This morning the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland heard the report of the Church and Society Committee.

First up was the ‘Growing Up in Scotland‘ report.  I was on the group which wrote the report so I was glad to see some good deliverences (motions) coming from the report.  I’ll pick out the highlights for me…

Child Friendly Churches

3. Instruct the Church and Society Council to work with other Councils to introduce a Child Friendly Church initiative based on the United Reform Church’s model.

This was amended to welcome the work the Mission and Discipleship council has already done on preparing a Child Friendly Church initiative, based on the United Reformed Church model.

Hearing Children

4. Urge Scottish and UK Governments to evidence as a matter of course how young people’s voices are heard in the development of legislation and policy.
5. Instruct the Church and Society Council, together with Presbyteries and other Councils of the Church, to bring to the General Assembly of 2010 a report on the ways in which each is enabling the voices of young people to be heard in their decision-making processes.

Great to see an emphasis on listening to children in decision making.  I wonder how congregations and the Assembly will make that happen?

8. Instruct the Church and Society Council to work with representatives of the National Youth Assembly to develop awareness of models of support in congregations on the issues involved in mental illness among young people.

This issue is one that has become ever more important to me.  My wife is a soon to qualify mental health nurse and her training has confirmed my belief that the church can and should play a role in supporting people with mental ill-health.  Like the other deliverence, the question will be how?

10. Urge Scottish and UK Governments to strengthen their commitment to end child poverty by 2020 and ensure that policies and adequate resources are in place to achieve that aim.
11. Urge the Scottish Government to ensure that resources, including partnerships with Churches and others, are in place to deliver the ambitions of the Early Years Framework.
12. Demand that HM Government uphold, respect and protect the rights of children who are asylum seekers or who are trafficked into our country.

For me these show that the church is where it should be, campaigning on behalf of the poor and those who’s rights are overlooked.

Engaging with Technology, Science and the Environment
Climate Change
16. Instruct Presbyteries, in association with the Church and Society Council, to produce a plan for each congregation in their bounds, setting out how they will measure energy consumption in their church
buildings, ascertain their carbon footprint and achieve a year-on-year reduction of 5% of their carbon
footprint using the Eco-Congregation Scotland carbon footprint module; and instruct the Church and Society Council, in consultation with the General Trustees, to report to the General Assembly of 2010 on the implementation of this instruction.
17. Welcome the proposed incorporation of Eco-Congregation Scotland as a Charitable Company and continue to support the work of eco-congregations.
18. Affirm the current commitment of the Church and Society Council to the ‘Responding to Climate Change Project’ and instruct the Church and Society Council, in partnership with other Councils, to complete the review of this project with a view to its development.

The climate change debate threw up some interesting discussion around how ambitious the church should be about targets, with 5% perhaps not being nearly enough of a reduction.

This raised the question again about the suitability of buildings for me.  Is the reduction of carbon footprints the catalyst needed to get rid of unsuitable buildings once and for all?  Can the church really claim to be good stewards while pouring money into drafty and expensive to heat buildings?  And the church’s central offices in Edinburgh won’t escape the carbon audit…

The General Assembly of the Church of Scotland began this morning and a couple of things have jumped out at me already.

The first is the presence of ‘The Queen’.  She’s not there in person this year but when she can’t make it she sends someone in her place, a Lord High Commissioner.  The Queen or Lord High Commissioner sit outside the Assembly, technically.  They sit on a throne in the gallery behind the moderator.

The State being outside the Assembly is important.  The General Assembly is separate from the state and yet this morning found itself discussing whether or not business could be done at Assembly on Saturday afternoon because it clashed with the Garden Party at the palace.

Now, I’ve been to the Garden Party, so I speak from experience… (I have an invite for this Saturday but I’m not going) when I say that the cosy relationship between the church and state seems to be one the Church of Scotland should be wary of.  The Church of Scotland has for almost all of its history believed its own press that when Scotland had no parliament that the General Assembly was the next best thing.  Well it wasn’t and isn’t.  There must be a role for the church in holding the state to account.  I sometimes wonder if the cosy relationship helps or hinders that.

The second thing to note from a procedural debate this morning is that it seems to be an Assembly with some sense of what is being asked to do this week and the importance of the decisions it will make.

There was much discussion about the order of the Overture from Lochcarron and Skye and the case being brough against the Presbytery of Aberdeen for upholding the call of Scott Rennie, an openly gay minister to Queen’s Cross Church.  Common sense won I think and the case will be heard first.

