What is in Kelvin's Head?

Can you preach about the Road to Emmaus?

20/04/2015

This sermon was preached on 19 April 2015 in St Mary’s Cathedral, Glasgow using ideas that were also explored in the sermon preached for Fr Chucks Iwuagwu in Haslemere, Surrey.

Sermon preached by Kelvin Holdsworth on 19 April 2015 from St Mary's Cathedral, Glasgow on Vimeo.

There are a number of texts in the bible about which it is almost impossible to preach. If I were to ask you which texts were there which preachers really shouldn’t attempt to tackle then I fancy that you might come up with some of the genealogies – the lists of who begat whom. Or maybe some of the more obscure purity laws in Leviticus which have little to do with our lives in a modern world.

And it is true – some of those texts are next to useless for anyone trying to preach the gospel.

But there are also a small number of texts about which sermons are pretty tricky for the opposite reason. If I’m honest, I’ve never heard (or preached) a sermon on the good Samaritan which actually improved on the story itself. It is the same with the Love Chapter – that glorious paean to love which St Paul sent to the fractious church in Corinth. No matter how badly it is read at so many weddings the ultimate truth shines out.

Love is patient, love is kind. (And that just can’t be improved upon.

And the same might be said of Psalm 23 – when did you ever hear a sermon on it that improved on the poetry or the pathos of the human condition so precisely observed.

And so it is with the gospel reading this morning.

The road to Emmaus is the Easter reading par excellence – it is familiar and comforting and disturbing all at once because it contains within it the surprise of recognising the Lord himself who appears, as is our experience with the breaking of bread and the fellowship that results from the breaking down of barriers between people.

But who can improve on the story?

What preacher ever beat Luke at his own game?

The answer, if there is one is to presume that we’ve never heard Luke telling of the story at all.

The answer is to put ourselves into the shoes – or probably the dusty sandals of the two who made their way to this place called Emmaus.

And the thing to remember is that they’ve not heard the story. They’ve no idea what’s about to happen to them much less any idea that we might still be talking about them these centuries later.

As they walk along, can we walk with them and overhear their conversation.

Before the stranger catches up with them, what are they saying?

Luke just tells us that they were talking about what had happened. Jesus had been put to death and Jesus had been buried. He was gone. No doubt there was a lot to talk about.

If we read this as pious Christians who know how the story turns out then we might presume that they were having prayerful discussions about how Jesus’s death fitted in with the prophecies of the Hebrew scriptures. If we read the story as empathetic fellow travellers on a spiritual tradition we can probably see into their grief and share it.

But what makes us so sure that is what they were talking about.

What makes us so sure that they were not angry with Jesus for provoking just about everyone and finally going that one step too far and getting himself killed off long before his time.

They may not have been experiencing pious thoughts at all. They may have been really rather cross.

And surely they must have been wondering what was coming next.

They’d been part of a great movement. And they’d lost their Messiah – what comes next? Who will replace him?

How do you replace a Messiah anyway?

Well, it’s obvious, isn’t it? You just put an advert in the Church Times for a new one. Maybe that’s what they were talking about as they made their way along the road.

How to write the advert for a new Messiah.

I’ve got this week’s edition of the Church Times here. This is how those adverts usually sound.

• City based church seeks Messiah. Our priorities are missional leadership, imaginative outreach and children and young people. We seek a Messiah who has a personal relationship with God. (These adverts are all written in code).

• Here’s another one – Honorary Assistant Messiah needed for 8 rural parishes in Norfolk. House provided but no stipend. Must be self-motivated.

• Messiah required to be rector of beautiful rural parish in the Garden of England. Good schools, lovely people, well-appointed Rectory. Resolutions A, B and C have been passed. (That’s code for – no female Messiah’s need apply).

It is funny the things they put in these adverts.

If I’m ever tempted to read these out in the office on a Friday morning when the Church Times comes I have to make sure that there are no coffee pots near to the Vice Provost. He has been known to get over excited and break crockery in his fury at what they say.

You would think sometimes that the Christian Gospel had been spread for 2000 years by mission development plans, people able to accomplish goal based ministry and those who have a passion for “innovative work with families and children”.

Fortunately, I think that I worked out some time ago that this simply isn’t true.

The Christian Gospel is spread by kindness, good humour, by people who bear the marks of Christ in their souls to enable them to reach out to a world that needs to know more about God’s love. It is spread by the enthusiastic witness of those who know the love of God to be true and to be the most wonderful thing in the whole world. But somehow the adverts don’t usually mention those things.

The stranger reached over the table and picked up the bread and gave thanks and broke it and their eyes were opened.

Opened I suspect to the good company that he had been on the road. The good humour he had exhibited that made them invite him in. The kindness he had shown them at a difficult time. Familiar factors. Familiar signs. Familiar symbols.

