As you can imagine the exhibition has not been without its controversy but, despite the subject matter, the thing that has caused the most ‘upset’ is an exhibit which is a film of a woman tearing out pages of the Bible and eating them, sticking them on her face, over her eyes and ears, in her bra.  Near to the screen is a Bible which people ‘who feel they have been excluded from the Bible’ can write on.

The idea of the piece is to highlight how the Bible has been used to discriminate against anyone who has a sexual orientation other than heterosexual.

The piece was created by a Christian, Jane Clarke.

Ms Clarke said: “Writing our names in the margins of a Bible was to show how we have been marginalised by many Christian churches, and also our desire to be included in God’s love.

“As a young Christian I was encouraged by my church to write my own insights in the margins of the Bible I used for my daily devotions – this was an extension of that idea. I still have that Bible, although it’s rather tatty now.”

The Bible has been placed in a glass case now at the request of Ms Clarke and visitors can write in a blank book next to the Bible, the pages of which will be inserted into the Bible.

I nipped in to see what the fuss was about.  Inside I met a BBC film crew and Lorna Gordon, the BBC’s Scotland reporter, doing a piece on the exhibition.  I wondered why.  It has already been on the news.

Inside I saw some great art, some stuff that I liked and some that I didn’t like and some stuff that was pretty explicit.

I also saw this controversial exhibit.  I didn’t like it.  It didn’t work for me but I get her point.

On the way out I noticed a group of people…

They were conservative Christians protesting against the exhibition.  I wanted to go and ask them if they had been in to see it.  But I didn’t.

I noticed two things.

The first was the irony.  A group of religious people protesting against an LGBT exhibition commenting on how religion has been used to oppress them made me laugh then feel sad.

The second thing I noticed was the irony.  The protesters had banners with ‘The Bible is God’s Perfect Creation’ on one of them.  Again the irony seemed to escape them.  Their complaint, apart from being against anyone not being straight, is that the Bible is being defaced, not that God’s creations, people, are being hurt and discriminated against.

I like the Bible.  I have lots of them.  I’ve written on some of them.  I’ve thrown some in the bin.  I’m not worried that I’ll go to Hell for that because it’s a book, a special book, but a book.  And the minute it becomes more than that it becomes an idol.

The intention of the artist was not that people should deface the Bible.  It was that people who have been excluded should be able to write themselves back into God’s story.  That’s a very powerful image.

The Bible is not the revelation of God’s word, Jesus Christ is.  The Bible is a recording of history, law, songs, prophecy, biography and letters.  I have no doubt that it contains God’s word but it doesn’t ‘contain’ Jesus.  He’s much bigger than the Bible.

I wish these people who protest were more upset about poverty, war, famine, drugs, violence or slavery.  Or perhaps I just wish they would go up the stairs into gallery and see the effect they have on people Created in God’s Image and have a bit more respect for people who are trying to tell us something important.

[UPDATE] Roddy Hamilton has written a much better post on this over at Abbotsford

What followed was simply remarkable.  Speaker after speaker condemned the report and one went as far as to move that the report should be received but not sent out.  Why? What could the controversy be?  Well,  the report says that some people have sex outside marriage.  I know.  I was shocked by this revelation.  Who knew???

This is the body that only the day before had said that it wants to have an open and frank discussion about sexuality and was now chastising Peter MacDonald for having the nerve to a) admit to pre-marital sex with his wife of 26 years and b) be funnier than them.

There is a serious underlying issue at play in all of this though, and the proposal to supress this report is just a symptom of it.  Over the course of the past week the Church of Scotland has, in my opinion, trampled all over the human rights of all of its office bearers.

The United Nations Universal Declaration of Human Rights Article 19 states that

Everyone has the right to freedom of opinion and expression; this right includes freedom to hold opinions without interference and to seek, receive and impart information and ideas through any media and regardless of frontiers.

On Monday the General Assembly banned anyone subject to its courts (all ministers and office bearers) from making public statements about the ordination of gay ministers. (UPDATE: the final wording of the motion was: Instruct all Courts, Councils and Committees of the Church not to issue press statements or otherwise talk to the media or to make decisions in relation to the contentious matter of himan sexuality, with respect to the Ordination and Induction to the Ministry of the Church of Scotland, until 31 May 2001.)

Article 30 states that

Nothing in this Declaration may be interpreted as implying for any State, group or person any right to engage in any activity or to perform any act aimed at the destruction of any of the rights and freedoms set forth herein.

So, congratulations to the Church of Scotland.  You must be very proud.  Contravening at least two articles of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights in one day and that’s before we even get started on the employment rights of gay ministers which were curtailed by the moratorium on them moving charge for 2 years.

What on earth do you think you are doing?

Do you think that avoiding the debate, the fight, the argument, the falling out is the best way?  At any cost?

Or is their another way?  Is it not possible just to agree to disagree?  To give congregations the right to call who they want to be their minister?  If they want to call a minister who is gay, let them.  If you don’t want that then don’t call a gay minister.

Would that be so hard?  To agree to disagree?  To be grown up about it?  To recognise a genuine difference of opinion which will NEVER be resolved no matter how may Special Commissions and gagging orders you issue.

This evening the Church of Scotland hears the Case of the Dissent and Complaint against Aberdeen Presbytery who upheld Queen’s Cross Church in their call of Scott Rennie to be their minister on the grounds that Scott, an openly gay man in a relationship with his partner David, is unsuitable to be a minister because in their opinion homosexual activity is prohibited in the Bible.

This is a case about many things.  It questions the right of a congregation to call a minister.  It questions the right of a Presbytery to uphold that call by majority voting.  It questions the basis on which a minister can be excluded.

I’ve blogged before about my hope for a gracious and ordered debate and I still hold out some hope for that, even given the things said in sermons and reported in the press over the past few weeks.

Because it is a case and the General Assembly meets as a Court, as with any other court proceedings, there will be no live webcast while the case is being heard.  I’m sure that given the proliferation of communication technology news of what’s happening will filter out and it might be worth keeping an eye on #GA2009 on Twitter for any news.

The Overture

Following the case an overture (motion) from the Presbytery of Lochcarron and Skye will be heard.  These are the terms:

ANENT MINISTERIAL CONDUCT

From the Presbytery of Lochcarron-Skye

Whereas:

1. the Church’s historic understanding of the Biblical teaching on homosexual practice has been questioned in recent years.

2. a lengthy period of reflection has elapsed without a resolution of the issue.

3. it is undesirable that the courts of the church should be asked to judge on individual cases in advance of any such resolution.

It is humbly overtured by the Reverend the Presbytery of Lochcarron-Skye to the Venerable the General Assembly to receive the Overture set out below,

“That this Church shall not accept for training, ordain, admit, re-admit, induct or introduce to any ministry of the Church anyone involved in a sexual relationship outside of faithful marriage between a man and a woman”.

There are a number of Notices of Motion already submitted and the discussion of the Overture will be streamed live.

Tonight will a defining moment for the Church of Scotland.  The outcome of this case may cause a split in the church.  It will cause hurt, no matter the decision.  I pray that God is with all of  those who are faced with this task and with Scott as he awaits the outcome.

The Met even have a poster campaign going.

Who’s next?  Shoppers? Drivers?

Seriously, if someone wants to take a photo of a building they will, and they are hardly likely to get their digital SLR out with a tripod.  Some of the best photos are taken ‘covertly’ on the street to capture people in a natural state rather than posing.  Is that going to be outlawed?