Letters to the Editor

Re "What makes a novelist Christian?" (Crosscurrents, Sept. 25). I have often wondered why our Christian bookstores or church libraries can only carry books that have labelled themselves Christian. I have never read John Grisham myself, but most of my inspiration comes from some other writers that are largely unknown by Christians. How about Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, Fyodor Dostoyevsky, and Leo Tolstoy, all Christians, all with significant things to say about our world and faith. Could it be that the works of these types of authors are just a little too real for us in our sheltered middle-class Christian world? Perhaps we prefer the candy-coated world that our churches so often portray. I encourage us all to see the real world out there and show that Jesus is relevant.

Thank you for your article. Keep encouraging us to step out.

Jim Peters, (E)
Winnipeg, Man.

In the past, I have generally appreciated the views of Jim Coggins, but I take issue with his perception of Christian novelists (Sept. 25). While I agree that John Grisham is a spell-binding storyteller (I have read and enjoyed all of his novels), one would be hard pressed to tell that Grisham is a committed Christian by reading his books. Even The Chamber, which Coggins maintains has a "remarkably clear presentation of the gospel", does not overtly proclaim any Christian truths. Classifying these books as Christian leads me to question the definition of a Christian novel. If it is just the absence of foul language, gratuitous sex and violence, and a good "moral" tone, then many secular novels could be classified as Christian. As our church's librarian, I have read dozens of excellent Christian fiction over the last five or six years. These books also have spellbinding story lines while specifically weaving Christian values and even Scripture into the story. Coggins's statement that Grisham's latest book, though not "Christian" may "ultimately do more good that most of the poorly-written romances that pass as ‘Christian fiction’ these days", indicates his ignorance of the amount of excellent Christian novels that are available today.

Janet Brown,
East St. Paul, Man.

John Norman's "Bringing in the Outcast" (Sept. 25) reminded me of my experiences a few years ago with a "Henry". Like the writer, I found some rewarding moments, but eventually decided I had to terminate the relationship. I want to underscore the point that Norman makes about commitment, as I also stumbled into my relationship and gradually realized I was not prepared for the time, attention and patience required. Sometimes a "Henry" is mentally ill and needs more help than you or I can gave. We have to realize that it is God who can change a life and we are only His servants. I don't know if I made much of a difference to that individual. Perhaps God put him into my life to show me something instead.

Roland Derksen,
Vancouver, B.C.

I was encouraged by the contrast between Pam Delinger's, "How could I not help my neighbours?" and Linda Wegner's "What's your sign say?" (Sept. 25). Delinger moved us to put our faith into action (James 2:15-17). Wegner unwittingly reminded us what faith isn't about, championing the archaic, hardened state of Christian outreach in North America.

In Wegner's story, when a drunk driver careens off the road to "demolish" their church sign, "its purpose, the proclamation of God's love, was temporarily disrupted." Actually, it wasn't being disrupted; it was being tested. A jobless man with a drinking problem totals his truck and all the churchgoers can think about is how to get the sign back up.

I don't think Jesus cares one bit about that sign. That man, on the other hand—Jesus died for him, and arranged a providential encounter with a Christian community who could have given the love their brickwork sign apparently preached. This story indicts us as a faith community, describing all too well what tends to happen when the world crashes in on our nicely manicured church lawns, scuffing our polished pews. It betrays what we think evangelism really is—not an incarnation of the Truth in the lives of believers, but a chiseled-out inscription on cold granite. It may as well have been a tombstone that got ploughed over. Let's remember that the gospel is not meant to be written "on tablets of stone but on tablets of human hearts" (II Corinthians 3:3).

Brad Huebert,
Winkler, Man.

In "Swissair 111 in perspective" (Sept. 25), John Redekop argues that our focus on sensational tragedies prevents us from seeing the more chronic tragedies in our society, such as tobacco, abortion and AIDS. He suggests that God is "probably more concerned with the thousands of lives continually lost to other causes than with the one-time destruction of the 229".

To imagine God prioritizing the loss of human life according to numbers is shocking. Redekop is right that we must take an active role wherever we can to put an end to the destruction of life. But does the greater number of lives lost to disease and addiction make the loss of the 229 any less significant? I find this logic hard to swallow, considering Jesus' remarks concerning the inestimable worth of every individual: "Even the very hairs of your head are all numbered" (Matthew 10:30). The loved ones of those who died on Swissair 111 would be pained to read that the lives lost were a mere lined in II Timothy 3:7 and Romans 1 by rejecting the truth and seeking answers which turn out to be lies?

Clearly, some in the Christian church have made mistakes before in their defence of so-called biblical "truths": owning slaves or reducing the rights of women, for example.

Why should any Christian "interest group" (denomination or otherwise) be so proud as to think that they will always have the correct interpretation of Scripture? We have seen shifts even in the thinking of the Mennonite Brethren Church over the years.

Coggins offers a list of "common arguments" used by "homosexual interest groups" but misses tackling the much deeper issue underlying the whole debate, and that is the way the Bible is interpreted by believers. It's much easier to focus on carefully selected peripheral arguments, than to focus on the ways in which those on both sides of the fence interpret texts related to homosexuality and the core of the Christian faith.

Coggins mentions that there have been Herald issues on money and materialism, but none on homosexuality. Maybe now is the time for a balanced and fair treatment of this topic, using a variety of voices. I would be most interested in reading reviews of influential books from both sides of the spectrum, particularly those from a Mennonite perspective.

W.T. Dale Enns, (E)
Nakatsugawa-shi, Gifu-ken
Japan

Return to the M.B.Herald Vol. 37, No. 21 Home Page