And all of a sudden their eyes are opened. And all of a sudden he doesn’t seem to be there.

Or is he?

All of a sudden they have a burning desire to rush back to Jerusalem. All of a sudden they have a burning desire to tell their friends that all it not lost. Love has not died. Kindness has not gone. The one who broke bread with them before has broken into their world again.

They don’t need a new Messiah.

It is worth remembering sometimes that the church doesn’t need any new Messiahs. One was always enough and he’s still around.

Still around and still turning up where bread is broken, stories shared and God’s people with humour and kindness celebrate the greatest news in the world – that God is love.

Turned up there in Emmaus. And turns up here.

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.

7 responses to “Inspection of TISEC”

Rosie Bates

25/04/2013

You are saying nothing Kelvin, doubtless for good reasons. However, I notice comment is open.

I do not pretend to be learned or academic enough to fully grasp the content of this document.

I do have experience. In a former life in a solicitor’s office, fashion, MIND, Samaritans, hospitals and other charities. As a member of the Church of England I have been a PCC member, sunday school teacher, pastoral visitor to the sick, particularly the mentally troubled, drug addicted and those facing homelessness and women living in abusive situations. Apart from those in deep mental distress I never experienced rudeness from my co-workers or fear of my person. This only began when I offered myself for Ordination!

I never experienced rudeness or abuse from co-workers when I ministered in Prisons, Hospices and Hospitals. I did experience it in all church meetings, especially when exploring Inclusive pastoral theology and the guidance of ordinands on placement with me, one of whom is now a Dean – but this person was no good as far as vocational advisors were concerned? Neither was this person protected in any way whatsoever until tranferred to our parish who appreciated their gifts. This gifted person needed our appreciation long after ordination as the powers that be continued to block progress. There were others in the same position.

How we treat people offering themselves for any kind of Christian vocation – What I find disturbing about this tome is the language which seems to have been culled from commercial, human resource and legal sources. ‘quality control’? I wonder what this is all about. The Church of England goes the same way because they need the money and they are ever likely to when they refuse to attend to the Gospel.

Some of the document reads as that of a church Instititute in fear of the life of the church – full stop. It seems to be driven by fear of legal redress and, perish the thought, ministers with particular vocations and personalities in particular settings. Of course vocational guidance needs safeguards BUT. To my mind much of what is written and supposed to be guarded against stems from the general malaise affecting all churches – the widespread refusal to accept those whom God sends who are bound to be a motley crew! More controls by control freaks will not answer the problems of exclusion. They may however protect those who wish to put God’s servants in dubious boundaries possibly controlled by dubious servants. Meanwhile, those who might be getting on with ministry may be forced to fill in more forms and tick more boxes or, if they have any sense, make something up to keep the idiots quiet!

I seem to remember Christ warning against lawyers schemes and dreams and those obsessed with commercial viewpoints. All the tools of losers but not those with a vision for the Body of Christ on earth where risking all for the Kingdom is often our call. Could this possibly include LGBT members and women and divorcees? Until it does no report or formal guidance will ever protect the Church or her servants from self abuse. I close my thoughts with an extract from your sermon as I fear this may continue to be the case for many, some of whom may not proceed to the fulfilling aspect or have a voice:-

‘My selection to be a priest was laboured and painful. My training was grim. The way that Iâ€™ve been managed has been ghastly. And the truth is, I have a wonderful, fabulous, fulfilling life.’

Reply
Daniel Lamont

29/04/2013

I would like to comment on Rosie’s comment.

1) I have friends who are ordained priests – in England – who report the kind of rudeness that Rosie identifies and I have witnessed it myself. It is wholly unacceptable and there needs to be a concerted effort from senior clergy and lay people to stamp it out. This kind of rudeness and abuse flies in the face of the injunction ‘to be in love and charity with our neighbour’ but institutions perpetuate it, often under the guise of dismissing it it as being no more than robust interplay between colleagues. It is, in fact, bullying and cannot be tolerated. Why is it?
2) I also agree with Rosie that the institution seems to be frightened and overly bureaucratic.
3) However, I don’t agree with Rosie about the report itself. As a retired academic and someone who has done a lot of work for the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education (QAA) especially in Scotland, I am of course complicit in the process. I also agree that the language wished on us has too much managerial-speak. One must look behind the commercial language. None the less, the process of external review is, I believe, important and can be helpful. At its core, the process is about assessing the quality of the student’s experience and whether the course of study/preparation is fit for purpose. It is also important that academic standards be consistent. Students who have come through TISEC need to be assured that the qualification is acceptable should they move to another Province. If there isn’t external review, courses can stagnate at best and be damaging at worst. Such reviews are as much about enhancement as about anything else. The report is professional and thorough and makes for uncomfortable reading. Kelvin describes his training as ‘grim’ and I have heard similar comments about ordination training elsewhere. The purpose of such reports as this is to prevent the perpetuation of such ‘grim’ training and to encourage the provision of something which is liberating and genuinely developmental. My own practice as a university teacher of English was immeasurably helped by external reviewers. I don’t think we should dismiss the report but find ways of implementing it so that all TISEC’s student can feel that their vocational potential is released.

