Dark Clouds
The induction of Scott Rennie proved to be a spark that lit a few fires. Whether these fires will spread further or will remain localised and die out remains to be seen. To keep with the fire-related analogy, the huffing and puffing started in earnest almost as soon as the Presbytery of Aberdeen first sustained the call to Queen’s Cross.
It opened wide a door of opportunity for the more hard line evangelicals, many of whom are not even members of the Kirk, to engage in a veritable feast of judgement and condemnation. And how some of them have loved it! It was like cream to a starving kitten. It gave a wonderful excuse to point out the speck in the Kirk’s eye, without having to consider the planks sticking out of their own eyes.
I want to stress and to acknowledge, without reservation, that there are many good and devout people who were, and are, genuinely concerned and uncomfortable about the possibility of any gay minister. I would not in any way wish to criticise them or their theological position nor do I wish to be perceived as claiming some moral high ground for myself. We all have to do what we believe to be right. For example, the Presbytery of Lewis has expressed its disappointment at the passing of the 2015 legislation. At the same time, they have confirmed their wish to continue to be part of the established Church of Scotland. To me, that is a position that can be accepted and respected. As stated above, the church as a whole has never been in total agreement on every issue. The Church of Scotland continues to recognise liberty of opinion on matters which do not enter into the substance of the faith. Long may it continue to do so.
But I do criticise those who have used the gay minister debate as an opportunity to let fly with a public flurry of sanctimonious and self-righteous claptrap that would have embarrassed the Scribes and the Pharisees. What kind of Christian witness is that to the world? Some people seem to believe that, because they are holding the Bible in one hand, they can do and say what they like, without even having to take account of the normal rules of courtesy and politeness.
The Free Church of Scotland – hardly a detached or objective observer – seems to have taken a particular satisfaction in pointing the finger. The Free Church has been a carping, ungenerous and sometimes ungracious critic of the Kirk for the best part of two centuries. Indeed opposition to the Church of Scotland is the Free Kirk’s basic raison d’être. Given the possibility that a small number of congregations might wish to leave the Church of Scotland, the Moderator of the Free Church, on the eve of the 2013 General Assembly, invited ministers and members of the Church of Scotland who wished to leave to come and join the Free Kirk’s own (depleted and divided) ranks. Whether this was an act of genuine kindness or of naked opportunism, others must judge. It has to be kept in mind that the Free Church are our brothers and sisters in Christ. This does not mean that they are our friends.
Some ministers and congregations in the Church of Scotland were already making noises. Suddenly the whole issue seemed to grow arms and legs. For some of the more hard-line traditionalists, it seemed as though the Kirk, by sustaining Scott Rennie’s call, had turned its back entirely on every single word of Scripture and was therefore in a crisis situation, sinking into a veritable morass of apostasy and immorality.
The more hot-headed wanted to take immediate action and some did. More moderate counsel in other places suggested that a “wait and see” attitude should be adopted. Some even now feel themselves pulled in different directions, which is understandable. Issues are seldom as clear cut as they might appear. There are now a confusing number of associations and pressure groups representing a wide cross section of views.
The first real significant break came with the congregation of St George’s Tron in Glasgow deciding in 2012 to leave the Church of Scotland. There is no doubt that this was a major blow and a great loss as well as a disappointment to many. Older people remember the remarkable ministries that had been offered in that iconic city centre building, particularly those of Tom Alan, George Duncan, Eric Alexander and Sinclair Ferguson.
These were men who were not uncritical of the Church of Scotland at various times, but their criticism was always balanced and came very much from within. St George’s Tron was a flagship of the great evangelical tradition within the Church of Scotland. It was a congregation and a witness in central Glasgow of which the Kirk could be justly proud, in the best sense. Even ministers and elders, who would not have described themselves as “card-carrying evangelicals” held St George’s Tron and its ministry in great respect. And in recent years the congregation has given sacrificially towards a major renovation and modernisation of the building.
Their last minister adopted a more hard line attitude. In 2012, the minister and the vast majority of the St George’s Tron congregation left the Church of Scotland to reconstitute themselves under the name of the Tron Church in nearby Bath Street. Critics at the time said that, under its latter ministry, it had actually left the Church of Scotland some years previously. But, again, things are seldom as simple as they seem.
