the issue

I rarely read a newspaper.

Sometimes I'll squint through the sports pages. But mostly I simply don't look at a newspaper from one week's end to another.

Today I remembered why.

I was fed by some folk a couple of lengthy articles that there have been in the recent press. One from The Times and one from yesterday's Scotsman.

Both were directed towards the upcoming General Assembly the Church of Scotland holds in a week or two's time. And both took a similar line, I suppose, though one was more comment, the other a sort of report.

It's the subtle distortions of fact that always end up annoying me so much: and confusing such a lot of the punters.

Here's an example of what I mean. This is The Times online, referring to the case of 'an openly gay minister whose appointment last year to a parish church has caused divisions' -

"The Church of Scotland is due to debate his appointment at its General Assembly next week after a petition was signed by almost a third of ministers pushing for all gays to be banned from the pulpit"

It reads as if the peitition is what has triggered the Assembly debate. Which, of course, is not how it is at all.

It's the other way round. The petition (if that's what you call it - and that's debatable too) has only arisen because the matter is to be debated at the Assembly.

There's a difference. And it's an important one.

Like who really started the stouche? Which 'side', as it were, in the argument was first to step out of line? Who were the ones to break rank?

Let's at least get our facts all right.

And that means seeing that it's simply not true to declare that there's somehow this huge big 'push' "for all gays to be banned from the pulpit".

That's simply not true. A subtle, unhelpful distortion which misses the point entirely. There's no such push and no such wish at all.

That's not what the whole debate is really about.

It misses, for one thing, the vital distinction between sexual orientation and sexual activity.

Morality has little to do with, and little to say on, the former. But it has everything to do with the latter.

The issue is not about a homosexual man at all. It's not about our sexuality so much as about morality. And on what that morality's based.

When I read the piece in The Scotsman, written by a Church of Scotland minister, I thought you could have been forgiven for thinking that the final authority for Christian morality is the UN Declaration of Human Rights, with Articles 1 and 2 being quoted in full.

Have we decided to dispense with the Bible? I thought, as I read the thing. Have I missed a trick along the way?

But no. To be fair to the man, he got on to the Bible next. Although I noted the order.

He quoted the 'Letter of John', exhorting us all to love. (He could have quoted a lot of places along pretty similar lines).

Classic Beatles theology: All you need is love.

And so, getting onto his theme of love, the man waded in -

"If the Church says a gay person cannot be a minister of the gospel....."

Woah! Woah! Same mistake again.

That's not what the church is being asked to declare That's not what the so-called petition is all about. That's not the issue is at all.

And it clearly wasn't a slip of the tongue (or the finger across the keyboard). He was back on exactly that line again later on -

"When a national institution, like the Church, publicly states homosexual people are not good enough to become ministers of Word and Sacrament....."

But no-one is saying that. That's distorting the thing entirely.

In fact that first part of his sentence is so full of distorted, unhelpful thinking, it's hard to know where to start.

Like, he seems to suggest that because we're a 'national institution' we have a responsibility to the nation, as though our values and standards must be drawn from and must in some way reflect the tenor of national life.

Like, he seems to suggest that the church somehow thinks that certainly some people somewhere are 'good enough' to become ministers of the gospel: as though we had some kind of league of Christian piety and the ones at the top get automatic promotion to the premier league of ministry, and the ones who've 'come out' get a massive points deduction.

None of us make the grade. None of us measure up. That's not what the thing is about at all.

And certainly not what he suggests is being said, that "homosexual people are not good enough to become ministers".

No one is good enough.

And no one's suggesting that some folk get banned from this ministry on account of their sexual orientation. It's not about our sexuality at all.

It's about morality. And whence our view of morality is derived.

I know the Beatles sang the song. And I liked it myself, for all that it's a bit repetitive. All you need is love.

I know, as well, that Augustine once said something like "Love God and do what you like". And I know, or at least I vaguely remember, enough church history to know that Augustine was one of the 'goodies', clever, wise, and basically on the button.

But to think that this line somehow settles the thing once for all would have made even poor old Augustine turn in his grave. He said what he did because he knew what Jesus meant when he said "If you love me you will obey my commandments".

And though Jesus certainly welcomed folk, regardless of who they were or what they'd been, that welcome was never a license to do as they pleased.

He let the rich young ruler walk away, after all. It wasn't quite terms and conditions that Jesus laid down. But it wasn't an easy soft option he offered either.

You want to follow me? Then this is what it'll mean.

It's costly. Very costly. And for the rich young man, too costly.

'Morality' always is. 'Ministry' always is. Costly.

Jesus didn't go running back after the man and say he'd shift the God-given goalposts just a bit to make it a whole lot easier for the man.

Despite the fact that he loved the man, we're told.

The issue's not about love so much as truth. And where that truth is found. And how that truth's interpreted.

The newspapers don't really help. You can see why I don't read them much!