What is in Kelvin's Head?

Easter Sermon 2016

27/03/2016

I never know whether he will rise.

Plenty of people who know better than me tell me not to be so stupid.

Of course he will rise they say – it is Easter.

But there’s a part of me which is never entirely convinced.

Before we get to Easter Day you see, I’m just not that sure.

Indeed, I’m not even sure that I want him to.

After the kind of holy week we keep here, you could be forgiven for hoping for a quiet weekend. And it is remarkable the number of people I know who, even knowing what I do for a living ask, “So, what are you doing for Easter?”

We live the whole drama here. From processing with our protest palms last Sunday to the betrayal of Christ in the garden on Thursday; from the cries to hosanna to the cries of crucify; from the lush intimacy of the last supper to seeing him stripped naked and led to a cross.

I end up exhausted.

By late on Good Friday, that day when the light of the world goes out, I find that somewhere in the back of my mind I’m wondering whether or not it wouldn’t be better this time if he would just stay dead.

Such is the reality of Holy Week to me.

And we didn’t need to look far to find the cross this Holy Week either. In the news from Brussels we saw innocent people attacked and targeted. We saw people killed. We saw an attack on the hopes and dreams of all who wish for an integrated peaceful world.

People’s hopes were crucified.

People’s dreams were being tortured by wicked men.

It is easy to believe that Christ will never rise from the dead.

And on the streets of this city, two horrific murders.

All too easy to believe that there will be no resurrection.

Yet disappointment, bitterness, sadness and betrayal are the very ground in which the seed of faith flourishes.

Earlier this year, I had to attend the funeral of someone I knew who had died very suddenly and unexpectedly.

I found myself going to a funeral in Clydebank Crem as a mourner rather than someone taking the funeral.

Now, I’ve been there so many times.. I’ve stood at the front of that building leading services plenty of times. But I never realised that above my head when I stand there, there is a window.

Well, there’s what used to be a window. It is a stained glass window and it is one of those that needs to be illuminated by an electric light, like those on the north side of our cathedral.

This one is left unilluminated.

Crems these days tend to be rather ambiguous religious places. Spiritual but not religious is, after all, becoming the dominant religion if people are asked to tick boxes.

I sat at this funeral, which was for someone who didn’t seem to have had an explicit faith of their own and as I sat there I saw this window that had always been hidden from me when I’d been stood at the front.

It was all dark glass. Dark shapes that didn’t seem to make sense.

And then as the service went on my mind started to see the way the glass was shaped and seeing the outlines of the pains I could suddenly see that it was a representation of a resurrected Christ, wearing a crown of glory and by his feet the word – “I am the resurrection and the life”. Though the glass was still dark it was as though a light had come on. “I am the resurrection and the life”.

Even when we don’t at first see it; even when we’d prefer him to stay dead and quiet and buried, the risen Christ is already dancing down the road ahead of us.

In the first light of dawn I came to this church and the bishop kindled a fire from which we lit the paschal candle.

And a fire was kindled in my heart that burned away the cynicism that made me wonder whether I’d prefer him to remain in the tomb.

For fires need to be kindled.

Candles of hope need to be lit right now.

The light needs to be shared.

As the light was passed around here in the first light of Easter Day, I remembered that the light of Christ will conquer any darkness.

The faith that we proclaim here is simple

We believe death is ultimately beaten.

That means that tyranny will not win.

That means that terrorism will not win.

That means that prejudice will not win either.

For love wins in the end.

We Christians have a candle of hope to share this Easter day will people of goodwill all over the world, those of faith and those who have none. Every one of us is called by current events to make the light shine. Every one of us is called to bring hope and justice and joy and peace to the world.

In this city, I think we have a message to proclaim at this time.

A Muslim man in this city was killed this week soon after wishing Christians (that’s us) a happy Easter.

Let the news go out that the wickedness of such a murder will not define us as Glaswegians. Such wickedness has no place in our city.

Death will not have the last word. Let the love of God warm every heart in this city, Muslim and Christian Glaswegians alike. And let that love show forth in new ways, that this city may flourish.

