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.)

Opportunities of pluralism

Re “The challenge of pluralism” (Features, Apr. 7). Gil Dueck grapples with the issue of how Christian ministry deals with the evolvement of pluralistic societies. It’s curious that he doesn’t mention pluralism within religions, as evidenced by ongoing doctrinal debates. Strife to the point of enmity from internal divisions is perhaps even more disconcerting.

First, in response to Dueck’s article, separation of church and state is mostly a blessing.

Second, assuming as most religions do, that only one God can be God, it can be presumed that adherents of many religions are seeking to access that God. With this common search, there is actually an opportunity to come together.

Third, a significant cause of fear of pluralism for Christianity is the perception that truth is fixed according to Christian understanding and interpretation. It is fixed (by God), but only understood in part, and only to the extent God in Spirit reveals it to seekers. Hence, God is much bigger than human enlightenment, and much bigger than how any religious dogma can describe him. Humility regarding religious claims on God opens the door for religions, even collectively, to wait on God to manifest himself, instead of shunning each other.

Jake Janzen,
Abbotsford, B.C.

Narrow Christology

Re “The man’s church, the man’s soul” (Crosscurrents, Feb. 24). John Eldredge’s books are indeed cause for concern. He advocates a very narrow kind of masculine Christology and then berates anything that would oppose it. For example, what about those of us who favour a Daniel-like diplomacy – are we not men? Eldredge’s books leave much to be desired.

Horst Unger,
Victoria, B.C.

Imitating Christ through abstinence?

Re “Why I don’t drink” (Intersection, Feb. 24). I commend anyone who chooses a path [of abstinence] under the conviction of the Holy Spirit. I’ve had plenty of opportunity to defend my choice to drink in my many years in the Anabaptist tradition.

I don’t abstain for the very reason that I am a Christian. By definition, a Christian is a “little Christ,” or “imitator of Christ.” So, to imitate him would not preclude drinking. Those who say that by not drinking they’re being good witnesses forget that, as Toews mentioned, they would more likely be considered a recovering alcoholic than a Christian. We ought to stop defining ourselves by the things we don’t do.

David Makaroff,
Abbotsford, B.C.

Remain discerning about ourselves

Re “Dangers of contemplative meditation” (Letters, Apr. 7). I can appreciate Carla Kamps’ concerns about the dangers of contemplative meditation. But, aren’t we just stating the obvious? Every tradition has elements that can lead us down the wrong path. Our own expressions of faith are no exception. Christians from contemplative traditions might warn their students about the dangers of rationalism inherent in our tradition.

Students should be taught how to be wise and discerning, but let’s not pretend our own traditions are devoid of danger. If only one tradition is singled out with a warning label, we imply that dangers lie only “out there,” while remaining undiscerning about our own traditions.

Also, Kamps raises a false dilemma by rhetorically asking, “Are we transformed by faith, or as Jim Holm says, ‘by doing what Jesus did?’ ” The implication is that we’re transformed only by faith, not works, and therefore Jim Holm is wrong. But the argument is misleading – we believe we are saved only by grace through faith, not transformed only by grace through faith. Transformation is quite a different matter from salvation.

Jason Rekker,
St. Catharines, Ont.