No depth of theological substance for me
THOUGH it must be admitted that many “appeared to be delighted” by the enthusiasm and freshness of the Most Reverend Michael Curry’s evangelical performance at the royal wedding, it did not meet me with the same degree of satisfaction.
It was, however, a breath of fresh air measured against what we so often have come to expect of a perfunctory Anglican elite on such regal occasions with somewhat pretentious upper class accents and vestments alone evoking feelings of status and class division; separation from the grass roots within society.
On reflection I was left with a sort of vacuous feeling that this presiding bishop of the American Episcopal Church seemed to have said everything and yet nothing. And yet for sure in my late teens, burning with a strong desire of Christian socialism, I certainly wanted to play my part in drawing awareness to social injustice and racial inequality, even more so on completion of a degree in theology. Most certainly the bishop had alluded to a number of those who’d put the heart of the gospel message into action in addressing issues already mentioned but the sort of repetitive use of the word love as the panacea for all evils was used far too loosely as though viewing the world through rosy-eyed spectacles. The poor people who live in some of the South American countries where corruption is rife at all levels hardly need reminding of this. Changing such though requires some depth of thought in terms of the radical action required rather than talking in some wishy washy manner about love.
There is a Jesuit maxim, applied equally both to teaching generally and the homily; “to simplify with the simplification of depth.” Sadly I grasped none of this from the bishops lengthy delivery, rather it was like a sort of outburst of evangelical butterflying which at least served to remind that there is a vast difference between the idea of love as understood by the media at large and that at the heart of Christian theology. David Abbott Stoke Golding