Letters to the Editor

Conscientious objection

Re "MB Changes Canadian Defence Policy" (July 19): The new regulation allows people to seek release on the grounds of conscientious objection, after they have joined the military. Thus, it is more than a reinstatement of a provision that lapsed in 1952. The older law allowed for exemptions from conscription for people before they joined the military. This older kind of "C.O." provision is one that many countries now have. The new kind that the Canadian Defence Department has just approved is still very rare, though both the US and the UK have such provisions. It is also noteworthy that our request for this new provision was formally endorsed by a broad range of Canadian Christian groups, including the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada, the Canadian Council of Churches, the Pentecostal Assemblies of Canada, the United Church and others.
William Janzen, (E)
Director, MCC Canada Ottawa Office

Thanks

You people are doing a good work. Keep it up!
Larry Nickel, (E)
Abbotsford, B.C.

Not evil

Growing up in an MB church, a major event that I waited for was going to Banff. My parents went as sponsors in 1986, and I had heard good reports from other youth as well. I really enjoyed Banff '95. The speakers and worship were amazing, and our youth group grew much closer together. But the phrase "Banff '95" in the Herald has 100% negative connotations. The fuss about the dance is all that I immediately remember. My experience has been ruined.

Many letters include phrases like Harold Hiebert's: "I, too, can remember when drinking alcohol, shooting pool, bowling, going to shows and wearing lipstick were sin." There were more activities than just those that were considered unacceptable in the 70s but very few are nowadays considered evil. No one has commented on the progress of the MB church.

This June, I graduated from an MB school, and in my years there we held dances. For me and my friends, it is a different social activity from the everyday things to do. The dance at Banff was so innocent, especially compared to our school ones. It was almost all Christian music, and the music was mostly not suited to dancing. We were just having fun. I know lots of youth who stayed for the dance and loved it, others who chose to do other activities, and very few who were offended.

As to the sexual aspect of a dance, the campus was so well supervised that there was no opportunity for "flattened grass" (or melted snow). Every person has hormones, and if dancing might enhance sexual appeal, innocently walking across a crowded cafeteria or running to chapel would do the same thing. Alcohol is the number one enhancer, and there was none at the dance.

It is my wish, and probably the wish of many others, that the topic be dropped. If the MB Conference as a whole decides to formally take up the issue, great, but the Herald should not be a gossip column, repeating the same arguments every issue in an impractical way.

We youth are not as evil as we are being made out to be. We are Christians trying to find our path through life. The Banff coordinators are the same, and I commend them for their hard work that seems to have been forgotten. Maybe they made a mistake in holding a dance, but that only proves that they are human, just like the rest of us.
Kristi Koss,
Winnipeg, Man.

Good for research

I had to tell you how impressed I am with your web page. I am researching information for a potential sermon (I'm a layperson) and found the ability to research your back issues for articles extremely helpful. In addition, your layouts made my search easy.
My compliments and thanks.
Reg Tiessen, (E)
Ontario

Rethinking Wind and Fire

I respond to the report on the Anabaptist Women Doing Theology conference (June 14) and to Jane Woelk's letter (July 19), since I was likely the participant quoted concerning the absence of a "recognition of grace" at the conference. In subsequent weeks I have had many occasions to rethink that impulsive evaluation.

For one thing, the love and healing I felt at one workshop ("Spirituality and Aging") has touched not only me, but also those close friends with whom I shared my experience. The worship times remain unforgettable. The creativity and beauty of worship expressed by women freed to work together ministered to me with a depth and intimacy I had not known before. One song in particular, "Ruah", has come to mind over and over again, supplying words when prayer was difficult.)

My initially negative reaction at the conference was provoked primarily by the presentations and responses in which I heard some of the same language I had heard too much of already on the university campus. I had hoped for a gentler tone, a more gracious acknowledgement that men and women share human weaknesses, and a more positive vision generally. Having seen some extreme grasping for power and having been subjected at times to an inflexible insistence on feminist language, I listened with too much suspicion and skepticism. I had naively assumed that Mennonite churches were ready to move past the clich<142>s of gender warfare, especially since I had experienced good working relations both in the college where I work and in MCC circles.

Since then, however, I have been reminded that the attitudes which give rise to the frustration and anger I heard at the conference are still alive and well. I keep remembering also the stories of women I heard at mealtimes, during response times and during my travel there and back. There is still much need for courage among women and men to speak painful words before the "unforced rhythms of grace" (Petersen, The Message) can be felt. My response to the Wind and Fire conference still contains some ambivalence, but I am grateful I could be there.
Edna Froese,
Saskatoon, Sask.