It seems nonsensical to legislate in hindsight and then hold people to that new rule for something that happened before its introduction.  I’m glad the case will be discussed in full rather than being potentially curtailed by a previous decision.

You can watch the General Assembly online with live streaming, follow generalassembly on twitter and watch the conversation using twitter search #GA2009.

Some of the bloggers I read have been posting their thoughts on the petition to the Church of Scotland’s General Assembly regarding the ordination of ‘practicing’ homosexuals.  I wrote about it in my posts ‘Not In My Name‘ and ‘How Would Jesus Behave?‘ but there are some other interesting thoughs:

John Orr has posted some interesting thoughts on Biblical interpretation to follow up his initial post.

Chris Hoskins asks ‘Where’s the Grace?‘.

Iain McLarty has some posts on the implications of the Lochcarron and Skye overture, the logical problems with it and a summary of some of the blogging on the subject.

Bryan Kerr asks what happened to a God of love for all?

My previous post on the petition launched ahead of the Church of Scotland’s General Assembly in support of the overture (motion) from the Presbytery of Lochcarron & Skye was my most viewed post ever.  I didn’t set out to say anything controversial and hoped to appeal to people to be calm, reasonable and gracious.

The question that I ended that post with was one asked by Christians all along the theological spectrum. ‘What would Jesus do?’.

This morning it struck me, and not for the first time, that one of the problems with this discussion is that Jesus said nothing specifically about homosexuality.  That leaves us with a bit of a vacuum when trying to answer the question ‘What would Jesus do?‘.  It means that we need to try to work out what Jesus might have said from his other teachings.  We also need to consider the rest of the Bible where again, little is said directly about homosexual relationships.

There are passages in the Old Testament in Leviticus, we read the stories of Sodom and Gomorrah and in the New Testament Paul has some words in Romans.

The problem for many is that these passages are in their view inconclusive.  For example, the passage about Sodom and Gomorrah tells of a host offering his daughters to visitors rather than them having sex with another man.  Not something we would see as acceptable now.  Paul’s words in Romans are the subject of much debate around the translation and context.  Is he talking about homosexual relationships or about the practice if ritual sex with young boys at the pagan temples?

I refer to these passages by way of illustrating the difficulty and complexity of the theological discussion.  Perhaps we need to move beyond throwing passages at each other and engage in a discussion about what the core of the Gospel is?

One of the biggest steps forward the Church could take is to begin these kinds of discussions is to start at the general rather than the specific.  As many will point out in the coming weeks, there are many things supported in the Bible that we have moved away from.  If the early church had not decided to admit those who were not Jewish to their membership then we wouldn’t be having this discussion at all.  Those decisions were often painful, often divisive.

So, let’s try to start again.

Let’s try to start from the question ‘How would Jesus behave?‘ because to be honest when I read the scriptures almost everytime I expect Jesus to do one thing He does something completely different.  What is consistent is how he does things.

You may have heard on the BBC Scotland news this evening that Queen’s Cross Church of Scotland’s right to call an openly gay man to be their minister, a decision endorsed by a majority vote of the Presbytery of Aberdeen, has been the subject of a complaint and the case will be heard by the General Assembly in a few weeks.

There are some in the church who don’t think that a homosexual should be ordained as a minister so a petition is being gathered to take to the General Assembly of the Church of Scotland to call on them not to uphold the right of the congregation to make its own decision about who they can call to be their minister on the grounds of his sexuality.  Apparently 1/5 of the ministers of the Church of Scotland have signed the petition.

I don’t want to get into the discussion about sexuality here and now.  That will no doubt come in the future.

What I do want to say is that tonight people across Scotland and across the world have had their own prejudice confirmed.  Their own stereotype image that the Church of Jesus Christ is intolerant, bullying and homophobic has been paraded on the evening news.  Again.

There are ways to go about disagreeing.  Disagreements can be had with dignity and with respect.  Raising a petition, giving that petition to the press as an ‘exclusive’ and trying to raise a groundswell of support to pressure the poor souls whose turn it is to attend General Assembly into making the decision you want is not dignified.

‘What Would Jesus Do?’.  I wonder where ’start a campaign that will put someone under intense media pressure, drag them in front of the General Assembly and have their life paraded for all to see’ comes in the answer to that question.  I don’t think it does and tonight I am ashamed to be a member of the Church of Scotland.

