Same-sex marriage and the state

I’ve been very heartened by the many responses to my sermon on Sunday. It was reported on at length in The Times, which used it as its top Scottish story on Monday and it was used in the Herald and all over the gay press too. Whatever anyone might think about what I said, it seems to me to be very gratifying that a sermon can still be at the heart of a national debate.

Then there has been responses on the internet – Thinking Anglicans picked it up and there are comments on their thread. Beth commented on it and got some response too. Meanwhile if you want negative criticism of the sermon (and my existence) then you need look no further than Kendall Harman’s blog which had a piece relating to the sermon and another one relating to the press coverage. Fr Kendall’s blog is one of the most courteous on the internet, inhabited by the most discourteous commenters.

Generally speaking, I think that if you have a job like mine then it is incumbent upon you to  preach a sermon which hits the headlines at least occasionally. It seems to me that it goes with the territory. Not to do so is to miss an opportunity.

I’ve been pleased too that there has been a mixture of comment about my interpretation of scripture and also my comments about the RC Bishops. It was a dense sermon with something for everyone. The comments on my own blog post have been particularly erudite as usual.

This morning, the Primus has joined in with some of this debate with an excellent piece in the Scotsman. You can find his opinion piece here and the news report on it here.

The news report rather over-eggs the pudding with an all too eager headline which says: Gay marriages backed by Episcopal Church . Better to concentrate on what Bishop David says himself – it is good stuff:

Jesus did not call the church into being as a citadel of orthodoxy. He was constantly criticised because he spent time with people who didn’t fit the conventional patterns and were deemed unacceptable by others. He told stories about nets and fishing, about lost sheep and banquets where the guests were to be gathered from the highways and byways.

The Scottish Government’s consultation challenges us to think seriously about our society, its values and its patterns of family life. It challenges churches to reflect on what it means in today’s secular society to call people to uphold marriage and family life. And if there is a mandate for us in the churches, it is to try and build communities of faith which honour the way in which we believe Jesus responded to people in their diversity.

Blasphemy

The BBC is reporting that the government is going to oppose attempts to abolish the law on blasphemy.

“A spokesman said ministers wanted to consult the Anglican community further before supporting such a change.”

Goodness. Thanks for asking.

On you go. Ban it.

Without delay.

Thomas Becket

BecketLet us pause for a moment to remember Thomas Becket on his feast day.

The thing that he is remembered for is his death in Canterbury Cathedral – struck down by knights who believed that they were carrying out the orders of Henry II of England. His cult spread through Europe and I remember discovering chapels dedicated to him in Sweden when I was there 10 years ago. I was asked this morning at morning prayer whether there were any ancient dedications to him in Scotland. At the time I could not remember – in fact, Arbroath Abbey was dedicated to Thomas just 8 years after his murder.

It is easy to regard Thomas through rather rosy spectacles. He can seem like a saint whose story speaks of someone prepared to speak truth to power even at great risk to himself. (There are shade of Benazir Bhutto here, don’t miss them). However, I’m not at all sure that I would take Thomas’s side in the argument with Henry that he actually fought.

Henry wanted clerics to be subject to civil authority rather than ecclesiastical courts. In the end, though he had tried to impose that authority on the church, as a consequence of the murder of Becket, he withdrew the changes that he had introduced. Thus, centuries later, churches still claim authority over their own and exemption from the norms of civil society. At the time, the King had much support for his reforms from within the church, but never convinced the archbishop to concede that the church was not above the law of the land.

Plus ça change, plus ça change.