Warmed by the Easter fire, I know that Christ is risen.

Risen and working through attempts to tackle poverty.

Risen and working as prejudice against gay people gets less and less respectable each year.

Risen and working through the urgency of new interfaith initiatives.

Risen and working in lives set alight in this and other places with the love of God.

Risen and working because there’s no other way to live than believing that love wins in the end.

For if Christ were not risen, we would not be gathered here, in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

Amen.

10 responses to “Where does the Church of Scotland stand?”

Robin

21/05/2013

I understand your sentiments, but both on this issue and on the ordination of women in the Church of England the weary words of Mrs Boyle in Sean O’Casey’s ‘Juno and the Paycock’ in reply to her son, who scorns the Irish Free State and wants an Irish Republic or nothing, are inclined to come to mind:

“To be sure, to be sure — no bread’s a lot better than half a loaf.”

Reply
Nick Brindley

21/05/2013

I think you’re right to think this is a disastrously wrong-headed attempt to avoid having to think the issue through, although we may not agree on what would be involved in such thinking (almost nobody agrees with me!)

I think we need to revisit some pretty fundamental problems on the nature of the moral authority of the Bible, the meaning of “salvation” and what ministry is to make any real progress with this issue and there appears to be depressingly little appetite to do this in a spirit of mutual trust and of trust in the leading of the Spirit guiding our interpretation of scripture

http://loveswork.wordpress.com/2013/05/21/failing-to-be-biblical-reflections-on-church-of-scotland-sexuality-debates/

Reply
Frank keefe

21/05/2013

This is what happens when you water down Gods truth so the secular world will think what a progressive church you are.When a small secular wedge is pushed under a church door you can bet a larger one will be pushed under it in the not to distant future.I believe a liberal minded church like the Church of Scotland is more dangerous to the Christian faith than atheists like Richard Dawkins and his followers. Jesus found it hard to convince the Pharisees of their misguided beliefs if He walked our earth today He would find those modern day Pharisees in the Church of Scotland even harder to convince.

Reply
1. Rosemary Hannah
  
  21/05/2013
  
  Well, there you go – I think the exact opposite – that Jesus, who plucked corn, and healed, on the Sabbath, would be out partying tonight with all sorts of disreputable people. The Pharisees were the people who stuck rigidly to the law, breaking it even as they kept it. Jesus was the one who re-interpreted it.
  
  Reply
  1. Frank keefe
    
    21/05/2013
    
    I find it amazing how those who look for sin to be accepted would try and use Jesus to back them up.First Jesus said the Sabbath was made for man not man for the Sabbath.The Pharisees abused Gods law with their legalism.Its why He said about the rescue of a sheep on that day.He didnt re-interpret it He was showing them how it SHOULD BE KEPT as God ALWAYS intended it.Its the church who is doing the interpretation and Jesus certainly wouldnt be “out partying” such disrespect of our Lords holiness is often the way with liberal ” Christians” Instead of the church being a light to the world that worlds darkness is putting out that light.
    
    Reply
    1. kelvin
      
      21/05/2013
      
      Bless you for your faith, Frank. May it bring you happiness and joy.
      
      Reply
Graeme Cowie

21/05/2013

It’s a fudge, no doubt. And one which, far from preserving the “traditional” Kirk actually serves to undermine it in a number of ways, particularly concerning the status of “doctrine” and who gets to determine what it is, or at least what practical meaning it is for something to be “doctrine” rather than merely a personal religious sentiment. Explicitly to permit complete deviation from “doctrine” by congregations is not very Presbyterian, and the “traditionalists” either didn’t seem to realise that, or they care about preserving substantial doctrines at the expense of, well, what makes the Kirk the Kirk.

