• Finding a place to be

    I heard of another church that is due to close this week. It is in a place some distance from me but a church community that I once knew and like many church closures, it seems incredible to me that this particular one is closing down. As it happens it is one of the very many Church of Scotland closures that are currently going on. The congregation in question, such as it is these days, will be invited to join with another congregation. It is a rare merger of churches which produces a church with the strengths of both congregational parties. The strong likelihood is that the resulting congregation will be less than the sum of its two parts.

    My own denomination is not immune to this kind of thing. Some of our churches are very vulnerable. Some of them are coming to the end of their natural. However, our decline feels a little different to that of many churches.

    Scottish Episcopalians have been here before of course. We’ve already been wiped out.

    I’ve read articles recently that have been well trailed online suggesting that the Church in Wales and the Anglican Church in Canada face complete wipe out within a short number of years. Existential collapse is a real risk. Those writing the articles that I’ve been reading are firmly of the view that it is all the fault of the wicked liberals with their desire to stamp out the true faith by treating men and women alike and with their perverse notion that stability and love should be foisted on same-sex couples as a possible way of living on this earth.

    Life is more complicated of course. Much more complicated and much more interesting.

    When you witness these things from the perspective of a church that has already been wiped out, maybe they feel different. The Scottish Episcopal Church came within a whisker of being wiped out in the years following 1689. Politics started it. In the same way that trains stop because of the wrong kind of leaves on the line, the Scottish Episcopal Church pretty much hit the buffers because of the wrong kind of king on the throne. The organisational structure of the church died. But its spirit never did. And I want those who are in churches which face terrible demographic change over the next few years to know that. It is relatively easy to close church buildings. But the essence of a denomination is harder to kill off if it does its basic business and leads people into the presence of God.

    One of the signs of organisational collapse in church structures is increasing desperation within regional and national jurisdictions.

    The trouble is, desperation is not a successful mission strategy.

    Few mission strategies are terribly successful to be honest, and I find myself thinking a lot about that.

    Might God be telling us something in this area?

    The mission strategies which seem to aim to turn every Christian into a little missionary to recruit more people into the fold seem spectacularly unsuccessful.

    I think we need new and more interesting metaphors for doing all of this. If it is just about turning people into recruiting agents, I’m not sure I’m interested and from all I can see, God doesn’t seem to be all that interested either.

    I think instead that Christian communities that provide the space and the resources for people to live life in all its fullness tend to be magnetic. The dominant way that faith seems to be being passed on now that Christendom (the expectation that everyone belongs to the faith already) is over, seems to be the simple force of attraction.

    People are attracted to those living lives that are full of old-fashioned joys like faith, hope and love.

    And people are attracted, deeply attracted, attracted more than most church folk can imagine, to places where they can find the space and the resources to simply be and find themselves loved by God. Some of that is played out in the “thin place” spirituality with which we are very familiar in Scotland. But church folk have lost the basic plot if we lose the idea that crossing the threshold of a church means something. To enter a holy place is a holy thing and there’s work to be done to tell people that the God of the mountaintop has a heart for the city and the God of the island pilgrimage is waiting for pilgrims back at home in the spaces we can find where the buzz of life is at its most exuberant. Churches have always been places where the experience of the unexpected and the uncanny can lead people to all that is holy and all that is true.

    Pilgrimage may be a more useful word than mission for a lot of modern people. Conversion for a great many people seems to feel more like a walk in company to a holy place than the turning on of a light.

    That’s not to say that everyone has the same experience. They don’t, and we should rejoice in those who find themselves suddenly experiencing the overwhelming and shocking love of God. But we should pray that the same love also gives them a heart to know that this won’t be the experience of everyone. It never has been in Christian history and I suspect it never will be.

    Churches still have a purpose whilst they are places where people can discover the God who lurks in the world offering change for the better and good news and redemption for all.

    From the perspective of a living congregation in a denomination that has been wiped almost off the face of the earth in the past, from the perspective of a city where Episcopalians were persecuted and still held fast, and from the perspective of a denomination that has more than its fair share of modern problems, I still feel remarkably and ridiculously hopeful.

    It isn’t just that there’s work for us still to do. It is that there’s work for God to do in us. And God might well have some good news for those who have reason to pause in holy spaces and wonder for a while.

    A distinctive glimpse of heaven managed to survive the organisational collapse that we faced in the past.

    Will it survive current challenges?

    Well, I wouldn’t bet against the Holy Spirit.

    We’ve been here before.