Reply
1. Rosemary Hannah
  
  30/04/2013
  
  Indeed there is much to take on board. However, without wishing to down-play the negative aspects of the report, I think it would be in order to point out that it was not wholly negative. Indeed, seven areas were ones the board had ‘confidence’ in and in another seven they had ‘confidence with qualifications’. Recognising this does not mean that Tisec staff members, of whom I am one, are complacent: we recognise the need to improve and keep on improving. It does mean, however, that the changes made since Kelvin was there have begun to make for a more positive experience among the students. The two areas of ‘no confidence’ are of course serious. I do not think it would be appropriate for me to say more in this kind of forum.
  
  Reply
Daniel Lamont

30/04/2013

Rosemary, You are quite right to point out that there is much positive in the report. I am more concerned to support the process and principle of external review and the work of the inspectors than comment in any detail about the content of the report. I am in no position to do that.

Reply
1. Rosemary Hannah
  
  30/04/2013
  
  I would join you in totally supporting external review. Tisec is externally reviewed both by Min Div and by its academic validating body, University of York St John. Three years study at Tisec is accredited and is the equivalent of the first two years of a degree, and the credits earned can be, and indeed have been, used by students wishing to complete a degree. Nobody should be in any doubt that qualifications from Tisec are academically recognised and accepted.
  
  Reply
Kirstin

07/05/2013

Thank you for posting this link Kelvin.
It saddens me that among the 50+ recommendations are at least half a dozen which students were asking for almost right from the beginning – most notably a chaplain.

Reply
Rosie Bates

07/05/2013

‘My own practice as a university teacher of English was immeasurably helped by external reviewers. I donâ€™t think we should dismiss the report but find ways of implementing it so that all TISECâ€™s student can feel that their vocational potential is released’.

Daniel, I am certain you are correct and far more experienced in external review processes and the wisdom of them than I am. I regret that I tend to pick up on negatives in reports these days but I suppose this is because the dangers of particular prejudices in the Church are just not honestly expressed. This always leaves me with misgivings about how open any student may be about their particular personal situations. My thoughts are not confined to gender issues. Everybody has ‘baggage’ of some sort – either past or on-going. There are peculiar responsibilities attached to the care of those training for Christian ministry and an individual’s spiritual formation may be in danger if their choice of spiritual direction is limited due to prejudice of one kind or another. We all know that Christ works with our weaknesses and individual sensitivities for the good of the whole Body of Christ. Finding genuine, inner disciplined strength as a redemptive outworking of our past and present weaknesses is always an on-going process requiring constant and vigilant discernment. In this regard Kirstin’s comment is particularly relevant:-

‘It saddens me that among the 50+ recommendations are at least half a dozen which students were asking for almost right from the beginning â€“ most notably a chaplain’

When I was working in Cat A prisons I was not in those days required to report everything the prisoners told me to the Senior Prison Chaplain and this was understood by all. I soon discovered this was an important aspect of my ministry as the Head Chaplain was obliged to give rather full reports on prisoners to the regular meetings of the Parole Board. This situation did not always lead to honesty and just conclusions. The Chaplains concerned noted that prisoners were more open with me and I pointed out the spiritual dangers of the reporting system. Several prisoners went on to obtain proper justice for past abuses they had suffered but had hidden from a system they feared. With the best will in the world all institutions are bound to have their weak points from time to time as well as their many strengths. The appointment of a chaplain with whom students may freely confide should have been a priority when such reasonable requests were first voiced. Our human condition longs for standards that allow for the freedom of the Holy Spirit in the life of the worldwide Church. Enabling conditions that allow for the expression of fears and what lies at the heart of them is surely a vital factor in the progress of every individual’s vocation whether this be to lay or ordained ministry. ‘Perfect love casts out fear’ and I wish I could say I was not overly fearful for the Church of England in terms of her vision for justice and freedom for all her members. The fear at work among us has tended to provoke critical responses to many recent documents. Who among us can say whether this is necessarily helpful is always a big question. The big questions in life are always best explored within a loving, transparent worshipping community. Being challenged is often a painful part of the Divine response to a simple question such as ‘Here I am Lord – what do you require of me?’……………I do pray that TISEC will be further enabled by the power of the all embracing Holy Spirit to help students and staff to respond in profound and positive ways.

Reply