Practise more discretion

Of the Christian periodicals that come into our home, the Herald is not the one I pick up when I want to read spiritually invigorating articles. Periodicals like Decision, Challenge, Focus on the Family and Leadership are more meaningful. I was especially disturbed by two articles in the June 14 issue. The feminist article Wind and Fire does injustice to the Real Christian Women of our country. It seems that not only in government but also in the Christian media minority groups are given more press than the majority. I also find it very unsettling when theologians, whether female or male, read into God's Word meanings that are not supported by the Word. Even a child understands the word Father and knows it does not mean Mother. The other phrase that caught my eye was "thinking about God's greatness by using many images". The writer should read Isaiah 40:18-40 and Exodus 20:4.

The other article which troubled me was the full page account of an assistant pastor's sexual abuse. We should acknowledge the sins of our leaders, but it serves little purpose to go into a detailed description of the abuses. Let's practise discretion in our publications.
Peter J. Funk,
Aldergrove, B.C.

The dishonesty of neutrality

Thank you for the June 28 editorial addressing one of the most difficult and evil sins that afflicts our churches and families. It seems that the consequences of this evil are still not being taken seriously by some in our conference leadership and many church members. Dishonesty through the supportive affirmation of an abuser who refuses to accept responsibility for his actions is probably the greatest hindrance in the healing of the abuser and the victims. The supporters of an unrepentant abuser, who insist that he be accepted into regular fellowship, or be allowed the freedom of participating in Christian functions, unknowingly (or knowingly) hinder the need for the abuser to become accountable to The Body and the victims, thereby also hindering the healing process. All of us wish that every church and worldwide problem could be resolved by I Corinthians 13, but Christ Himself provides clear direction on dealing with the intransigence of man in Matthew 18. However, we really do not like to acknowledge this stern teaching. You touched on "the corruption of the victim", who is contaminated into living the deceit of silence. The most important requirement of the abuser is that the victim remain silent about the relationship. This obligation of deceitful loyalty from the victim<209>usually a child<209>shapes the life of that person forever, and no amount of therapy or counselling can ever eradicate this part of their life's experience. The ongoing suffering by the victim is criticized as a nonforgiving spirit or as seeking gain by insisting on accountability from the abuser.

Elie Wiesel, a holocaust survivor, wrote: "Neutrality helps the oppressor, never the victim." Truly, neutrality is a rationalizing form of dishonesty. Neutrality is so easy for all of us to hide behind at times. Thank you for taking a firm position on this subject, and deciding not to be neutral.
Frank V. Klassen,
Richmond, B.C.

News disturbing

I found it very disturbing to read the article about Ed Dyck, (June 14). Is it really necessary to write in detail all the failings of the man in the Herald? Does the whole readership need to know all about this sordid affair? Couldn't this sad episode be dealt with in the local church or in church boards? I have my MB Herald lying on the table in my living room, but with articles such as this one, I feel I will be forced to hide it quickly, since I have nonchurched friends visiting me from time to time.
Ellie Friesen,
Kelowna, B.C.

Courage to speak out

I am angered with Henry Wedel's reply (Letters, July 19) to a personal tragedy of sexual abuse. It appears that Henry believes we should just sweep sexual topics under the rug and pretend they don't exist. Henry says that it is unnecessary and cruel to publish such a sad incident. I ask: Unnecessary and cruel to whom? I also am a survivor of sexual abuse. The June 14 issue was incredibly valuable to me. I applaud the incredible courage it took my sister in Christ to share her story and the progressive editorial decision to print in detail the article on Ed Dyck.

Historically, survivors have been told by well-meaning adults to keep quiet, don't say anything because it will hurt so many other people. Yet, the greatest hurt is always to the victim. When an abused person finds the courage to speak out on the sins inflicted upon them, often the response from thoughtless people is how to protect themselves from hearing the painful truth of a survivor. Rarely do people ask how they can help a survivor overcome the effects of abuse. I do not believe for an instant that there is a prurient fascination with the subject matter of sexual abuse. Sexual abuse is still not discussed enough to educate the public on what survivors require to recover from this in a healthy way. We want our stories told and honoured, not ignored or hidden. We want to lead healthy, productive and "normal" lives. Even though I do not know the brave lady who shared her story, I love her courage and her strength to fight this injustice and to risk disclosing her pilgrim's journey in order to help other survivors, such as myself.

I am on a lifetime process to recover from my abuse, and often my comfort comes from knowing Jesus' strong position on child abuse in Mark 9:42: "And if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to be thrown into the sea with a large millstone tied around his neck."
Charlene H. Smart,
Vernon, B.C.

Return to the M.B. Herald Vol. 35, No. 16 Home Page