Letters to the editor

Obituaries and tributes

Peggy Regehr (Letters, March 20) encouraged me. The last testimonies of our loved ones can be an encouragement to others whose faith may be wavering. I hope that in future these will be published in their entirety.

David Penner,
Swift Current, Sask.

Amazing grace

It has come to my attention that my article "Unnatural Act" (Encounter, Feb. 20) bore striking similarities to Philip Yancey's book, What's so Amazing About Grace? I have not read Yancey's book, so am unaware how closely my material mirrors his. My list of over a dozen resources, however, included a 1991 article by Yancey (published in Christianity Today) from which I incorporated two quotes and adapted some ideas. Beyond that, it is possible that we used common sources.

John H. Unger, (E)
Brandon, Man.

Benefits of publication

We at MCC Women's Concerns, B.C. would like to affirm the Herald's policy of publishing articles such as "Teacher Dismissed" (Nov. 7).

Publication supports the victim. It tells her or him that s/he is believed and valued. It tells other possible victims that they may tell their stories without being reviled by their brothers and sisters in Christ. It is also a public warning to future potential victims.

Publication attempts to support the accountability of the leader. Frequently leaders have been able to move and re-offend because people in the new constituency don't know the history.

Publication breaks the environment of silence which helps to perpetuate the abusive cycle. It warns offenders that their behaviour is not accepted. In the past, offenders have been able to re-offend with impunity, involving many victims, because the church followed a policy of hushing things up.

Publication reminds us that we are all sinners. We cannot maintain an illusion that we in the church are the "good people" and that those outside it are the ones who grieve the Spirit.

Publication establishes the Herald as a journal that tells the whole truth about the MB church.

Publication in the church press may diminish the interest of the mainstream press, to the benefit of both victim and offender.

Publication stops rumours, which may stray far from the truth, escalating the magnitude of the offence and distorting the facts. Rumours are difficult to track down and correct; an early, truthful account of the facts is the best defence against lies.

Unfortunately, publication does re-open the wounds of those who know and care for both the victim and the offender, even after there has been confession and repentance. That is one of the painful realities of sin, that others are hurt by our actions. Nowhere does the Bible say, "There shall be no consequences for your sins if you confess and repent."

We all live under grace. Thanks be to God.

Donna Stewart,
MCC Women's Concerns, B.C.

Concerns about revision

Elmer Thiessen's response to the Confession of Faith (March 20) was refreshing. I thought that perhaps I was the only one with concerns about the revision process. I agree that a confession of faith is "meant to define the basic beliefs of a particular people of God. Practical application should grow out of doctrine." I encourage those tasked with the review to stick to the basics. I encourage readers to take the time to read the Confession of Faith at your church or on the internet (at http://www.mbconf.org/mbc), and respond prayerfully.

Nellie Taylor, (E)
Abbotsford, B.C.

Confessing the faith

Thank you for Elmer Thiessen's article (March 20). I agree that the Board of Faith and Life has put too many words into the Confession of Faith which do not relate to saving faith.

In contrast to "tiptoeing" and "political correctness", Jesus was very direct in dealing with people (Matthew 3). So was Peter (Acts 2).

I also rue the fact that the words in our hymnal have been altered.

I suggest we start a new denomination called OMBs, the original Mennonite Brethren.

Emmal Friesen,
Winnipeg, Man.

Positive reading

I very much appreciate the Herald. I find it uplifting to read how God's people are at work in the church and in the world, making a positive influence. My daily newspaper is depressing and disgusting because mostly what is reported is Satan's work in the world. I much prefer periodicals like the Herald which are positive and informative.

Lorette Bueckert,
Waldheim, Sask.

Typo?

Thank you for "God's Lawyer" (March 6). I enjoyed it until the second last paragraph, which contains what I assume is a typographical error: "Everybody was happy--except perhaps God." Can you clarify what was meant?

I work for a mission organization, and although we do not receive your publication ourselves (the copy I'm reading belongs to missionaries preparing to serve with us), I have been positively impressed with it. Thanks for the work you do to encourage believers.

Sheri Cantle, (E)
SIM Canada

The sentence was correct as published, but not as clear as it should be, due to editing. The meaning was that everyone was happy with the timing (the Dycks staying in Ontario for the fall) except that God had other plans--their house sold immediately and so the Dycks came to Winnipeg right away. The article did not mean to imply that God was unhappy with the Dycks' decision to enter ministry, only with the proposed timing of their move to Winnipeg. Ed.

Too ideological

Krista Enns (Letters, March 20) expresses a sentiment that I find all too common among contemporary Protestants when she fails to see any connection between the pill and abortion. The sad fact is that Depo-provera, the IUD and oral "contraceptives" all have a greater or lesser abortifacient effect. That the pill can work in this way should be obvious from its use as a "morning after agent", when prevention of ovulation or conception is unlikely. For that reason, I have great personal struggles when my patients request the pill. Although the pill probably prevents conception as a primary method of action, even the package insert tells you that the pill's effectiveness is increased by causing the lining of the endometrium to become so thin that any fertilized egg is prevented from implanting. For that reason, I recommend that couples look into the Ovulation or Mucous method, an effective, safe family planning method used worldwide by millions (mostly Catholics).

