• A Christian Country?

    I’ve been watching the various debates about whether “we” live in a Christian country with interest over the last 10 days or so. I’m inclined to agree with the notion that the UK clearly has such a great heritage from the Christian tradition that it makes sense to speak of it as having been a Christian country. I also think that we have moved beyond Christendom and that it is obvious that the UK is not a Christian country in the sense of being a country of people who are either united by Christian belief or practise.

    What surprises me a little is how little comment there has been about this in Scotland. After all, in Scotland we are currently thinking very precisely about what kind of country we want to either be or belong to.

    I remain unpersuaded by the case for independence for Scotland. I don’t think myself that separating from the rest of the UK would be good either for Scotland or for everyone else involved. However, I rather like the fact that in Scotland we are talking about what kind of country we hope for. There are clearer lots of people who want a fairer society. However, I’ve no real interest in building a Scotland that is fairer than England. I want a fairer society for everyone. Compassion has no borders. I care for the poor family in Carlisle as much as the poor family in Aberdeen. (Carlisle is nearer in any case).

    What interests me most this week though is that there has been so little discussion of whether Scotland should be a “Christian” nation if independence were to come upon us. I’m quite clear myself that if there is any talk of a draft constitution for Scotland it must be a secular one. I have no problem being part of a historically Christian country and working to make it more secular. I do however have a big problem with starting up a new country and writing Christianity into the constitutional definition of what that country is.

    Should independence become a reality, then we have to have a real debate about what kind of country we are talking about. I certainly don’t want to be part of a new country which has a National Church written into its constitution. Members of the Church of Scotland can’t presume that the rest of the Christian communities are going to back any attempt to keep their particular position in society. Similarly, it cannot be presumed that issues like eduction funding will be unchanged in a new country. The settlement by which the Roman Catholic Church is funded by the state to run often excellent schools can’t simply be presumed to be what the people of a new country will want.

    I’m very aware that some want to make a case for an established or national church on the grounds  that a broad, moderate church is a force for good in society. However, I think that the mainstream Christian churches are currently presumed to be promoting a morality that people who think they are good, decent, upstanding members of society simply abhor. I don’t think there is a long term future for churches to be established or privileged in any way by the law if they are associated in the public mind with discrimination against woman and people who happen to be gay.

    In England, I suspect that disestablishment will come about by erosion. In Scotland where a new constitution is on the table,  things may be rather different.

    I think that a secular Scotland is probably one in which churches like my own will thrive. We all have things to fear from anything else.

3 responses to “Six Points for Preachers”

  1. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
    Rosemary Hannah

    I think I would add: if it does not matter to you, yourself, then don’t imagine it is likely to matter to anybody else. Find, if you can, the point where your concerns and the concerns of the text cross. Better to say a very little that matters, than a lot which really does not.

    Also: read (to yourself, before you start) the whole passage you are going to speak on and read what comes before and after. You do not have to agree with it. You do have to enter into dialogue with it. Supine agreement of Scripture is not (in my opinion) required. Taking it seriously, is.

  2. […] Dent-de-Lion by admin Posted on November 2, 2012  Six Points for Preachers […]

  3. Melissa Holloway Avatar
    Melissa Holloway

    I’ve noticed how uncomfortable preachers are with the word ‘love’. Discounting the times in is used in a pre-set theological phrase like ‘love of Christ’ as sort of a plug in, I rarely hear it in sermons.

    Its a reason to be Episcopalian – if the preacher avoids love, you can always hear it – or see it- or taste it – in the Eucharist.

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • All people – All people that on earth do dwell

    Several people have asked me who it was who chose the music for last Sunday morning's service. The answer this time is that it was me. Usually, that is not my job though I do take my part in the creative process. Luckily, the my taste overlaps reasonably well with the Director of Music's taste.…

  • Eucharistic Prayer

    One of the really great things about the Scottish Episcopal Church is our collection of liturgies. There has been some suggestion recently that these should be gathered together in one prayer book and printed up together. People like the idea of a proper book. I’m not so keen myself. Printing all the wee bookies has…

  • Press Reports on yesterday

    The Scotman has Gay bishop thanks Scottish Church for recognising ‘all God’s people’ The Herald has Applause and tears as gay US bishop preaches in Glasgow The Times has Gay clerics certain to win struggle, Right Rev Gene Robinson says The Daily Record has Bishop in Gay Pledge

  • Gene Robinson on blogging

    Here’s a wee treat and a promise before I finally fall into the slumbers of a happy but exhausted provost. I got the chance of a chat with +Gene before the service this morning. Here is a snippet of the conversation. It is all you are getting tonight but there is more where this came…