• Whose Spiritual Mantle Will You Inherit?

    Sermon preached on 30 June 2019

    In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. Amen.

    Just the other week I was chatting with someone who asked me where I had studied.

    I told them that I had read Divinity at the University of St Andrews.

    Straightaway, the question came back – “Oh, whilst you were there, did you have a Chariots of Fire moment on the beach?”

    For those who don’t know, Chariots of Fire was a huge film in the 1980s. A story based around the 1924 Olympic Games, which famously opens with a group of runners running along the West Sands in St Andrews.

    An iconic moment.

    These are the fastest, fittest men in the world.

    Easy to see how I could be mistaken for them running along a beach.

    The film title, I think was inspired by that bit of Blake’s poem Jerusalem:

    Bring me my Bow of burning gold:
    Bring me my Arrows of desire:
    Bring me my Spear: O clouds unfold:
    Bring me my Chariot of fire!

    But originally, of course, it comes from the second book of Kings and the reading that we heard this morning.

    Elijah and Elisha are preparing to part at the end of Elijah’s life. And as they continued walking and talking, a chariot of fire and horses of fire separated the two of them, and Elijah ascended in a whirlwind into heaven.

    It is one of those biblical images that is so vivid but which probably works better on the radio rather than on the television. Better in the oral tradition than something that we might try to capture in a picture.

    As the two prophets walk and talk they have their own chariot of fire moment.

    The elder Elijah asks what he can do for Elisha and Elisha says he wants to inherit a double share of Elijah’s spirit.

    Not a bad thing to hanker after I think.

    As we reflect this morning, I’d like you to just hold Elijah and Elisha in your minds.

    One of them will soon take over. Pick up the mantle and carry on.

    And thinking about them I want to say something about leadership – spiritual leadership to be sure, but it is worth thinking about how leaders operate in general sometimes too.

    It is no secret that this diocese has been struggling to find a new bishop. The second round of the election process has not resulted in an election and we are now moving to round three, where the other bishops become the electorate.

    There is considerable angst about what kind of person we will get and whether or not they match up to what we want.

    I think that leadership is particularly difficult in the modern age.

    Someone said to me recently that they really want the bishops of the church to take a firm lead and say what they mean and implement procedures clearly and decisively.

    The same person then went on to say that whenever the bishops have done this, they have made precisely the wrong decision and should have done nothing at all.

    This is the paradox of leadership in our current age. People want firm leadership. However, everyone expects to have an opinion and expects that opinion to be adhered to and if it isn’t, oh how easy it is to vent one’s spleen online and oh how quickly rage ensues.

    Who would be a leader in such circumstances?

    And what qualities does a leader need?

     

    It may be my particular involvement in the discernment process to try to find a new bishop for Glasgow and Galloway that makes me a little weary of the search. But I do know I’m getting tired of being asked what kind of bishop I want.

    Indeed, I find it rather more inspiring to think about whose mantle we should be picking up. Whose spiritual inheritance should we be claiming, with the audacious demand that we inherit a double portion?

    Those from the bibilical tradition? – Elijah who could call down fire from heaven, Peter (whose feast day falls this weekend) who managed to be forgiven for more than most people, Mary whose Magnificat still inspires us daily.

    Those who have campaigned for justice for people of all races? – Martin Luther King Jr, Rosa Parks, Nelson Mandela

    The Stonewall rioters and those who came after them demanding equality for LGBT people?

    Or the new generation who have worked and are working to stem climate change like Greta Thunberg?

    As we think about Elijah and Elisha walking and talking before Elijah is wheeked away to heaven, can we have a wee chariots of fire moment and think about what spiritual leadership looks like.

    The biblical tradition seems to have a lot to say about those who can see what is coming over the horizon. Visionaries, prophets, bringers of change.

    The uncomfortable saints who are easier to deal with in stained glass than in the flesh.

    Leadership needs to look different in the modern age to the way it looked in the past. More collaborative. Less dictatorial. More about encouraging people to work together than forging out as a one person band. With a greater ability to listen and be seen to listen and consult than has ever been the case before.