To an extent, though, you could see it coming. I think the traditionalist wing sensed they would lose if it was a straight choice (unfortunate phrase) between 2A and 2B, and so tried to push for something that retains a symbolic attachment to historical doctrine whilst letting liberals have the lion’s share of the cake they want, which is to be able to ordain those in committed same-sex relationships and to be done with it. I know for a fact that a fair whack of liberal commissioners were swayed by 2D (not including my parents, who are CofS ministers who voted with option 2A), many seeing it as a way of letting the traditionalists have some sort of phyric victory whilst in fact enabling ministers to be in civil partnerships without any lasting problems. It is much more likely that 2D will make it through Barrier Act procedure now that it’s got the traditionalists’ name on it, and notwithstanding the extra year it’s going to take to turn it into a proper overture, I think the consensus of the Kirk is that they really want to stop talking about this.

The new system ought to be fairly robust once the Legal Questions Committee have had their teeth dug into it. The clear intention was conceded by the movers that they did not intend for Presbyteries to be able to discipline or annul decisions made by Kirk Sessions seeking to be allowed to appoint ministers in civil partnerships, and for a lot of liberals (and actually, a lot of those on the conservative wing too) this will be seen as a critical part of the compromise if it is to be laid to rest. My only real concern is that if the traditionalists are for any reason unhappy with the implementation by LQC it could lead to the whole debate re-opening in GA 2014.

It’s clearly not enough for many liberal ministers, elders and members of the Church of Scotland, for whom this still presents a partial sense of “separate not equal” for congregation and minister alike, and it probably makes it more difficult for the theological position of the kirk formally to be moved away from same sex relationships being sinful, now that the “practical harms” are in a significant sense out of the way, but by Church of Scotland standards, it’s a major step forward for a very broad church, and one which has probably saved it from a major schism (though a handful of churches may still leave over and above The Tron and Gilc South). For those of us in the Kirk 5 years ago, this would have been virtually unthinkable, and momentum has picked up since the Rennie case 4 years ago. The good fight goes on, and hurdles remain, but if it gets through Barrier Act procedure I think the practical objectives, in a Kirk which already offers substantial liberty of personal opinion in matters of doctrine which do not enter into the substance of faith, have largely been met, albeit in a roundabout way.

For more of my thoughts on this matter, see:

http://www.predictableparadox.co.uk/2013/05/church-of-scotland-religious-progress.html

and

http://www.predictableparadox.co.uk/2013/05/presbyterianism-cracking-at-seems-cost.html

Reply
Margaret of the Sea of Galilee

22/05/2013

And it still does not properly address how LGBTQ people (single or in civil partnerships) will be dealt with (dealt to?) when they offer themselves to Presbyteries as feeling called to the Ministry of Word and Sacrament. Will they be asked about their orientation? Questioned? Interrogated? What responses will allow them to or prevent them from pursuing that call?

Who is this Albert Bogle anyway – is he about to become the first to be beatified by the Kirk and for what exactly? By-passing (even disregarding) Kirk “Order”, convincing his important friends to let him bulldoze ahead and his less important friends to print off 700 and something copies of a Deliverance which is incoherent and unimplementable.
Off to read Revelation for other signs of The End Times…
.

Reply
Peter W Nimmo

25/05/2013

Kelvin, you make lots of good points in your post. But just to clarify- what is the doctrine and practice of the Scottish Episcopal Church on this issue? Does your doctrine approve of persons in civil partnerships being clergy, and is that put into practice?

Reply
1. kelvin
  
  25/05/2013
  
  Yes – there are quite a number of clergy in civil partnerships. In England, Anglican clergy in civil partnerships are supposed to declare that they are “celibate”. That isn’t the case in Scotland.
  
  The pension scheme in Scotland recognises Civil Partnerships by giving such partners the same benefits as wives or husbands in marriages. Civil Partners also are treated in the same way with regard to housing as a straight spouse if a relationship breaks down.
  
  Any candidate for ordination who is in a Civil Partnership is expected to be honest about that at selection.
  
  The bishops of the church announced a few years ago that they would not consecrate anyone as bishop who was in a Civil Partnership. They were clear at the time that this was a moratorium. However it is not clear to me whether that moratorium still stands. I do expect there to be questions about that at the coming Synod.
  
  Reply