     

     

11 responses to “Equal Marriage – Questions people haven’t thought of #1”

  1. Stewart Avatar

    As I see Scottish Law, all partnerships are registered by the Civil Authorities. In the case of Glasgow you have to go to Martha Street and fill in the appropriate paperwork. All varieties of couples can have a civil partnership officiated by a Civil Registrar.

    However only Man-Woman partnerships can be solomnised in a religious setting. Kelvin, you should be allowed to solomnise all partnerships (Man-Woman, Man-Man, Woman-Woman) in St Mary’s.

  2. william Avatar
    william

    Do we mean a ‘moral difference’ in the sight of God, or in the eyes of a nation at a particular point in history, or in the understanding of practising homosexuals, or in the perspective of a christian church?
    Without defining the audience ‘moral difference’ is a slippery term!

  3. kelvin Avatar

    In this case, all that I’m interested in is what the Scottish Episcopal Church thinks it is doing.

  4. Erp Avatar
    Erp

    How does the SEC consider opposite sex couples who get a civil marriage and then years later want something in church?

    Now from my initial humanist point of view there has been no difference in moral status between a civil partnership, a civil marriage, or exchanging equivalent promises in cases where a legal ceremony is not possible (e.g., slaves in times past or same sex couples in many places) though there are legal differences.

  5. kelvin Avatar

    The SEC regards couples who get married in a civil ceremony and couples who get married in a religious ceremony as being equally married. There is no distinction between them

    This is, I think, different to the Roman Catholic Church in Scotland.

    1. Seph Avatar
      Seph

      If the SEC opts out of the same-sex marriage legislation, will it recognise civilly-wed same-sex couples as being married? If not, then the hypothetical same-sex couple are not married in the eyes of the church. If the SEC decides to recognise same-sex marriages but won’t perform them, there is no difference and we should stop messing around.

      I imagine people going from civil partnership to marriage will make as much or as little of a big deal of it as they like.

  6. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
    Rosemary Hannah

    For me the question is intent – if the couple intend to be married but are denied by a civil authority, they are married in the eyes of God. However it is very plain that currently the law wishes to consider they are NOT married, and it is a hard thing indeed to keep your end up against the law. Therefore they ‘need’ to be married to affirm to themselves and the society that they are indeed married.

    The question is ‘what makes a marriage: set promises made according to form: the understanding between the two marrying: the understanding of society of what marriage is.’ In practice it is very hard indeed to have a marriage without all three components.

    CU was designed to have no promises, and no understanding by society that it was marriage. Compassionate registrars saw at once that the former was impossible. Generally, society has not fully embraced the idea that the latter is fully true. They usually think it is just near enough. Some people then think it is near enough to consider it marriage, and others that it is quite near enough, thank you. Hence those pressing for equal marriage – to make it clear once and for all.

    1. Geoff Avatar

      Having been vexed by this question myself, I think Rosemary is onto something. After all, the ministers of marriage are the couple. I have long advocated that couples denied marriage “for fear of the religious authorities” exchange their vows and present themselves at the altar rail during Benediction of the MBS for a guerilla blessing.

  7. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
    Rosemary Hannah

    Interestingly, the church is still in places reluctant to marry some divorcees (where, for instance a new relationship has been formed before the marriage ended, and the new relationship killed the old) but once civilly married – married they are.

    1. william Avatar
      william

      In the eyes of God?

  8. Rosemary Hannah Avatar
    Rosemary Hannah

    @william. I am agnostic on the question of whether people whose adultery caused the end of an earlier marriage are married in the eyes of God, if that is what you are asking. It is an issue on which I have to admit I am incapable of dispassion. Maybe they are. God is endlessly forgiving and compassionate. It will hardly be news to anybody that I do not always rise to God’s standards.

    I am sure that faithful gay couples who consider themselves married and have taken all the legal steps they can to be as-close-to-married ARE married in the eyes of God, but this latter belief will hardly come as news to those who know me and my family.

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • Conversion Therapy and why I can’t join calls for it to be banned

    There’s a huge new initiative launched today which brings hundreds of faith leaders together to “affirm and celebrate the dignity of all, independent of a person’s sexuality, gender expression and gender identity”. It is quite an achievement to get so many people from different traditions to sign up and publicly identify themselves with that cause.…

  • Every Eucharist is a Virtual Eucharist

    Every Eucharist is a virtual Eucharist. Of course it is. We know this. We experience this. We forget this. Christianity – at least the bits of Christianity that are worth taking seriously – takes time and space so seriously that it knows that the particular cannot ever express the ultimate. Indeed, time and space are…