    We seem to have a bit of trouble moving to a new paradigm for leadership in all areas of life including the very troubled political sphere.

    So it is worth thinking about where we each get our motivation and encouragement from. Who inspires us? Who motivates us? Who encourages us?

    Answering those questions will probably take us some way in working out what kind of leadership will be effective either in the church or in the rest of life.

    So as Elijah and Elisha walk and talk before the chariot of fire arrives, I simply ask you to think about that question today.

    Whose mantle do you wish to pick up?

    From whose spiritual tradition do you wish to inherit double?

    In the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.

    Amen.

2 responses to “Human Rights Petition”

  1. Steven Avatar
    Steven

    Kelvin

    I strongly agree with your sentiments and intend to sign the petition. As a practising barrister I can say that the incorporation of the Convention has had a hugely beneficial effect across society – especially in creating a rights aware culture amongst the judiciary.

    I have successfully relied on the Convention to (1) ensure that the state continues to support destitute asylum seekers whilst they are appealing an asylum support decision (2) prevent the removal of a mentally unwell Brazilian amputee who is awaiting further surgery in the UK (3) ensured that those detained under immigration powers are not held in “ordinary” prisons and (4) prevented the deportation of a Turkish national for a crime committed whilst a child. The Convention naturally “benefits” those on the edges of society – whose cause might be unpopular. That does not mean, of course, that it is unworthy. Quite the opposite.

    I have of course relied upon the Convention in cases which stretch the reach of the various articles. That is how the law develops. Judges do not embrace such claims uncritically. Unfounded and weak claims are rejected as such and so the public perception of an “out of touch” judiciary is misplaced. Thank God for the Judges who – if they were to follow the whims of public opinion would “string em up”, “bring back the birch” and “throw away the key”!

    The Human Rights Act 1998 still retains parliamentary sovereignty in any event. This means that Parliament can still introduce laws that are in breach of the Convention. All that a Judge can do when faced with such legislation is declare it to be “incompatible” and that is it. This may create political pressure (especially at a European level) but it means that the “Queen in Parliament” is still sovereign.

    In addition the HRA 1998 has become entrenched as an almost constitutional statute. Repeal or significant amendment would not create less litigation. On the contrary, as the Daily Mail might put it, lawyers would have a “field day” arguing about when a particular right ceased to exist under the ECHR in the UK and the extent to which rights survived repeal or amendment. It would create a legal mess, a constitutional back-step and a political nightmare.

    In fairness though a solicitor did ask me if they could bring a case to challenge a refusal by the police to allow a man more regular smoke breaks on the basis of his Convention rights (he was being questioned for murder)…I reminded the solicitor that the drafters of the Convention had in mind the ashes of Auschwitz when drafting the Convention and advised him to, as they say in Ulster, “catch yourself on!”

    1. kelvin Avatar

      Thanks Steven. It us really helpful to have your perspective and some concrete examples.

Leave a Reply

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

Previous Posts

  • The taxi of the beast

    I saw this taxi outside my office over the weekend. It appears to be the taxi of the beast. Should I be worried?

  • Sermon preached on Trinity Sunday 2014

    The truth is, I’ve not preached on Trinity Sunday. I think I have preached on Trinity Sunday in my time at St Mary’s but certainly not many times and certainly not for a number of years. You see – I’ve been in charge of the preaching rota. But lo. Here I am having spent a…

  • How not to have a synodical discussion

    This afternoon I’ve been engaged in a discussion at the General Synod of the Scottish Episcopal Church about same-sex marriage. At least, that’s what it was supposed to be about. Often in the afternoon it felt like a discussion about how to have a discussion. (All of this was being facilitated by Hugh Donald of…

  • British Values and Education

    I do wish that Mr Gove, the Education Secretary, (and everyone else for that matter) would stop trying to wrap progressive values in a national flag. I feel uncomfortable about it, whatever the flag – and there’s a lot of it going on in Scotland at the moment too. According to the Prime Minister, the…