What is in Kelvin's Head?

General Synod: Come for all now is ready

12/06/2015

I’ve commented before that you can tell almost all you need to know about a Christian community by the way that they invite people to communion.

Yesterday, General Synod started to meet in Edinburgh and by some distance the most significant theological statement came, not in the debates about how we will talk about same-sex couples and marriage, not in the considerable theological reports that we had but in a tiny little exchange used in the liturgy.

Come all people: this is Christ’s table to which all are invited.
Come, for all is ready.
Thanks be to God.

Now, the reason this is significant is that this isn’t what we usually say in church. This isn’t what is part of the regular liturgy. So far as I could tell, it was used yesterday at the Synod Eucharist simply by the sanction of the nodding of seven bemitred heads gathered around the altar.

It was a joy to me to find such a thing said. I’ve believed this way for quite some time.

In St Mary’s we say, ‘everyone is welcome to Communion in this church’. Occasionally I get people asking whether we really mean it and I always say ‘You bet we do!’

Now the thing is, it is uncommon. Some churches make theological demands – all those who are trinitarian Christians are welcome to receive the bread and wine. For others, one sacrament acts as both a barrier and a key to another – all those who have been baptised are welcome to receive communion. Still others make Church membership the key. And for others still it is good behaviour, for example, the terrifying – all who are in good standing with their church are welcome…

Yesterday at our set piece Eucharist when we are all on show and amongst ecumenical and interfaith friends, we said that it was for all people. It was hugely significant and hugely welcome.

But the thing is, liturgy changes us. That’s part of the idea.

If we say things like this then it will change what we do.

The church is currently debating whether to change what we do with regards to marriage. Is it open to straight couples or in fact something that is open to any couple? Are gay people fully accepted as God’s children, whose relationships God will bless or not?

We’ve got to the stage of discussing that seriously at last. This isn’t my conversation any more. It felt like that for years. Now it is the church’s conversation.

If we start to behave in the Eucharist as though the gifts of God are for everyone then there must be rising hope that we will apply the same to all our sacramental thinking.

The debate is happening. Real change is possible. It started most particularly in that little exchange at the mass.

Come all people. Yes, come all people.

That’s the kind of church I want to belong to.
Thanks be to God.

7 responses to “Have you no scriptural basis though?”

Jackson

15/02/2012

Hello,
If this blog were a talk radio show, I would say something like â€˜long time listener, first time callerâ€™. I found this article very interesting and the role of the Bible in the 21st century is something that many people are hesitant to enter meaningful discussion about. Being brought up in an Evangelical tradition I was taught to hold the Bible in very high regard. However Iâ€™ve come to realise in recent years that Scripture, Tradition and Reason is the only tenable way to approach oneâ€™s faith. Old teachings do run deep, though, and the question needs to be asked, when is it appropriate to look to the scriptures as a source of authority? The flagrant abuse of the Bible to further dogmatic agendas is undoubtedly a source of frustration to many Christians, but what do we do when reason seems to lead to a stalemate? A prime example will be when Margot MacDonald eventually revives her End of Life Assistance Bill. Many Christians in Scotland will be lobbying against and undoubtedly no small number for. Now scripture and tradition would affirm the sanctity of life, but that wonâ€™t stop quite a few people allowing their opinions to be moulded seemingly by reason alone. Meanwhile there will be a great many caught in the middle of very persuasive arguments, struggling to make up their minds while desperately looking for something authoritative to cut through the confusion. Are we too scared of fundamentalism to look to the Bible for guidance in such scenarios?
Cheers!

Reply
Neil Oliver

15/02/2012

Kelvin, I’m fascinated by your blog posts this week and encouranged that your statements make such sense to me and my view of my faith and the world. Great stuff.

Reply
Helen

16/02/2012

I too have followed your blog this week with interest and have found that it has encouraged my broadening faith, stimulated by St Mary’s. Thanks for the effort and thought you have applied. Dont be too hard on Evangelicals though.

Reply
1. kelvin
  
  16/02/2012
  
  Being an Evangelical taught me so much of what I know…
  
  Reply
Akma » On Miracles

17/02/2012

[…] that the BIble holds a primary place of reference for Christian life (and I acknowledge that my boss doesnâ€™t*, in the sense I propose here), one ought to have something to say about the prminence of […]

Reply
Brother David

21/02/2012

Being an Anglican educated in a United Methodist seminary, my stool has four pegs; scripture, tradition, reason, and experience, the Wesleyan Quadrilateral.

I have enjoyed these fireside chats good Padre.

Reply
Melissa Holloway

28/02/2012

This reminds me of a funny conversation I had with my 20 yr old son – we found ourselves discussing whether or not Kelvin was an evangelical?!!

He had taken a university course on Evangelicalism in America and I suspect it was taught by a (perhaps undercover) evangelical. Seems that one of the ideas that my son came away with was that being evangelical was more a way of doing things – an idea that we did indeed hear from Kelvin – that one has the good news and is eager for the world to know.

Of course my argument was that evangelicals do have to believe certain things, that I remember realizing I wasn’t an evangelical anymore when I couldn’t believe that there was a certain group of people, however they were defined, for whom hell was reserved. I feel there are parts of the movement that are just not benign.

But anyways, it is remarkable that someone somehow trying to put evangelicalism in the best light caused him to conclude that Kelvin fit the bill.

I think in the end we came up with the conclusion that Kelvin is able to hold a distinct theological vision in a perhaps evangelical way, having taken the best from his roots. I hope I won the day.

The whole conversation felt a little like the Twilight Zone.

Reply