Letters to the editor

Mennonite Brethren Herald welcomes your letters on issues relevant to the Mennonite Brethren Church, especially in response to material published in the Herald. Please keep your letters courteous, brief and about one subject only. We will edit letters for length and clarity. We will not publish letters sent anonymously, although we may withhold names from publication at the request of the letter writer and at our discretion. Publication is also subject to space limitations. Because the Letters column is a free forum for discussion, it should be understood that letters represent the position of the letter writer, not necessarily the position of the Herald or the Mennonite Brethren Church. Send letters to: Letters, MB Herald 1310 Taylor Ave. Winnipeg, Man.  R3M 3Z6 or send via e-mail. (Please ensure that your postal address is included in your e-mail correspondence.)

Offensive rhetoric

I had intended to respond to “Prayer misdirected” (Letters, Aug 12), but attacks on the Pope and insinuations that he (and other Catholics) do not share a bond with us in prayer should simply be dismissed.

I am, however, dismayed that such offensive rhetoric would find its way onto the pages of what is usually a worthwhile discussion forum.

I hope future issues will not include the contributions of those who brand fellow followers of Christ with judgmental labels.

Kevin Hall,
Port Moody, B.C.

Appreciation

I express my gratitude to the MB Herald. Though I now attend the North American Baptist Church, I feel a deep connection to my MB roots. I continue to receive the Herald and have enjoyed reading it since I was a teenager.

Paul Doerksen’s “The church as a political reality” (July 1) was an excellent piece. I was excited to find writing so thought-provoking and of such calibre. I too have been considering the impact the church could have by incorporating more of a focus on itself as a political reality, particularly as an entity within North American society.

Secondly, Cara Pauls’s “The Sunday morning shopping spree” (Aug. 12) was honest and refreshing. It caused me to reflect on the importance of “sticking it out,” since the success of any community seems to require long-term commitment on the part of its members. This is important to consider as Christian communities in North America battle the overpowering message that “I” need to do what is best for “me” as opposed to the collective “we.”

MB Herald carries pieces that are both poignant and practical. It continues to help me as I seek to invite people to become followers of Christ.

Monika S. Mueller,
Winnipeg Man.

Better hermeneutic needed

Re Board of Faith and Life resolution on “Women in Ministry Leadership” (July 22).

May our response be within the following biblical constraints:

1. May we tiptoe gingerly into examination of and conclusions regarding this issue, having a holy dread of going beyond what the Bible demands regarding restrictions on Christian sisters. Jesus hates unnecessary burdens (Luke 11:46), hates the unnecessary offending of those who wish to (maintain) fellowship with Him (Matthew 18:6), and encourages the weary to come to Him because He is “gentle and humble in heart” (Matthew 11:28–30). As Christ’s ambassadors (2 Corinthians 5:20), let us model Jesus’ sentiments in our examination of women in church leadership. If we are not sure about some aspect of this issue, let us err on the side of liberality.
2. May we “tremble” at God’s Word (Isaiah 66:5) and avoid an inclination towards superficial explanations intended to get around awkward Scripture. May we remember at all times that God is the divine author of all Scripture and that awkward texts are not of private opinion (2 Peter 1:20). It is not so much “Paul says” as “God says.”
3. May we be filled with the Holy Spirit before we engage in thinking and discussion on this issue (Ephesians 5:18–21).

I sympathize with the board’s desire to see vigorous application of the priesthood of all believers in the ministry of Christian sisters. I am thankful that the board put a lot of work into their resolution. However, I have a deep concern with respect to the hermeneutic used to address the restrictive texts.

They seem to have used a hermeneutic of seeing the restrictive texts as contingent restrictions on Christian women, existing temporarily in order to combat particular heretical influences, to avoid impediments to witness to certain audiences. The conclusion required by the resolution’s wording is that the basis for the restrictions, and therefore the restrictions themselves, no longer exist.

This needs critical assessing. Does it not lead to the following problems?

1. God and Paul seem to become liars when they explain a particular restriction in terms of creation order (1 Timothy 2:13). If the restriction existed only contingently, due to local context, why do God and Paul make reference to the creation in giving rationale? Aren’t they misleading?
2. Don’t God and Paul also become ogres with respect to 1 Timothy 2? If the restriction there was only because of the misbehaviour of some women in the Ephesian church, why are all the women there punished by this restriction? If barriers to witness are a factor, aren’t God and Paul telling the church to conform to local sensibility in giving this restriction, rather than counter-culturally correcting thinking and practice?
3. Wiebe sees significance in only 1 Timothy and 1 Corinthians explicitly mentioning restrictions on women in public assembly. He suggests that those restrictions did not apply universally among 1st-century churches. Following that logic, we should see the directions for selecting elders and deacons in the same letter as also being contingent and not universal – since not all New Testament letters address this issue. We should be inclined to set aside that authoritative guidance, if it becomes awkward. Yet, thankfully, we don’t do so. Why such arbitrariness in the handling of Scripture?
4. This hermeneutic of contingency might well open up Pandora’s box. If our generation of believers uses this hermeneutic to “explain away” biblical texts difficult to reconcile with the present resolution, will not our spiritual descendents be inculcated towards using the same procedure when facing difficult scriptural restrictions regarding sexual mores, etc.?