So, no.  I won’t be signing your petition.  And I hope no-one else does either.  Not because I don’t belive in your right to have one.  Not that because I don’t think you have the right to hold your opinion.  But because I believe that we are called to love one another and to conduct our discusions with love and respect.

The new issue of the OneKirk Journal is now available online.

It has some great stuff including:

• reflection on the use of torture
• a guide to some of the notable events at General Assembly
• ‘champagne bubbles’ by Roddy Hamilton
• A conversation with Scott M Rennie
• and an Introduction to Emerging Church by some guy called Stewart Cutler

Have a look.

OneKirk is not a club, pressure group or party. Rather it is a network of Church of Scotland people that is being developed to support, enable and facilitate one another in our various ministries, whether they are lay ministries or ordained. OneKirk seeks to help us discern the meaning of the Gospel of Jesus Christ in our generation.

Today was at an event organised by the Church of Scotland called ‘Emerging Church – Centre Meets the Fringe’ in a new church development in Gilmerton, Edinburgh (domain of the inimitable Paul Beautyman).  We’re hearing about ‘emerging church’ from people who are ‘on the edges’.

In some ways the day so far has been inspiring and in others ways frustrating.

Firstly, it’s a Church of Scotland event and despite the large minority of people here from out with the CofS it’s a bit Church of Scotland centric.  That said, the issues that they face are the same as every other denomination.  

The tension between denominational church and the expressions of faith out there in the wild was very evident as is the thought that ‘emerging church’ is just for children and young people, that 11am is a rubbish time for a service and that power is both a problem and an opportunity.

But what is also evident is that there are people around who are thinking deeply about what the church is, how we express faith and how the ‘church’ of the future might look and be.

I’ll try and get some proper thoughts together later but for now I’m inspired by Paul Thomson’s vision of Christians in the wild, being followers of Christ where they are.  Groups of people who share a dream coming together to make that dream a reality.  Grasping that thought that the Good News is for the poor, that people outside the institution still have faith and are managing to resource their spiritual journey just fine thank you very much.

What’s my role in all of that?  I work for a denomination.  I try my best to support, challenge and encourage it.  To help it’s congregations to develop and wrestle with how to be church here and now.

But part of me has disengaged.  Part of me wonders what the Sunday morning thing is all about (you might have detected some of this in yesterday’s sermon).  My questions are similar to the ones voiced here by Paul and by Doug Gay.  What is the church?  How can we reclaim some of that rich heritage of the word church?  Where does liturgy fit and how can it resource a richer experience?  How do we understand heracy and orthodoxy?

Questions, questions.  I like the questions.

Sometimes it takes me ages to get something to the point where I know what it is and where it’s going.  My preparation for NYA2008 has been a bit like that.

The Church of Scotland’s Youth Assembly is in 3 weeks.  It already seems to have consumed much more time than it really should have.  I’m leading a team who are facilitating 3 two hour discussion sessions about Social Media.  I think part of the problem is that the topic is too interesting for me.  I’ve found myself off on all kinds of tangents but I think the main problem is I haven’t been able to see where it’s going.  Not so much the presentations.  I think the information about Social Media is is fine.

I know what I want to say, but we started with 4 topics which have kind of merged into 2.  Now I’m not sure how to manage that!  Oh well, more thought required.  I think if we can nail the discussion points the rest will follow.

So, why is Social Media relevant to the church?  Answers please…

John has blogged his thoughts HERE.  Well worth a look as usual!

I’ve been invited to head up a team delivering a debate stream (I’ll explain in a minute) at the Church of Scotland’s National Youth Assembly in September.

The debates have in the past followed a fairly traditional model where people would be given written information prior to the event, someone would present more information on the topic at the event and then participants would ask questions, discuss and decide what they think.

This year there will be four debate themes; The Media, Healthy Relationships, Sustainable Living and Future Church.  I’m involved with The Media one.  Each theme will have four sessions lasting 2 hours each to explore one aspect of their topic with around 60 young adults.

So, we’ve decided to take an adversarial approach setting our sessions up as discussions around the opposites like control v democracy.  We’re also going to concentrate mostly on ‘new media’.  Should be fun.

We’ve decided to use a wiki to both provide information beforehand and to post what we come up with during the event.  More on that nearer the time.