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.)

Uneasy paradox

Re “Protect us from evil” (Features, November). Both Daryl Brandt and the Herald’s anonymous contributor hit the central paradox of pacifism for a North American Mennonite. On one hand is the assumption that you and your community will be protected by those who you choose neither to endorse nor support; on the other hand, most Mennonites would intervene to stop someone who is about to harm a child, friend, or neighbour.

Mennonite views on pacifism are split and history bears this out. So with respect to the MCC pamphlet reprinted in November, I also encourage Mennonites to take action: Be honest with yourself as rich Christians living in one of the richest countries on earth. Speak honestly about your relation to society and your role in it. Wear red on Fridays once in a while. Meet the troops in your communities when they return from overseas, or after a search and rescue mission, or after putting out fires in B.C. or sandbagging homes in southern Manitoba. Hear their stories. Remember and honour the fallen.

You may not support us and you don’t have to. But we will stand on guard for you regardless.

Greg Penner,
Ottawa, Ont.

Values eroding

Re “Protect us from evil” (Features, November). The Bible and the teachings of Menno Simons (and other early Anabaptist leaders) make it clear that as believers in Christ and followers of the MB confession of faith, we simply aren’t to bear arms against our fellow human beings. If a profession involves the carrying of a firearm with the intent to use it against others, it’s clear that MBs should avoid employment in that field. If a person wants to help stop persecution in far-off lands or protect society from evil, there are other ways to accomplish those goals.

The distinct identity of the Mennonite Brethren church is very different from the way it was 50, or even 25 years ago. Aspects of the MB church have quickly eroded to the point where it’s virtually impossible for a newcomer to discern the difference between MBs, Baptists, Presbyterians, etc. How many MB churches have continued with German language lessons, have a weekly choir, maintain a stance on Halloween or school dances or movie theatres or highschool proms or using money on Sundays?

If we allow a small minority to create a grey area on pacifism, this will be another example of the watering down of our most important values, and will further erode the clear and distinct foundational values and beliefs of the MB church.

Anonymous,
Port Rowan, Ont.

Action required

Re “War and peace” (November). I have a younger sister who is presently serving in the Canadian Armed Forces, so it was with interest that I read the November issue. While I have reservations about our church’s official position on the use of force, regardless of the situation, I nevertheless respect it, and realize that it’s a blessing to live in a country where we can have that choice.

My concern with some of the articles is the way in which some Mennonites impugn all military personnel, simply because they’re in the military. This a very one-sided view of a complex issue. Military personnel do lots of things, including protecting innocent third parties who would be vulnerable and defenseless against the violence that’s perpetrated against them. I believe in living in peace, but in this unjust and unfair world we need our military not only to protect and defend, but to help those in need of humanitarian assistance.

Unfortunately, praying that the world will be a better place is not going to do a whole lot if no one actually acts and would rather just hold hands.

Levina Austin,
Kitchener, Ont.

Respect sacrifice

Re “Why I don’t wear a poppy” (Viewpoint, November). In my view, wearing a Mennonite Central Committee ersatz pin on Remembrance Day is contrary to the principle of working for peace. Instead, it risks engendering bad feelings, resentment and in some cases, anger. A mother of a fallen soldier or a shell-shocked, battle-scarred veteran might consider it a slight to the high price paid for our freedom.

I suggest we hold the principle of working for peace very close to our hearts every day of the year, and on Remembrance Day reflect on the brutality of war, the agony of those who died and those who mourn, and out of respect for their sacrifice, wear a poppy. Working for peace includes not offending our veterans and certainly not hurting a sorrowing mom.

Susanne M. Wiebe,
Victoria, B.C.

Peace officers want a place

Re “Why I wear a poppy” (Viewpoint, November). The discussion of pacifism, nonresistance, and Remembrance Day has been a concern of mine for a long time. Until now, I feel it has been ignored.

It’s quite easy to profess pacifistic ideals, and then condemn governments and individuals for their actions. However, many will still call on the government for protection, more police, and harsher jail sentences. I suggest a “true pacifist” wouldn’t put someone in the line of fire. It’s ironic that members of the Christian Peacemaker Team [recently in the news] didn’t refuse to be rescued by the armed forces.

Some of us who have occupations as “peace officers” are often not sure how to feel in our conference setting. In biblical times, the converted centurians were not required to change professions.

Recently, our Canadian troops have been in Afghanistan, where girls were forbidden to learn or fly kites. My heart is torn for these children. Can we ignore this situation any less than we ignore violence in our homes, streets, or communities?

I, too, will continue to wear a red poppy with pride, thankfulness, and hope.

Wayne Hildebrand,
Hepburn, Sask.

Peace not always possible

Re “Voices for pacifism” (Features, November). Don Peters states that “the peace position is the heart of the New Testament.” It may be unfair to critique the statement without opportunity for amplification, but as it stands now, I believe it’s wrong. Peace is a fruit of the Spirit, and Christians should live in a spirit of peace. But it must be recognized that in certain situations peace is not possible, especially when there is a violation of justice.

God is not only a God of peace, but also of righteousness. The heart of the New Testament message is that I’m a sinner, God’s righteous wrath was borne by Jesus on the cross, and now by faith I’m counted righteous. Justice has been served. Only then is there peace.

Peters applies the peace principle to international relations and wars, stating, “God has a better way.” Maybe, but while some have sought different ways through compromise and concession, peace has not been realized. To always apply the “peace position” to international affairs is not realistic. In the Old Testament, God calls for action quite contrary to a radical pacifist stance. War is a terrible tragedy, but it cannot be said that God doesn’t use war to achieve his purposes. Nevertheless, let us pray for peace!

Nick J. Dyck,
Abbotsford, B.C.

Keep on preaching

Re: “What’s the matter with preaching?” (Features, October). With appreciation to my former colleague Ray Bystrom and his concern for Christian relevance for a postmodern generation, I’m nevertheless troubled by the direction for preaching which he is advocating.

To call preaching “monologue” is to prejudice the case against preaching. It’s like calling doctors “medicine men.”

Preaching is not a phenomenon of the fourth century. One noted German scholar interprets the book of Deuteronomy as a sermon. Check Jeremiah’s famous temple sermon (Jeremiah 7), Jesus’ Sermon on the Mount (Matthew 5–7) and Stephen’s sermon (Acts 7). All have the ring of “monologues.”

Preaching may not be in style, but the question remains, “How can they hear without someone preaching to them?”(Romans 10:14). Paul urged, “Proclaim the message” (2 Timothy 4:2). Sharing and “conversation” is hardly a biblical substitute. If there is a problem with preaching, it needs to be addressed. Hardly is a “disease” treated with PAS (physician assisted suicide).

Elmer Martens,
Fresno, Cal.

New perspective on Paul distorts truth

Re “Scholar with sway: N. T. Wright” (Crosscurrents, October). Several articles in the Herald have promoted the teachings of Bishop N.T. Wright, including “Scholar with sway” by Gil Dueck, a professor from Bethany Bible College. I believe those promoting Wright have glossed over the errors found in the New Perspective on Paul (NPP). These errors regard foundational doctrines, so it’s expedient that we take the time to examine the roots of this movement and its implications.

Wright and his contemporaries redefine justification, faith, and righteousness according to their own liking, thereby altering the gospel message. The NPP bases its teachings on a distortion of Second Temple Judaism, which has been refuted by other scholars. We can read for ourselves what Christ says about the doctrine of the Pharisees in Matthew 16:11–12, John 5:39–40 and Luke 18:9–14. What Wright teaches is contrary to Christ’s teaching.

Bonnie Klaassen,
Main Centre, Sask.