Contrary to popular perception, a congregation is not an incorporated body; it is simply a collection of individuals who, in law, are represented by their office-bearers as trustees, who accept personal liability. A congregation cannot legally secede from the Church of Scotland, lock, stock and barrel. Nor can a seceding congregation normally claim ownership of the church building even if the title is held by local trustees. (I am aware that I am in danger here of over-simplification.)
Events during the last few months of 2012 were a complete public relations disaster for everyone involved in the Tron debacle. No one came out of it well, although everyone wanted to claim the moral high ground. Writs were flying around and there were angry exchanges in the newspapers. It was one of these situations in which everybody involved – the congregation, the minister, the Presbytery of Glasgow, the people of Glasgow and the Church of Scotland – lost out.
If the truth be told, human pride on all sides has played a major part and continues to do so. The difficulty in attempting to give any kind of objective assessment is that there are people whose word I would normally accept without hesitation who give such diametrically opposite and polarised accounts. At any rate, feelings ran very high.
The Presbytery of Glasgow and the Ministries Council wished the tradition of a conservative evangelical ministry and associated outreach to continue, based in St George’s Tron Church. Given that the vast majority of the existing gathered congregation would no longer be members of the Church of Scotland, the ambition to bring together a new gathered congregation seemed (to me) to be more than a touch unrealistic.
The end result was that in late 2012 the breakaway congregation left the iconic building, on which they had sacrificially spent hundreds of thousands of pounds, to the sound of the hymn “The Son of God goes forth to war”. A sign was put up outside “The living church has left the building.” Olive branches were, it seems, in very short supply. In fairness, neither the Presbytery of Glasgow nor the Kirk’s spokesmen in Edinburgh seemed to be in the mood to mend fences either.
The Church of Scotland brought in a transition minister based in the empty Tron building. Few would envy him his job. The words “poison” and “chalice” came to my mind, at the time. However, although it is still early days, there do now seem to be some encouraging signs of rebirth and renewal in St George’s Tron.
In general, the media favoured the breakaway congregation in their reporting. This congregation had lost their building but now had the great advantage of being perceived as brave victims and principled martyrs who were being turned out on to the street by a harsh, triumphalist and compromised Church of Scotland. The media did generally seem to overlook the crucial but simple fact that the congregation had themselves voted almost unanimously to leave. No one had asked them to leave. No one in the Church of Scotland or the Presbytery of Glasgow wanted them to leave. It was their decision and their decision alone. According to their website, the Tron congregation felt they had “no option”. Again, that is surely a matter of perception.
However, some of the powers that be in the Church of Scotland did not help themselves by giving an impression that the Kirk was not unduly worried at the prospect of losing so many committed and contributing members. It was a case of “...business as usual”, according to the Principal Clerk of the General Assembly. Were these words a sign of wilful complacency or a genuine attempt to reassure the Kirk? Personally, I think the words were well intended but they might have been better left unsaid or expressed differently, given the wisdom and benefit of hindsight.
It had been known for some time that Gilcomston South Church in Aberdeen (the church in which Carole and I were married in 1974) also intended to leave. I suspect everybody learned some lessons from the Tron disaster. Gilcomston South held detailed and courteous discussions with Aberdeen Presbytery and, at least in the meantime, the recently formed independent congregation of Gilcomston Church are leasing their Union Street building (on which they too have spent large amounts of money) from the Church of Scotland.
As a result of the 2013 Assembly, another prominent evangelical church, Holyrood Abbey in Edinburgh, stated its intention to leave the Church of Scotland by 2015. Similar statements have come from St Catherine’s Argyle and New Restalrig congregations in Edinburgh. Large numbers of the congregation have meanwhile left Larbert Old and Dundee: Logie and St John’s Cross (to form a Grace Church in both cases) and also St James Broughty Ferry (to form Brought Ferry Presbyterian Church).
There may yet be others but, at the time of the third edition (2015) “things” do seem to have somewhat settled down.
In late 2014, yet another pressure group, the Covenant Fellowship, opposed to the ordination of ministers in active homosexual relationships, was founded in Glasgow.
Just how many more of these well-intentioned, but basically impotent, pressure groups do we actually need?