    For satirists, humourists, cartoonists.
    For journalists. For bystanders.
    For those who take risks to disturb our peace of mind.
    For those who take risks to give the peace and security for them to do so.

    Lord in your mercy.
    Hear our prayer.

     

     

    , , ,

5 responses to “Heresy hunting”

  1. Nick Brindley Avatar
    Nick Brindley

    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
  2. Andrew Avatar
    Andrew

    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
  3. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
    Rosemary Hannah

    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
  4. Jimmy Avatar
    Jimmy

    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
  5. Allan Ronald Avatar
    Allan Ronald

    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

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • Conversation, Striptease & Fishing – how to blog for beginners

    Hey, good news, good news. Malcolm Round has started a blog. Malcolm is the Rector of St Mungo’s, Balerno. I know he has been fascinated by the online blogging thing for a while and I’m delighted to see him having a go himself. Away you all go and read his stuff and leave him a…………

  • Equal Marriage – Prop 8 Ruling in California

    So, the anti-gay Prop 8 has been ruled unconstitutional in California. [Here’s the catch-up if you’ve not been paying attention – California allowed some same-sex couples to marry, then there was a people’s poll on the same day as the Obama election which was passeed by 52% to 48%. It determined a new amendment to…

  • Sermon preached on Lammas Day – 1 August 2010

    Today is 1 August and that is a traditional day in Scotland which has a name and a heritage and a series of traditions around it. And I bet most people these days don’t know what it is. Today, 1 August is Lammas Day – one of the Scottish Term Days, similar to the English…

  • Inclusive Language

    Ruth has the skinny on the Inclusive Language amendments that the College of Bishops has licensed for permitted use. The paper proclaiming these amendments has not reached these parts and I’m not sure what that situation means liturgically. Most of the amendments are not particularly surprising, and indeed, some of them have been in use…