Unfortunately, many people, even Christians, do not seem to think that a small chance of causing an "early abortion" is as important as personal convenience, especially when all their friends share the same societal attitude toward "unwanted babies" and personal autonomy. Divorce rates are much higher among pill users than among couples who use the Ovulation method. I believe the correlation shows a link between attitudes toward marriage and fertility, both God-given blessings. In this area, we are more influenced by the world than we would like to admit.

Dr. Rob Pankratz,
Abbotsford, B.C.

Better methods

I respond to Krista Enns's letter (March 20). Beatrice Klassen (Nov. 7) was correct that the IUD and contraceptive pill are methods of abortion.

An individual who seeks to live from a Christ-centred worldview sees life as a miracle and gift from the Creator, regardless of circumstances (Psalm 139). Life must begin at conception, as there is no other clear division between life and non-life. Abortion is the termination of any life after conception. The IUD is abortive because it alters the chemistry of the uterus, destroying the ability of the fetus (Latin for "little one") to implant. This is the termination of a life. The pill provides hormones meant to stop ovulation. The hormonal doses have been lowered over the years to reduce side effects. As a result, several times a year, a fertilized egg (a life) may not implant due to the altered chemistry of the womb. Evangelicals as a whole have embraced these methods of "birth control" (not "conception control") as morally acceptable when, in fact, they are not. We like to think we are "pro-life" but these methods are not.

There are alternatives. Serena, a natural family planning method, is 98% effective when used as taught (same percentage as the pill). The PC2000 fertility testing instrument, used in Europe since 1990, is simpler than Serena. Let's not give in to popular acceptance of ancient sins, sacrificing our children on the altar of our idyllic lifestyle.

Mother Teresa was asked if she agreed that there were too many children in India. She replied: "I do not agree because God always provides . . . for everything in the world that He has created."

Verlynn Alexander,
Main Centre, Sask.

Worship whom?

I was disturbed by Ed Bauman's statement: "The first step . . . is to make contact with God" (Letters, Feb. 6). Has God commanded His children to go through a ritual before they contact Him? What about Jesus' words: "I am with you always" (Matthew 28:20)? Isn't there something wrong if followers of Jesus don't have contact with God at all times?

We have embraced a concept of worship which is not found in the New Testament church. Not once is corporate worship commanded in the New Testament. Jesus says: "True worshippers will worship the Father in spirit and truth" (John 4:23). Worship has more to do with obedience to the Word than with going through motions. When I show love, give sacrificially, pray, read God's Word, visit the sick and assist those in need, those are acts of worship. I can participate actively in worship singing, and yet my mind may be far from the words that I sing. Unfortunately, we have reduced worship to singing contemporary music. For me, worship is my total being glorifying Jesus.

The early church "devoted themselves to the apostles' teaching and to fellowship, to the breaking of bread and to prayer" (Acts 2:42). The church of Jesus is a persecuted body until Jesus comes back. We are making it a celebrating body while some parts are suffering very severely. After Jesus raptures the church, we will have ample opportunity to celebrate and worship. Why is our present generation going back to the Old Testament for worship, while leaving the practice of the early church?

Isaak Eitzen, (E)
St. Catharines, Ont.

Democracy not versus morality

Over the years, I have appreciated the Personal Opinion column and found myself largely in agreement with John Redekop's perspectives. However, his attack on democracy in the church (March 20) is unwarranted.

1. Is he saying that to be democratic is to be immoral?

2. If "fallen mankind is strongly and inexorably inclined toward evil", does it follow that decisions made by a "large number of fallen human beings" are likely to be more immoral than decisions made by one human being who is "strongly and inexorably inclined toward evil"?

3. Was Jesus really a victim of "injustice based on majority rule", or was He the victim of a religious dynasty and a political dictatorship using mob psychology to whip up the emotions of a manipulated "minority" within an apathetic majority?

4. Does Redekop really believe that church members should be restricted to deciding when the service shall start, etc., and that "informed, trusted leaders" should decide all other matters of theology and ethics? How do we then prevent the emergence of one-man religious dynasties, which even now are increasingly evident in our own brotherhood?

5. If "consequential issues are best not decided by majority views", what is the role of "the priesthood of all believers"?

The article displayed an elitist view of polity within our brotherhood. Often it is where the consensus of the majority has been ignored or manipulated that autocratic governance by an individual or a clique has become possible, and "wise and good" moral decisions are at a premium.

Peter F. Bargen, (E)
Kelowna, B.C.


Return to the M.B.Herald Vol. 37, No. 9 Home Page