In light of these consequences, could the board develop a better hermeneutic for their present resolution, doing so before the presentation of this resolution at the July 2006 Canadian Conference convention? If such is not feasible, this resolution – in its present form – should be rejected in July as premature and inadequately developed.

Richard Loewen,
St. Catharines, Ont.

Biblical way is clear

I dislike gravity, but I realize that without it, the world as well as life on this planet would not function. Similarly with certain biblical demands. We many not like them, but they are there for our good.

Following the logic of the Board of Faith and Life board re the resolution on women as pastoral leaders, do we now make women the head of the family “where they are called and affirmed” or do we follow the biblical demand of “wives submit to your husbands”? Of course, men are to love their wives sacrificially; love them as Christ loves the church, even when they are sometimes unlovable. These are tough standards, but we know this is God’s plan and therefore for our benefit.

Male headship is clearly established in the creation account in Genesis 2. Eve was created to be Adam’s helper (2:18). Both were created in God’s image and with personal dignity, but in a non-reversible relationship.

Adam’s headship is illustrated in many ways. For example, Adam named the woman (2:23). To name someone in ancient times implied having authority over them. After the Fall, God summoned Adam, not Eve (Genesis 3:9). In Romans 5:12, Adam is held solely responsible for the Fall. He abdicated his leadership and in Genesis 3:17 we read how God’s intended order of authority was reversed and of the consequences.

In Christ’s offer of salvation there is no distinction. In Galatians 3:26–28 Paul is saying that no kind of person is excluded from being a child of Abraham, who has faith in Jesus. We must not confuse positional equality with functional equivalence.

The doctrine of the Trinity illustrates this in the best possible way: Jesus is equal to the Father in terms of His being, but He voluntarily submits to the Father’s leadership. There is no contradiction in affirming both an equality of being and a functional subordination among the persons in the Godhead. Just as there is a chain of command in the Trinity, there is a chain of command in the family unit and in His church.

Biblically, women are not to be elders either. All of the nouns and pronouns used concerning an elder are masculine; he is to be a “husband,” not a “wife.” In 1 Timothy 2:12, Paul is saying that a woman should not have spiritual authority over a man. Men are no better than women, it’s just the chain of command God requires.

Finally, putting aside all the heavy theology, were we all to obey the simple command of “wives submit to your husbands,” and husbands to take Christ-like leadership in their families and in the church, we would not be having this debate today.

David Da Silva,
Black Creek, B.C.

Timely articles

I was pleased to see the MB Herald highlight the issue of mental health (Aug. 12) through the personal stories shared by three courageous individuals, “Where is hope when life hurts?” One common theme in the three accounts is the struggle of finding God in their darkness.

The Mennonite churches in Manitoba have taken the initiative to respond to mental health needs by becoming directly involved. As part of Eden Health Care Services, I have witnessed over the years struggles similar to those described in these articles. How do we as a faith-based mental health services provider appropriately tap into this personal struggle? What is the responsibility of the individual, the community and the service provider in incorporating the experience of our individual and corporate faith in God?

The articles illustrated the differences. Sometimes our personal faith allows us to reach toward hope. Other times when we are confused or too sick or disillusioned to find our faith, it is the faith of the community that carries the person toward hope and recovery. Discerning the difference between a crisis of faith and a mental health crisis can be very difficult and many times the two intersect.

The authors need to know that in sharing these struggles they help us understand better that it is not only okay but also in fact necessary to challenge our faith when we find ourselves struggling. When we are reminded of the fact that one in five of us will deal with a significant mental health issue in our lifetime, it is comforting to know that the same God who created us cares enough to relate to us in difficult times as well.

Let’s support each other – sit with, walk beside, pray for and yes, even carry one another when necessary.

James Friesen,
Eden Health Care Services, Winkler, Man.

Reflections on recent issue

God’s timing is impeccable. Canada Post’s is not. The Aug. 12 issue is only about the third one to arrive within a week of the date on it.

I read the Herald cover-to-cover, starting from the back. I usually recognize someone in the obituaries. My parents’ friends are beginning to move to glory. Friends my age are mostly somewhere between giving birth and giving in marriage.

The ripple effect of Larry Thiessen’s life will extend for many generations. His daughter and son-in-law, Carla and Alex Suderman, were our interim pastor couple for a year (Flin Flon, Man.). God provided Scott and Natalie Koop as a pastor couple for our church family in September 2004.

When Brad Huebert (“Erin’s story”) was youth pastor in Winkler, he brought some of the youth group to visit because they are our sister church.

This issue on hope arrived in the middle of a rainy week and helped me summon the courage to phone a woman who had confessed her depression to me.

May God continue to bless your work.

Sandra Schroeder,
Creighton, Sask.

New age influence

I was disturbed to find the report on the Renovaré Conference “The with-God life” (Aug. 12). It seems that the ancient mystics of the Catholic Church are beginning to influence modern-day Christians. Do they forget that Protestants broke away from that church because they preach “another gospel”?

Another popular movement, based on The Purpose-Driven Life, also has New Age implications and influence, as well as many doctrinal errors. This information is available on several websites and in books by Warren Smith and James Sundquist.

The evangelical church is in danger of watering down the gospel and becoming ecumenical, which is leading toward a one-world religion that has already begun with the formation of several inter-faith churches and the World Council of Churches. Perhaps we need to be educated in this area, in order to be more discerning.

Lynda F. Magner,
Abbotsford, B.C.