|  | |
Previous | Next
 |
Brief letters that include the writer’s name and address are welcome. We will not publish letters sent anonymously, though we may withhold names at our discretion. Letters may be edited for purposes of length or clarity. Send by regular mail to:
Letters, MB Herald
3-169 Riverton Ave.
Winnipeg, Man. R2L 2E5 |
or by e-mail to mbherald@mbconf.ca.
Please ensure that your mailing address is included in your e-mail correspondence. |
Review not helpful
My thanks for reviewing my book, Can God Be Trusted? Faith and the Challenge of Evil (Nov.5), which is about to be issued in paperback.
Alas, readers of the review by Shirley Isaac will have virtually no idea of the contents of the book. The review is full of distortions which will put off readers who might find the book of help.
For example, Isaac asserts that the book’s argument “is based on reason rather than on faith”, completely ignoring the treatment of faith and knowledge in the last chapter, that concludes with a call to faith. Isaac says that the book “does not explore the impact of evil upon God Himself”, which is bizarre given the book’s focus upon the career of Christ – a career that truly marks the impact of evil upon God Himself. Finally, she concludes that “the book is written in a detached, academic style and does not make use of personal experiences.” Oxford University Press editors, who know academic style when they see it, released the book as “trade”, not “academic”, precisely because of its style. In my stories, I refer to my grandmother, my parents, my children and my students.
In light of the dictum that “there’s no such thing as bad publicity,” I guess I’m still grateful that the Herald noted the book at all, but interested readers can find more helpful reviews in ChristianWeek, Christianity Today, The Christian Century, and First Things.
John G. Stackhouse, Jr.
Vancouver, B.C.
Be careful what we teach
I concur with the letter from Walter Fast (Oct. 22). The Alpha program comes out of Holy Trinity Brompton Anglican Parish. The Alpha News (a publication put out by Holy Trinity Brompton, London, and sponsored by Kingsway Publishers) says that this course is “The Last Word in Evangelism”. In the Alpha News of November 1997 to February 1998, the Roman Catholic Archbishop of Wellington, Cardinal Thomas Williams, as well as the Cardinal’s Auxiliary Bishop of Wellington, John Dew, both endorse “this remarkably effective course” which “if understood and properly put into action will promote evangelism and ecumenism”. Also in the same publication, Bishop Ambrose Griffiths states that the course is “entirely consistent with Catholicism” and “does not contain anything that is directly opposed to any Catholic teaching”.
This should give us cause for serious consideration. The true gospel teaches that we are saved by grace through faith alone, and this is contrary to the Roman Catholic teaching. People who take this course are also encouraged to open themselves to the “slaying in the spirit”, and other experiences associated with The Laughing Revival. We should be very careful as to what we teach “seekers” and new Christians.
Further insight into this course is in the book Falling Short? The Alpha Course examined by Chris Hand, published by Day One Publications, 3 Epsom Business Park, Kiln Lane, Epsom, Surrey, KT17 1JF, e-mail: Idos.dayone@ukonline.co.uk; and on the Internet at http://wayoflife.org/~dcloud/index.html (then click onto “End Times Apostasy Data Base”, “Evangelism”, and “Alpha: the last Word in Evangelism?”).
Name withheld
Not thoughtful
On seeing John Redekop’s column on pay equity (Nov. 19), I was looking forward to a thoughtful and Christian look at this issue. I found it neither thoughtful nor particularly Christian. While the column presents a series of arguments, they all centre around the fact that this will cost taxpayers $5 billion. While that is something to be concerned about, it is not sufficient reason to state that the pay equity ruling was wrong.
There are some definite biblical principles that apply to the pay equity debate, but none of them show up in Redekop’s argument. The first is a question of justice. Redekop refers to the “allegation of systemic pay discrimination”. Christians should be asking why jobs that typically fall to women receive lower pay. Is it because women were not considered the primary bread winner, and so did not need higher wages? Is it because the jobs they perform are not as valuable, or are not perceived as such? Is it because traditionally men have set salaries in the public and private sectors? The problem is systemic, and Christians should see that as an issue of justice.
Second is the principle of integrity, of a government keeping its word. A Liberal government passed the 1977 Canadian Human Rights Act. In Opposition, the same party pushed the ruling Conservatives to settle the pay equity dispute. When re-elected, the Liberal government promised to abide by the Human Rights Tribunal ruling, but then refused to honour that promise. They spent years and many tax dollars fighting their own law. Should Christians expect integrity from their elected officials?
The third principle is that of mercy. The 200,000 people who will benefit have been at the low end of the pay scale for many years. Knowing some of these women and men personally, I cannot help but rejoice with them. They will pay a significant proportion of their windfall in taxes; after that, they will invest some in their retirement, pay down their mortgages and pay for their children’s education.
Redekop bases much of his argument on the fact that “this approach ignored the realities of supply and demand. Rather, ideology is followed.” Our biblical ideology should regularly be challenging the realities of supply and demand. Many Christians in the Western world have made the assumption that the market economy is a biblical model. It is not.
Jon Arnold
Gloucester, Ont.
Authoritarian stance
In response to “God’s Word final authority” (Letters, Nov. 5), our care group felt compelled to express our view. We take exception to the authoritarian stance the Andersons seem to take regarding this woman’s decision to leave an abusive relationship. The impact of abuse is minimized by their reference to “the possibly very harsh circumstances” the woman lived in. We are especially concerned by the assertion that we all struggle with “various forms of abuse”. Any form of abuse is unacceptable in any relationship.
The reference to a wife’s responsibility (I Peter 3:1-5) seems misleading and out of context. There are many references in the Bible as to what constitutes a healthy and loving marriage (e.g., Ephesians 5:22-28; Genesis 24:67; Colossians 3:19). God’s desire is for husbands and wives to love and respect one another. The Andersons, in taking the wife to task, seem to have overlooked the husband’s responsibility.
We are fearful of the message the letter sends to abusers, to victims and to people outside the church.
Nancy Harris, Heather Maddingan, Thomas Maddigan, Ernest Pauls, Elaine McGrath, Marv Wiebe, Elly Pauls, Rhonda Wiebe, Tom McGrath
Abbotsford, B.C.
Females also predators
Re “Pornography lies” (Letters, Nov. 19): The focus on perverse male fantasies is useful but identifies only part of the problem. Female pornography is coming on fast. The more insidious area is the romance novel. A steady diet of this stuff leaves a lot of women dissatisfied with their man.
Phil Dyck,
Langham, Sask.
Previous | Next Last modified January 11, 2000.
© 2000 Mennonite Brethren Herald.
Published by the Canadian Conference of MB Churches.
Masthead and usage information.
|
